Your reply further establishes my point: Apparently many Wikipedians can't even recognize when their own data is astonishingly wrong. ;)
Look carefully. The site claims that edit was made two years prior to when it actually was.
Perhaps it's more obvious from this history view of the page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Li...
Or do you just not believe in causality?
Ah, I didn't even look at the date. I assumed you were saying something about the content of the edit, sorry. That was, quite clearly, a temporary glitch in the servers somewhere. Occasional mistakes do not make a source unreliable - no source is perfect.