`:::It is both uncivil and disruptive of you to misrepresent the applicable policy.  The standard for removing a prod notice is ``If you do not agree that the article should be deleted without discussion,`` and nothing I did conflicts with that standard.  I would note, however, that your prod nomination which I challenged was out of compliance with the prod policy in all but the most technical sense; the policy states quite clearly the prodder should ``Tailor your reason to each individual article; generic messages are not helpful. Use an informative edit summary.`` Your explanation was not tailored to the individual article, and could not have been more generic.  Most of the rest of your comment is little more than a surly violation of WP:AGF.  And if you are the middle-aged paralegal you describe yourself to be, I'm sure you are aware of the importance of accurately and properly citing rules you invoke; you should do so here with regard to your rather eccentric descriptions of supposed burden-of-proof requirements.     `