Thanks, Tim, for your support. Yes, there does seem to be a denial that a split exists. Maybe this is to encourage a sense of camaraderie and goodwill between the “opposing" camps. I can see no other reason for it.
Oh dear, I really am having second thoughts about saying what I am going to say below. Yes, as Peter says, we've been here, but...
Let's forget Wordsworth a moment. What i find in Jeffrey Side's thoughts is a genuine attempt to eek out some basics with regard to the 'split'. By doing this he gets up the noses of folk on both sides of the split, including of course those who don't think there really is a 'split' or that if there is it is a minor thing that doesn't really matter in the long run. Jeffrey's questions have relevance to my own concerns in this area - the difference being that he is a lot more daring and forthright in his targets. He delves into things in a way that invites those entangling knots that form in this kind of discussion about poetry, which then get pulled tighter and tighter.
I think that what he has to say about Wordsworth is important, but only if you share his view that there is a dichotomy and that it is relevant. If you don't share those views then don't argue with him, because then you will both be on a hiding to nothing (as we have seen before). Someone who actually shares his view that there is a problem and that it is relevant can then look objectively at what he says about Wordsworth.