I remain unpersuaded that such editing as is done for Wikipedia is adequate for the purpose. And the Roth business is an example. I was not party to the exchange between Roth's interlocutor and Wikipedia's editor, but the available account, so far not contradicted by Wikipediasts, would bear an understanding that the editor, instead of taking the complaint seriously, sent the interlocutor off with the remark that writers' statements are not reliable, made no effort to ascertain the validity of the complaint, and did not explain to the interlocutor how Roth might go about making his case. Instead, we have people commenting that everything is swell because it all worked out for the best in the end. Yes, because Philip Roth was able to use The New Yorker as a platform.