`== A Small Community? ==  I am having an issue. On the 26th of august the following statement was removed from the Foresters Falls, Ontario article: Foresters Falls is now a small community having digressed significantly since the invention of motorized transport.  This information was removed without any explanation. Because it is a factual peice of information I replaced it (aug 28th) and for safety sake put the book I had gotten it from as a referance. I explained my edit as ``Facts are facts``. I imagined that the matter would end here. Why would anyone insist on its removal after this point? The next day I saw that it had been removed again by the same user who explained ``if it's a fact cite a reliable source``. A simple enough request. I thought I had already done that but no matter. I renamed referances as sources, re-added the sentance again, explained this and left it. Within the hour my edit had been reverted and a message left on my user board saying ``Your change to the page Foresters Falls, Ontario was determined to be unhelpful, and has been reverted``. Needless to say I was a bit upset. Who determined this? who's POV about Foresters Falls is more important? What criteria are being used? I understand that the statement is not the most important ever but it certainly doesn't detract from the article. I have been attempting to have the user ArmadilloFromHell explain why he insists on it's absence but he is being very stubborn and will not answer my questions. I don't want to start harrassing people but I have no idea what to do. Here are a few of my questions:  *has the community not gotten smaller?  *was it not caused by the automobile?  *have I not sourced the statement as asked?  *is it not a fact?  *is it not information?  *does it not help inform people as to why foresters falls is not as large as it seemingly once was?  *is it not the only peice of information in the article that bridges the span of time between 1870 and present?  *is the usfullness of the edit the only criteria used to determine if it will be reverted or not?  *Why it is better to not have the statement than to have it?  *Does this information not answers a pertinant question left open by the article?  *If I were to refrase the sentance would that be better?  *What criteria was used to determine that it should be removed?  *Why insist on the removal of this perfectly sensible statement?   I simply think that this edit was made in haste and I get the feeling that I've cause offence simply by questioning the logic behind it.`