Haha. I predict this will get nowhere with the likes of robotic crazy patrollers like Katz. Look at the most recent complaint against Katz:
I will explain this only once: do not delete the information I post. Edit the information that you understand. You removed a link from an article written by Richard Posner on the Richard Posner's Wikipage, you removed a link to book summary written by Marco Iacoboni on the mirror neurons on the page of Mirror Neurons in Wiki. Please, be clever and intelligent: the fact that I contribute with links is not that I am a SPAM! Before you think like a robot, think like a human. Ask yourself: "Is the provided link valuable, how related to the topic it is, and what is its quality?" These are basic questions an editor should ask before crippling the text... I have no time to repair the mess you created, but take a note! It seems that you don't understand the subjects you edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 03:21, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
I looked at one of the links the IP is complaining about. Katz removed it here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=476511770 with the comment reverting edits by IP whose only contributions are to add links to the MR site. Mate, that is the Montreal Review, one look at which http://www.themontrealreview.com tells you it is a critical review site, authentic, peer reviewed, high quality etc. The link was to an article by Richard Posner, currently unavailable on Wikipedia http://www.themontrealreview.com/2009/The-...hard-Posner.php. Posner is wholly notable - the link was in the Wikipedia article about him. The Montreal Review is as respectable a publication as you could get. Katz simply doesn't understand this.
Vandenberg may get somewhere with this, and get the links replaced. But in no way is he addressing the root problem, which is uneducated and illiterate administrators like Katz who are now running the show. Katz will not be punished in any way. Indeed, he is esteemed and respected on Wikipedia for his vandal fighting and his 'contributions to Wikipedia articles' of which he boasts 58,000 contributions (mainly removal of what he thinks is 'spam' links, such as to the Montreal Review, or (cough) the Logic Museum).
I predict Vandenberg will do nothing about this. The dwindling number of 'good guys' on Wikipedia are no match for the likes of the highway patrollers with their shiny badges