Thank you user UserQwyrxian for the necessary changes Dear Vikramaditya although i do understand your largerconcern that etymology needs to be an integral part for an article on community  it also has to be populated with statements representing all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint The removed statement was a only POV of ML Dames and fails to give a truthful impression  it is better not there If we are able to reach a consensus with UserSitush on what is NPOV for etymology we can always repopulate that section presently that consensus has failed Cheerup and be positive this does not mean we will not achieve consensus on an NPOVetymology in the future VS