sensationalist the only thing i have added to the article recently was to expand the quotation about lyveden new bield proposal to show that it was much more than concern about a local issue but you've seen fit to revert that i've not added anything about the letter from the mps yet and obviously i would put in the response from the pm but you've already argued that it would then be too long and give too much weight to the story there seems to be a lot of goalpost moving in your arguments as for your point about the anti wind groups i've never suggested that there was the same level of opposition as there is to nuclear power only that there is a weakening of support talk