> B. Wikipedia *MAY* report that those jerks on
Usenet have branded >> you
a
> kook. (Read the part about Wikipedia NOT endorsing
that label.)
I think that, looking at the previous way that the report was presented, it
was written in a way that possibly seemed more like the anonymous user was
calling him a kook than reporting it. Thus, Wikipedia was calling him a
kook. If it had been written as something along the lines of "Persons that
the newsgroup have labelled a 'kook' include [name], who was given the title
of 'Kook of the Millenium'" then there would be no reasonable argument
against its inclusion.