heros and villains

Today, I noticed an editor claiming that "some of Wikipedia's defenders turned to vandalism", and that "truth has become less important". You know I have my share of criticisms for the community, but I wanted to look into these statements.

I checked the Wikipedia account. He is, indeed, a burnout from two weeks ago. He was blocked for personally attacking an editor in October. He had been pushing an unverified POV as far back as July. He has been a highly active editor since 2005. He has now retired, citing his failed effort to push an unverified POV as reason for leaving.

I'm kind of curious what people's reactions are to this kind of editor.

My reaction: Before I looked into his background, I found myself saying "he's kind of right, maybe this guy is a hero for calling out Wikipedia's problems". Then I looked into his background and found he was the worst kind of POV warrior, and had managed to survive on Wikipedia for more than four years. In his own mind, I'm sure he sees himself as a hero. And if I only heard the surface of his story, I'd have believed that he was a hero, trying to defend the Wiki.

The whole situation makes me feel very uneasy, because it really is difficult to distinguish the heroes from the villains until someone flips out and "goes nuclear".