What I have seen is a substantial amount of material presented by Seleukosa and Megistias so far that is really adding in the structure of the article and if you want to its accuracy. 
 I have furhter seen 3dalcove getting in a edit warring without providing not even a single document  to support his views. 
 I would thought that 3dalcove should provide evidence for his points of view in this web page, and if the information provided doesn t prove itself to be circumstantial or isolated without being of a universal acceptance, then to accept his opinion and adjustments. Otherwise plain edit warring against strong presented evidence doesn t add at all to the mission of Wiki to provide essential information to the public. 
 By accepting arguments that are no rigidly stemmed but based on circumstential and/or personal points of view does not help wiki to claim that it is an unbiased but at the same time objective source of information. 
 It rather appears that moderators simply ignore the basics of historiography and  accomodate whatever options disregarding the way evidence must be produced and presented. 
 As such I would like to see more evidence than plain war editting. 
 Thank you