NO The current version accurately and in an appropriately neutral manner represents the actual content of the source material  These proposals are neither neutral nor encyclopedic The guidelines of WPBLP require that the source material be accurately represented with neither overstatement nor understatement  These proposals by grossly understating the source material misprepresent and distort it Neutralizing an article to use CPs term is a very different thing from an article being neutral  It is improper for an editor by neutralizing either positive or negative material about a subject to misrepresent an misconstrue the source references  I am also deeply disturbed that after this matter was taken to the BLP Noticeboard and the uninvolved editors commented that the current text is perfectly appropriate that this group of editors has decided that they will simply ignore that input