Undent.  That's actually quite helpful, thanks.  The indef block was premature (not unwarranted in my highly biased opinion) as all the evidence uninvolved editors were presented with was a vast, ugly sprawling page of crap that would be extremely difficult to tease out.  Any editor who didn't have involvement with him would be hard-pressed to come to any conclusion based on it.  The whole reason I delayed starting an AN or ANI thread was so I could thoroughly review his contribs and create a solid final version that would hopefully be more convincing than what I have now.  I'm in process for that, and this will be useful; also helpful for the arb case that will almost certainly land in my lap.  Content disputes are very difficult to sort out, and in my experience undue weight is probably the hardest thing to demonstrate to someone who is not already an informed participant in the debate.  This looks like the pure wikipedia-process equivalent, but your summary will make it easier for me to grasp.  I'm also comforted that yet another editor has reached an opinion I feel has some truth to it - Guido's contributions are based on his own opinion and will not shift no matter the evidence.  Thanks very much again.   (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:simple/complex