Ian Woollard wrote:
That sort of misses the *huge* point, particularly
with the Star Wars
kid, that the guy was a victim of bullying and copyright infringement.
Why does the fact that he was a "victim" change the standards for what
the contents of an article about him should be? That seems like it fits
the definition of POV very well.
I would argue that, under the circumstances it is the
other sources
that give it undue weight, not the wikipedia.
How do you propose to judge this without resorting to original research?