cpl i'd like to review the chessmetrics discussion at proj chess page you're making several assertions and not knowing the background vis a vis chessmetrics can't form an opinion whether i think you're right or not but i do think at this point you are incorrect in what you state about some of the content you've been removing from articles more than what you said also i don't undrstand why you are removing content like matches and match records based on i can't find it and it wasn't sourced you should be using citation needed tag for that rather than wholescale immediate deletion how do you suppose that content got there in the first place it seems there are three possibilities someone had a source they didn't identify someone had a source but got something mixed up or they invented it out of their head in any case the thing to do is tag it and give the editor time to source it i have no interest or desire to argue with you cpl but when i see what are imo bogus arguments intended to be the basis for removal of contents be they article content categories whole articles via afd then i'm bound to express my thought which might counter your opinions when you tried to stick words in fischer's mouth he never said regarding his strength compared to morphy's an effort which ended up opposed by me quale and which you proved by contacting the author was taken out of context by you you challenged me why i would nit pick even the slightest of your edits i ended up protecting the article did't i and you violated policy understanding execution of wp brd also unacknowleged by you when you tried to insist an incendiary accusatory youtube video should be included in dawn marie psaltis blp in violation of wp blpremove you reverted an ip user who removed the material calling the ip's removal an act of vandalism and you reverted me edit warred even though you were in the wrong about blp policy and again dismissing the talk i opened with edit summary explaining the material was a violation of blp policy and please see talk since you reverted me without first going to talk once again i helped protect that article and wikipedia since it was a blp against your efforts to compromise it so you see cpl i have no interest in arguing with you or even engaging in debate with you i've seen how you argue your points and i thoroughly disagree with your tactics and many times your logic you want me to go into a corner and not speak up when i see you violating policy and compromising articles if you find that a nuisance then good no one on wikipedia has called me anything other than my username or abbreviation ihts what makes you think i'm gonna receive your informal dude anything but insulting i do and you linked to your posts here to show example of your level of collaboration with me and avoidance of squabbles