The wikiscanner coverage is still flowing fast. Keith Olbermann had a misguided take, for example:
It's not his fault.* The media coverage around this has been deeply mediocre. With the exception, as usual, of the NYTimes piece (and here's their Wikipedia feed), nobody reported two essential facts:
- Contentious wikipedia articles are edited every hour of the day. Anonymous edits are always suspect. Any edit that looks unproductive (like deleting an entire section without comment) gets reverted immediately -- as, indeed, these edits were.
This side of the story would have required some actual reporting (digging to see how the edits influenced the later article), and reporting means boots on the ground, which means payroll.
- "Anonymous" wikipedia contributors are actually the only editors that aren't allowed to be anonymous. As soon as you choose a WP username, your IP address stops being shown.
Sure, those aren't the most important elements of the story. But not including them anywhere in the article? Pull up your socks.
* Note to Olbermann: Edward R. Murrow was a journalist, not an anchor.