Let s leave Alan s motives out of it The fact is Alan s own transcripts on his own website prove that the statements on pp 47 8 of his book about the jurors William Waters and Randolph Holinshed re the Brincknell incident are factually wrong Are we trying to improve the article by making it factually correct or are we merely trying to score debating points My objective is to improve the article by making it factually correct However if I edit it my edit will be reverted so it s obviously up to you to decide whether or not to remove the erroneous statements about the jurors William Waters and Randolph Holinshed as well as the citation to Alan s book in that regard isn t it If you don t do it in order to improve the accuracy of the article who will Just asking Nina Green