I'm with George here - if the big bad wolf in this whole scenario is Gary Weiss and a conflict of interest, then why is anyone scared? The wolf has no teeth. CHL is not the only one writing that "This is outrageous! Outrageous, I say!" but I don't see it. People are falling victim to the dangers of a narrow perspective.
Let me line it out, in a different way than George did and with somewhat less skill:
If: Mantanmoreland is Samiharris And if: Mantanmoreland/Samiharris is Gary Weiss Then: There is some minor sockpuppet abuse related to deletion and content discussions. But: This has had no appreciable effect on any actual content. And: The content in question is an infinitesimal portion of the total content on Wikipedia. And: Wikipedia is a small portion of the total content on the Internet. And: The Internet is a portion only of the total informational content available to most users who have access to it.
So, where is the justification for outrage here? Easy - there is none. The 'problem' springs from folks who are righteously offended by the transgression against our bureaucracy, but both the transgression and the bureaucracy are of little importance next to the point - the published content. Remember that we are real people, generally adults, who live in the real world. Sometimes we get caught up in our processes and view events in our little world as if they had significance in the wider world - but they don't. Only the product has significance in the real world.
Having said that! Focusing on the actual evidence here - I'm not a mathematician or an expert in statistical analysis, and few of the folks working on this analytical project are either. However, it is clear to me that the sample suffers from a number of mathematical problems - mostly relating to its size and selection, and the significance attached to the results. If you want to make a comprehensive declaration based on this type of analysis, you need a much more robust set of data to work with and a much more serious approach to mining it for significant data points.
Nathan