Guess what's the problem? '-' vs '–'! (Imagine User:Rursus snickering evilly here!)
What did he do that was wrong? In essence: he added false statements into articles based on articles that he didn't read, or didn't understand. He invented his own "truth" that he in rapid speed imposed onto Wikipedia without responding properly to objections. When confronted with criticism, he refused to admit anything wrong, instead calling the attackers "western ethnocentric" and alleging a conspiracy.
Conclusion: good editor ethics usually coincides with:
Guess what's the problem? '-' vs '–'! (Imagine User:Rursus snickering evilly here!)
What did he do that was wrong? In essence: he added false statements into articles based on articles that he didn't read, or didn't understand. He invented his own "truth" that he in rapid speed imposed onto Wikipedia without responding properly to objections. When confronted with criticism, he refused to admit anything wrong, instead calling the attackers "western ethnocentric" and alleging a conspiracy.
Conclusion: good editor ethics usually coincides with: