A couple things first of all be very reluctant to use lie to describe another editors statement Per Wiktionary  lie is an intentional falsehood which requires knowing the mind of another Simply because someone is mistaken or wrong doesnt mean theyre lying Secondly the primary goal of anyone named in an ANI thread should be to get out as quickly and painlessly as possible Lacking a clear consensus the way that usually happens is the archivebot Defending yourself just resets the archive clock and gives other editors another opportunity to repeat their statement in rebuttal Dont worry about stuff folks are saying there no veteran volunteer believes anything not backed by diffs If no sanctions have come forth after a five day ANI thread theyre unlikely to unless the editor provides justification for them by behaving poorly Let the others have the last word and go about your business For all who have commented here today Ill note the old school wiki rule for article pages is documented at WPFOC Focus on article content during discussions not on editor conduct comment on content not the contributor If you find yourself commenting about another editor on an article talk page youre doing the wrong thing and not helping reach consensus  If you simply must comment about another editor start with their talk page Note also that if you have the numbers consensus on your side youre not required to continue discussion until everyone agrees with you sometimes the answer is simply to agree to disagree and go with the majority viewpoint Naturally soliciting wider participation via WPRFC or an appropriate noticeboard is always a valid option Finally try to keep the big picture Ms Myerson while obviously notable had faded from the public eye long ago there wasnt any particular urgency to get the article perfect instantly