` ::Not at all.  I am referring specifically to the introduction.  I would turn your point around: if anyone thinks that putting Darwin in the introduction means that the article as a whole ``focuses`` on Darwin's definition regardless of current usage, they are mistaken, and their attitude will block progress on the article.  i am not saying Darwin must be in the intro, only that if someone takes this view - (B) - they need not have any objection.    |   `