regarding consensus but wikipedia's consensus practice does not justify stubborn insistence on an eccentric position combined with refusal to consider other viewpoints in good faith with respect to good faith no amount of emphasized assertions that one is editing according to wikipedia neutral point of view while engaging in biased editing will serve to paper over the nature of one's activities at times a group of editors may be able to through persistence numbers and organization overwhelm well meaning editors and generate widespread support among the editors of a given article for a version of the article that is inaccurate libelous or not neutral e g giving undue weight to a specific point of view this is not a consensus from i found these passages particularly relevant you seem to consider everyone with a different viewpoint as a troll and you continually revert edits in a way that makes sure the article is biased in favor of furries