Poor, Edmund W wrote:
Is it crucial to Wikipedia's integrity that we INCLUDE a mention of the fact that some anonymous troublemakers have branded a non-notable private citizen with a very annoying label?
It seems to me based on what I've seen over the past week or two of this debate that Wollman is both notable and public.
I think it is important ("crucial" may be overstating it) to Wikipedia's integrity that it doesn't remove notable, verifiable information about someone from articles solely based on the complaints and apparently groundless legal threats of that person.