sannse(a)delphiforums.com 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. Since then he
has returned to make other deletions and changes, and promised to keep
vandalising articles until Wikipedia is completely unusable. *That's*
the vandalism in question, not the "annoying edits" on the woman page
(and others).
Absolutely! Well said.
This is a true simple vandal with a track record. He's banned from
wikipedia, and that's that. We must not encourage him by considering
each of his edits independently. Anything he writes should be
reverted instantly, and his username vaporized as fast as possible.
And we should keep logs so that we can track him down and report him.
(He's at Harvard now, not MIT.)
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).
That's right, 100%. His stuff *is* bad, but at this point it's
irrelevant to debate the details.
--Jimbo