Why dont you consider the fact that the above unsigned editor was editing an already biased and overly praise worthy article likely writtten by the mayor's press secretary. Your view is myopic. How do YOU know that the original entries are true and accurate and are not "libellous" to the truth." Maybe the original author should consult the NPOV policy...which you are obviously letting that pass by...You have no idea how to spot vandalism when you have no knowledge of the subject matter, which you readily admit...Where are the literary references to the original author's glowing statements?....You are not too worried about that... 

 This is the problem with Wikipedia, you have a bunch of IT geeks like yourself who think they are suddenly literaty editors..go back to your sheep .....Scotty...This system is a disgrace