to user gabemc could you please explain why you deleted a sentence with two references without even giving a reason in december waters was again accused of antisemitism after an online interview in which he compared the treatment of palestinians by israelis to the treatment of jews by nazi germany fwiw i believe this to be wp notnews and wp coatrack type stuff that really does not belong in a bio on waters at this point but lest someone accuse me of ownership i'll step back and let others decide talk contribs i dont object to adding about the latest anti semite allegations but only when our way of doing this fits wp npov which the current insertion absolutely fails to do we must be balanced and not take one side or another in this case the side of those attacking waters was taken as the only side of the controversy we reported talk contribs in the process you deleted references citations one of them was his interview what kind of balance are you looking for when people are not able to read waters could you please bring back the references personally i just added the link to his interview beside that everything in the sentence was true you could easily re write the sentence and leave the citations there no you just deleted everything and the citations unacceptable this is a blp bio and so what i did was in no way unacceptable but if you want to re frame what you wrote in an npov way why not do so here on this page first you need to write in a balanced way as an editor and not rail against others cos you didnt do so talk contribs if you are going to accuse me of horrible and unacceptable things could you please provide the diff of the edit which you are so upset about talk contribs i was talking to its properly sourced now so there is no need to pile up cites per wp citeclutter also i'll remind you about wp notaforum this is absolutely wp coatrack wp notnews material imo we aren't here to follow waters' every comment regarding israel is this notable enough for a bio not likely maybe but we are already in wp undue territory regarding this controversy imo talk contribs john's edit is exactly what i mean by a neutral take on the issue nikosgreencookie it is your responsibility as editor to get this npov right and in all your edits its not the responsibility of any editor who may revert you talk contribs the best source and the best citation is his own words if you read the interview waters says if you believe artists should be mute emasculated nodding dogs dangling aimlessly over the dashboard of life you might be well advised to fuck off to the bar now if you like to eliminate his political views and see him only as artist you don't have idea what are you talking about so yes we have to follow all his political views as well december