In a message dated 4/20/2006 2:01:33 P.M. Central Daylight Time, jkelly(a)fas.harvard.edu writes: While we're engaging in this critique of Danny's response, it might make sense to ask whether or not Danny, and the other office people, are aware that there exists some large segment of the admin population who regard it as routine to undo other admin actions without discussion because they were "out of process", or "obviously wrong", or whatever. I am not a admin, or even a Wikipedian for that matter. I am one of those never mentioned "wikireaders" who noticed error and inconsistency in the plasma cosmology article. I have tried to edit the plasma cosmology page but have run into an admin and his two partners who interestingly enough are big bang supporters. In other words they support theory A, but also edit Theory B such that Theory B supports theory A. I asked this list about ethics. The first reply was "Assuming he is a good wikipedian, he can do what he damn well pleases." Personally, I believe that the comment on the front page stating that anyone can edit wikipedia is false advertisement. I did not find that to be the case. What I found was that only copy that is approved by the admin and his helpers will remain in the article. There are no ethics in Wikiworld. Ethics to the Wikipedian is whatever we damn well please? Now I read about a Wikipedian who done as much as anyone but yet was banned forever for reverting an action of a fellow admin. In the real world that would be called Guilty until proven innocent and is in violation of every principle America was founded on. Indeed, we spend trillions of dollars fighting those countries where the accused is guilty until he proves himself innocent. Again I am not involved as an admin, I am a reader who cannot stand idly by while an article in the Wikipedia is obviously slanted toward the opposing view. It is clear to me however, that my quest is futile, Wikipedia is not edited by the people, it is run by the admin, who take data given by the people and tell the story their way. I see things going on that are illegal in the real world. The admins, I suppose, are run by the office, which can take secret action without a hearing against anyone. If they can do that to a seasoned contributor, imagine what is going on with people like me, who just want to add a few things. Not a chance. I don't have any suggestions for change, it is far too late for that. But Wikipedians really should step back and look at what they are really doing. "We, here in Wikiland, do not allow warring, therefore, when it comes to that, take notice that we win, you lose, or else you will be banished forever." It was, in principle, a good idea though... tommy mandel