No I see editors those on the COI side who appear to or pretend to  take your pick  not understand the meaningsdefinitions of policies relating to BLPs sourcing peacocking etc clearly enough As a result the same form of inappropriate content keeps creeping back in with new excuses I think its more the case that some people are too keen to babysit this article and try to make it grow rather than let it breathe for a few weeksmonths I can understand editors being protective of articles theyve just created for a while  but there comes a point when they have to stop updating with bloat and trivial sources for the sake of it An author cant visit a bookshop everyday with a new edition of their book to sell nor can authors here expect to introduce new content daily unless the article is a genuine current event As far as I can tell the notability of this article is low perhaps questionable However I think it better that people leave the article as is for a while  better to have low notability than introduce elements that destroy it altogether and give grounds to AFD If they can do that then no there should be no further disputes and COI is no longer a matter to highlight via the tag    RFF