Poor, Edmund W wrote:
Is it crucial to Wikipedia's integrity that we
INCLUDE a mention of the
fact that some anonymous troublemakers have branded a non-notable
private citizen with a very annoying label?
It seems to me based on what I've seen over the past week or two of this
debate that Wollman is both notable and public.
I think it is important ("crucial" may be overstating it) to Wikipedia's
integrity that it doesn't remove notable, verifiable information about
someone from articles solely based on the complaints and apparently
groundless legal threats of that person.