A short, uncontroversial explanation of Neo-Tech should be acceptable. I certainly don’t know anything of the philosophy, and so I cannot contribute anything myself; so there’s your explanation.
—Cast (talk) , 30 January 2011 (UTC)Well, the problem isn’t that those who know of Wallace are unaware of this.
But the top man, Jimmy Wales, saw no problem in letting the fanatic “Bi” rage on.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) , 22 July 2010 (UTC) Anonymous “Bi” and occasional ally (he used sock puppets) overwhelmed the edit wars by easily, repeatedly stating there are no third-party sources supporting original material or obvious facts.
Citations are supposed to be used for questionable material.
After reading the comments on my father’s Talk page (as shown above), you can see that the value of Wikipedia was diminished by the fanatical efforts of “Bi”.
Here is another reason, beyond his obsession, that “Bi” had the upper hand in those edit wars: an idea system such as Neo-Tech, only attack articles.