Rjensen

::# You didn't have the courtesy to acknowledge when I put substantive effort to research the issues raised re the 'pillar' you cited and thoroughly (with some help from {{u|GPRamirez5}}) debunked your points.

::# You repeated your mention of yourself. Did you forget that you had already pointed to your WP page?

 

::The issue re ‘interference’ is that sources considered as RS on WP-en never refer to *ongoing* U.S. actions abroad by the term ‘interference’. They call it ‘intervention’. Whether they support or oppose the action, they refer to it as ‘intervention’ (a neutral or positive term) rather than ‘interference’ (a negative term). In contrast, they use the term ‘interference’ to describe actions by Russia (or in the past, USSR). That is a bias that should concern you as a historian and as a statistician interested in unbiased presentation of facts and data.