sannse@delphiforums.com wrote:
Jonathan Wrote:
The information is not misogynistic, it is true. Labelling this person a vandal does a disservice to the Wikipedia.
The content is irrelevant here. If this is our MIT vandal, then he caused hours of work for mav and others with numerous random text deletions and malicious changes under numerous user names.
If the information he is added is relevant, a neutral party can add it back at a later date. (I'm leaving out my own views on the information he is adding because, as I said, that's not relevant to the question of whether he should be allowed to edit here).
There's always a need to separate the writing from the person who wrote it. Just as we are not justified in claiming personal ownership to any of our contributions then similarly we are not justified in giving a vandal credit for his work. Most of what these people write is nonsense or offensive, and is justifiably deleted. If, however, in some rare instance our same vandal happened to write something meaningful and useful, there is no reason why that particular bit of writing should be deleted out of spite. Each contribution should be judged on its own merits
Eclecticology