They have since changed the status, but I will leave this Image for posterity. It is not just wikipedia; but many sites do this. I have and will always support a 'code ombudsman' for any public site that hosts more than 10,000 views per month. Different ombudsmen for different style websites with simple click purchase sites only requiring an audit (site does not falsely lead society/posterity). Larger news/information sites like MSNBC would not be able erase their posts about Reagan because Carter got cancer. Ombudsmen do not make things 'neutral', but they do prevent sides from misinforming-misleading-degrading society under the guise of information. In this case, Wikipedia was trying to degrade (blind) society by removing their own version of the information (fail to teach history in hopes that history will be repeated).
