Comment  The paragraph lists two items countering the Sulkowicz claim: "the man Sulkowicz accused responded by pointing out he had been cleared by the police and the school" and "He also provided months of very friendly communications between him and Sulkowicz between the alleged assault and the accusation". Both items are true, but there is more against Sulkowicz.  

 The whole case boils down to she-said/he-said, which means trusting Sulkowicz.  Sulkowicz, though, has demonstrably been dishonest. For example, here is a video where Sulkowicz claims that the same man raped two other women; yet here is an article explaining that the other women claimed only (i) attempted forced kissing and (ii) emotional abuse in a relationship. That same article describes how Sulkowicz was almost certainly dishonest in describing how the university handled her reported rape. And here is another article detailing a further issue about the integrity of Sulkowicz's claims.  

 For me, the biggest reason to doubt that Sulkowicz was raped—and thus believe that the police and the university were correct in dismissing the case—is that it is a she-said/he-said case where she has been demonstrably dishonest. The suggested paragraph, however, does not make that clear at all. I am not an expert on Wikipedia policies, but suspect that by not fairly presenting one of the main reasons, the paragraph might be considered biased and thus violate BLP.