february utc still discussing wp rs is a guideline and wp iar allows us to use it if rs interferes with improving wikipedia if lanning is good demonstration of the mainstream opinion on sra then it's completely suitable currently there is a feeling that the credibility given to the concept is giving undue weight to the existence of a highly improbable condition the journal of psychohistory is not peer reviewed lloyd demause alone edits it see journal of psychohistory and psychohistory criticism as well it's not a universally accepted discipline demause uses a freudian dodge to respond to criticism it's resistance not a valid criticism as stated above it's use by many many reliable sources gives it a lot of credibility religioustolerance org is not the source for the report it is a convenience link making objections to rt org a red herring