I would just like to note that I do not see why my last comment was deleted, Charles. (Nor indeed why the comment by Jess was deleted). 

This entry was being vandalised by somebody who describes Hari as a "little tyke" and was abusing other commenters by accusing them of being impostors. Given the opportunity to prove these people were not impostors, he refused. I was only pointing this out, so it can be borne in mind in future if this person continues to try to vandalise this entry.

How can responding to personal abuse with calm, reasoned arguments like this be described as itself personal abuse?

I totally understand why you are keen to shut down the nasty sniping that was becoming common here, but I don't think that's achieved by silencing people who are trying to point out personality-motivated vandalism so it too can be stopped.

Please don't just delete this message; it's really important to put down a polite, civilised marker about this. I think there is a strong case, once somebody has started abusing the subject of an entry in odd ways and abusing literally everybody else who edits it, to ban them from contributing further. To instead ban anybody who raises this question seems perverse. I think we should discuss it in a calm way, that doesn't accuse anybody of being a mysterious impostor or make any personal attacks. Isn't that fair? What do otehr people think?