You dont say that Martin Hogbin turned attention of Wisard191 to following  to write a whole article based on one source is not entirely within the spirit of WP I agree that it would be better to have a greater range of sources which is why in the absence of anything better the metalart source might be acceptable assuming it does actually confirm what is being said in the article I want remind that the discussion has arisen as a result of gross action of Wisard191 to remove my insertion to the text of the article My intention is to undo Wizard191s action which removed my contribution My goal is to contribute to the article section History the textSince the advance of the PC era the manufacturing of complicated and unique forged items is usually accompanied by realistic 3D computer simulation This accurate and relatively fast technology allows accumulate all needful knowledges equipment and intermediates for the future forged items before the starting of manufacturingiii Computer 3D modeling is now not scarcity even for small  companiesiiii Forging Process Modeling This footnote supports reality of using 3D computer simulation in forgingii On CADCAM hardware and software usable in forging This footnote tells which tools are usableiii 3D modeling in forge This footnote supports reality of using 3D modelling in small forging companiesAndy Dingley is the only author who promises to undo my undoing of Wizard191s action  I dont see in his intention a common sense I only see a passionate desire not to permit in the article my additional text with footnotes I almost no doubt that he again and again will try to switch debate to the criticism of an external link Meantime the article will be without the truthful text about the historical role of computer 3D simulation for modern forging   

    ####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 : 
You dont say that Martin Hogbin turned attention of Wisard191 to following  to write a whole article based on one source is not entirely within the spirit of WP I agree that it would be better to have a greater range of sources which is why in the absence of anything better the metalart source might be acceptable assuming it does actually confirm what is being said in the article I want remind that the discussion has arisen as a result of gross action of Wisard191 to remove my insertion to the text of the article My intention is to undo Wizard191s action which removed my contribution My goal is to contribute to the article section History the textSince the advance of the PC era the manufacturing of complicated and unique forged items is usually accompanied by realistic 3D computer simulation This accurate and relatively fast technology allows accumulate all needful knowledges equipment and intermediates for the future forged items before the starting of manufacturingiii Computer 3D modeling is now not scarcity even for small  companiesiiii Forging Process Modeling This footnote supports reality of using 3D computer simulation in forgingii On CADCAM hardware and software usable in forging This footnote tells which tools are usableiii 3D modeling in forge This footnote supports reality of using 3D modelling in small forging companiesAndy Dingley is the only author who promises to undo my undoing of Wizard191s action  I dont see in his intention a common sense I only see a passionate desire not to permit in the article my additional text with footnotes I almost no doubt that he again and again will try to switch debate to the criticism of an external link Meantime the article will be without the truthful text about the historical role of computer 3D simulation for modern forging   

