call current discussion that is our discussion of the big changes you started here just about  days ago  It will be hard to anyone coming to the discussion at this point to know much of what were talking about with this much removed    I know but then not much was being removed  But Ive put back October   Cultural depictions of Johannes Gutenberg   Ive started an approach that may apply to Wikipedias Core Biography articles creating a branching list page based on in popular culture information  I started that last year while I raised Joan of Arc to featured article when I created Cultural depictions of Joan of Arc which has become a featured list  Recently I also created Cultural depictions of Alexander the Great out of material that had been deleted from the biography article  Since cultural references sometimes get deleted without discussion Id like to suggest this approach as a model for the editors here  Regards    Cleanup and changes by Mukerjee Oct   A number of changes were made and the article was considerably cleaned up on Oct    The claims of printing in Korea and China largely unreferenced were referenced with extensive quotations  The Biography section which was only a paragraph with other fragments scattered elsewhere was cleaned up but still needs work   The contributions of Gutenberg as the father of the printing press and a leading catalyst of the Renaissance have been under challenge from a number of quarters this was presented with documentation  The possibility that EastWest traffic over the two preceding centuries of the Mongol Empire may have led to some knowledge in Europe of movable type  was introduced   A number of sentences and structures such as the unwieldy initial paragraphs were copyedited ruthlessly merged with other fragments and cleaned up   User Dicklyon reverts with the comment too much of a change to do without discussion  This is not a criteria in Wikipedia where ruthless editing is consistently encouraged   Please justify in what way these changes are inappropriate and merge them by putting in extensive work instead of just a revert   I am reverting back to the new version which certainly reads better and has  far better referencing and citations than the present version  Please give your reasons here please do not blindly revert edit the text  to merge the elements you dont agree with   It does not make sense to keep the older inferior version that people are working with still     Such an extensive edit that throws out the stable work of many editors over many months with no chance for incremental review and collaboration is just too disruptive and disrespectful in my opinion  But Ill let someone else decide now whether to revert you again  I recommend a revert followed by you reintegrating changes piece by piece with time between for reactions and negotiations    ps We dont need weasle words in the lead  If it is verfiably true that Even within Europe there are those who claim that Laurens Janszoon Coster of Holland may have used movable types earlier then you have to say WHO makes such a claim and give a verifiable reference for it  The things I have read about Coster did NOT say that anyone actually claims or believes that only that it was a local legend for a while    I understand your angst at having many microscopic changes gone  But the socalled stable version read rather poorly and at least the English and the flow is a lot cleaner  There were repeated references eg two consecutive parags referred to his family in Biog the AE award had two references etc there were poor constructs and of course the referencing was admittedly poor  So please try to look at the whole picture  Wikipedia says it right up front  edit the page only if you dont mind others ruthlessly editing your text  As for the weasel word issue this is what the current version reads pls see the Biography section  these were edits that were made before your comment here  His business partner was Johann Fust who was more of a banker than a printer but a  history by Hadrianus Junius of Holland claims that the basic idea of the movable type came to Gutenberg from Laurens Janszoon Coster via Fust who was apprenticed to Coster around  and may have brought some of his equipment to Mainz