I'm not familiar with WND, but I suspect that I wouldn't think much of it if I was. That said, the man has an extremely valid complaint: his article, even in its unvandalized form, was pretty lousy, and then defamatory vandalism was allowed to persist for two days. Even if his overall views on Wikipedia are incorrect, which some (by no means all) of them are, he's entitled to sympathy and everything we can do to prevent this from happening again. Responding to Wikipedia-hosting defamation with "But he's objectionable in his own way" suggests (incorrectly, I'm sure) that the responder believes that defamation against people we don't like is okay.

Steve