Because you won't

I would like to begin by saying I did not claim the information in question on the Professor J page is worthy or not, that'd be for a thread. A thread that you are in obligation to make as it is you who is trying to change the page. I can make one for you if you like. I have taken the time to reeducate myself on this wiki's policy.

First of all

“	If a disagreement occurs, a reversion may happen. You must respect this reversion, even if done by another user, and prefer to discuss the issue in the talk page for that page.	„

I requested that you continue the discussion on the page in questions' talk page. I would like to hear your argument, and might even agree. I am not strongly in favor of keeping or removing the line. I am against removing things without due process.

Furthermore, I am not taking the role of a mod. I am following the wiki policy, the guidelines that we are all expected to follow. (And before anyone questions whether I or Mystic have the right to revert eachother's edits, there is nothing stating otherwise. Only that we may not undo mod's edits.)

“	If an administrator or moderator (collectively considered moderators) reverts a contribution or makes an edit as a deciding factor in a tensioned discussion, argument, issue, or etc. it is an offense to revert it. These are to be considered final judgments and an explicit end to the argument. If one takes further issue it must be presented as an appeal to the moderator on that moderator's talk page.	„

So what should really be discussed? First of all, what is the wiki's policy on removal? All I found is:

“	In main spaces you may contribute only content. This includes corrections to content in meaning, form, and lexico-grammatical ways. You may not completely remove content from a page that is in accordance with our policy, however this does not prevent you from presenting the data in a different or more summarized way so long as all the content is still represented in some way.	„

There is no alleyway for content to be removed, as far as I see it in these guidelines, unless something is considered not to be content (or a moderator says so because they have the final say).

Instead of quesitoning what I'm doing, you should be making a thread in Professor J's talk page argueing whether that line of text is considered content. The policy says:

“	Textual content is text written on the wiki within the main namespaces (or also just "spaces") of the wiki. Image content is an image displayed on the wiki within the main namespaces. Video content are videos displayed on the wiki within the main namespaces. Audio content is not currently supported individually by the wiki and would instead be displayed in a video form.	„

It goes into further detail on what each type of content is. The line on the Professor J page most clearly matches descriptive content.

“	Descriptive content is content such that it describes an object, event, place, NPC, plot, ability, concept, or process within the game. Description is factual in nature and does not use subjective terms or subject matters such as, but not limited to, quality of appearance. It is generally done in words rather than numbers. Descriptions are considered claims of facts present in Mabinogi that should be indisputable. If you are not 100% certain of the authenticity of a claim, seek feedback in the talk space of the relevant page.	„

The Professor J page says:

“	In Iria II: Episode 1, when the Aces are requested to deliver relief supplies, Professor J holds onto them as he did not trust Merlin. Strangely, upon arrival at the delivery point, all characters and the description of Episode 2 state that Merlin had been carrying and lost the supplies.	„

This is factual. It describes the plot. You were not questioning the authenticity of the claim. There is no precedent in the policy, as far as I see it, that allows non-moderators to remove content. You can only improve on it, or start a discussion on it. In the case of improving on it, the only thing, to me, that seems opinionated in the post is the word "strangely", which can better phrased with the word "however".

If you would like to reread the wiki policy regarding content, and see the sources of my argument, go to Mabinogi World Wiki:Policy/Content.

It's not that there's no alleyway for content to be removed but it certainly should be discussed, yes. This whole thing falls mostly under style I think (tho Blargel's argument is valid too, I hadn't thought about it). I want style to be discussed among users even tho moderators can define it. It's ill defined though and it's not something I can work too well into policy. I can try to work on a page about removal, though, that can touch on things like style and invalidity. It might be worth doing.

As much as you are right about the reversion policy the point of the policy is to stop reversion wars, so, I think if you're put in a position to revert again because someone's not listening, it may be better to start the discussion thread yourself.

(EDIT: To advertise fairness, I did discuss this with Mystickskye in private as well.)

That would actually help. It's not exactly required by the policy right now, but I feel like we should talk about things like these (and things unlike these) before removing them. Afterwards we can set up a sort of horizontal stare decisis and make people appeal to have content on the pages, rather than appeal to take them off (since that seems to be what people like Mystic seem to think is happening), but there should at least be a day's worth of discussion before we rush to delete things that have no clearly defined precedent. (And I would like to be linked to the discussion Mystic says sets the precedent.)

Also I apologize about the reversions.