Coming to an understanding   Ive done most of the lions share of edits on this article but I want to make it clear that my interest is in having a neutral article and that Im not trying to push the idea that the Seth Material is true or valid thats a judgement that the article cant make  For example the first use of the word channeled had quotes around it  I was the one who put those quotes in though someone else removed them  I inserted the first instance of the word purportedly even though it is on the list of words to avoid because I felt it was needed and I have reinstated it when other editors removed it  Someone named Itsmejudith has just changed the word awareness to the idea and I support that change  Im mentioning these small things simply as examples to show people that the neutrality of the article is important to me  And despite what you may have thought speaking to Verbal now when I substituted Jane Roberts speaking as Seth said for the Seth personality said I believed that I was making a change that was a leap forward in neutrality since Roberts was the one who actually uttered the words  Verbal I would like to try to bury the hatchet and work together on this article  Your interest in the article appears to me to be negative but I am willing to consider the possibility that I am wrong and to see your point of view  In order to work together well have to discuss specifics of the article on this page  Well need to discuss individual passages as well as the broader issues of the articles size and the proportion of primary to secondary cites  If we make a concerted effort to work together Im sure we can come to an understanding and improve the article  Are you with me on this