Lets leave Alans motives out of it  The fact is Alans own transcripts on his own website prove that the statements on pp 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 its 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 Alans book in that regard isnt it If you dont do it in order to improve the accuracy of the article who will Just asking Nina Green