As to your first point if the reverts were to get rid of BLP violations I would support the person removing the BLP violations Such biographies can have a serious impact on a persons life and social standing so lies and unverifiable content in such articles cause far more damage than edit warring does This does not mean that I support edit warring on BLPs in general edit warring over wellsourced information remains unacceptable However FICT issues are not BLP the damage caused by editwarring and endless strife far over Pokemon outweighs the damage caused by breaching a notability guideline so I cannot quite see the analogy here I dont think you have been stonewalling the WPFICT discussion and I have not opposed nor will I oppose you due to your views on what the content policy ought to be on that issue Indeed I think your approach there has generally been constructive The opposition is based on how you dealt with the people who very strongly disagreed with your position and the vandal comment followed up with defenses of it being civil and then merely poorly worded worry me Regarding A Nobody while I view that editor as basically constructive he is fairly far off to the inclusionist side on the inclusionistdeletionist scale and fairly far off from where I stand I consider myself somewhere in the middle on that scale and who sometimes exaggerates in his complaints Hence while I listen to what he says I generally dont accept his arguments at face value Kirill was very unambiguous that the vandal quote was the reason he proposed the topic ban and the ban did attract support from other arbitrators as well so I cannot see that he was a lone wolf here