::::In controversies sections (which are mostly grubbed up by stupid POV fishing expeditions to find authoritative crap or flamorous appraisels thrown on, or at, a figure one dislikes on wikipedia), one should distinguish peer review (see the 'Criticism' section for Karl Popper to grasp the point), from public controversies quite distinctly, esp. in  the I/P area where anxiety fits and politicized hysteria are commonplaces even in the commentariat. That is what mist be sharply distinguished here.