For three weeks the claim by several people that the section was out of balance had been standing unchallenged Wouldnt you call this a consensus The scientific POV was about six times the length of the proastrology POV I have cut the former down to remain at twice the latter so it was still a very moderate change Clearly the scientific POV will need to be condensed and the proastrology POV will need to be detailed to achieve balance I would also like to understand why you felt that you needed to react so suddenly to my edit I waited for three weeks before implementing a change supported by the Talk page while you waited a total of 11 minutes to go against the Talk page without discussion To your credit you are now open to discussion rather than going into a revert war Thanks for that

    ####Prompt- Does the next message are offensives ? reply with a JSON object (without carriage return or new lines)
    with keys :
    isoffensive (True if it's offensive).
    This this the message : 
For three weeks the claim by several people that the section was out of balance had been standing unchallenged Wouldnt you call this a consensus The scientific POV was about six times the length of the proastrology POV I have cut the former down to remain at twice the latter so it was still a very moderate change Clearly the scientific POV will need to be condensed and the proastrology POV will need to be detailed to achieve balance I would also like to understand why you felt that you needed to react so suddenly to my edit I waited for three weeks before implementing a change supported by the Talk page while you waited a total of 11 minutes to go against the Talk page without discussion To your credit you are now open to discussion rather than going into a revert war Thanks for that

