Rsradford is entitled to his opinions as a matter of course But for an advocate of an extreme and aggressive polemic to discuss objective balanced portrayals smacks of hypocrisy Clearly Mr Radford does not like the interpretations of Rydberg and he is entitled in the appropriate forums to express this dislike in whatever form of critique he chooses  and furthermore citations of any critiques and polemics Mr Radford has to offer are fair in the interests of providing readers with a different POV although citation of collections of critique and countercritique would be most in the interest of fairness but what is not appropriate is attempting to inject polemic into a balanced portrayal of Rydberg in the main article Readers should have access to balanced legitimate nonslanderous critiques so that they can make up their own mind but if Mr Radford merely wishes to inform people that he doesnt like Rydbergs theories and what is de rigueur and what is faux pas in the social circles he esteems he can do that in his own time and on his own pages