i find it amazing how you can write so much and yet say so little that massive essay above is just the same stuff you've been saying for ages and everyone here has already rejected it apart from about the document kolzene presented i agree that that can certainly be used for the article again you're going on about this urbanates thing you said we should replace the urbanates section with some undefined notion of urban planning but you don't seem to get the fact that urban planning and urbanates are exactly the same thing in technocracy a technate wouldn't go on building old style cites it would be build urbanates therefore any urban planning will be the planning of urbanates you say i would suggest hibernian that you or someone make a file of the wilton ivey piece and use that in reference to urban planning but that is essentially what is already there the urbanates article was mostly written in reference to the ideas wilton ivey etc if you want a longer section about what a technate might do with cities before it replaces them with urbanates which would likely take decades to build then be my guest if you know some specifics about it however so far you have added absolutely nothing to that section you have only deleted material from it so i'm not very optimistic about what you could contribute especially taking into account your incredibly biased opinions on the issue and i will confirm again your edits will be reverted without mercy when the protection is ended so there is no point trying to convince anyone here to keep them