Anthere said:
Just for the record, Mr Wollmann is still requesting removal of that information. I am not exactly sure what we should answer him now...
We can't easily stop editors mentioning what they want, except by order of the Foundation or Jimbo. Since this information is arguably encyclopedic I don't think there would be any other way; whilst I sympathize with Ed Poor's Niceness Principle I don't think it can conclusively command a consensus among editors to keep Wollmann's name out (although I suppose I could end up being pleasantly surprised on this). My experience in the past has been that there is something about Wollmann that exercises a deep fascination to some that is far beyond what may seem reasonable to others. So it comes down to the old legal calculus: is this guy likely to sue and if he did could you afford it? Your lawyers can advise you.