"

 Packerfansam 

Better to continue the discussion here, I think.

The ANI, in which we both participated, was closed out in June or so with no action, based on her assurances that she understood the nature of the problems she'd occasioned, and a promise to try to stop.  You'll recall that she had been removing references from articles to non-Christian religions and thought, sexual orientation, and sex generally, among other things; and while I was the one to raise this initially at ANI, it is certainly fair to say that I was not the only one to be troubled by these edits.

As the matter wrapped up, I was skeptical that she appreciated the problem (she described it along the lines of ""offending one or two users"") or that she'd actually quit the problematic editing, but after being characterized as ""overzealous"" on the point, I withdrew.

She has slowed, but certainly not quit, her POV editing.  A partial list of such edits since then includes:

July 9
At Christianity, without explanation, she recast the “Criticism and apologetics” section as “Arguments and apologetics”, and removed sourced critical commentary by Nietzsche, Bertrand Russell and current Jewish and Muslim theologians, as well as a (sourced) observation by an atheist that some Bible stories may be based on myth.

July 30
At Trois-Rivières, removed without explanation the identification of a (Canadian) Liberal Party politician as “liberal”, as well as a reference to another person’s being the first Jew elected to public office in the British Empire

August 15
She erased, without comment, mention of Hugh Hefner’s attendance at the Art Institute of Chicago.

August 18
She removed proper and wikilinked mention of a notable alum who is best known (and described as) an LGBT activist.

October 15
At Ted Turner, she removed a reliably-sourced quote from Turner declaring himself to be agnostic, claiming it was “contradicted” by info elsewhere in article, when the excised information was more recent than the “contradictory” text and, indeed, nicely illustrated the point (in the source itself), which is that Turner has waffled on the issue over the years.

Here too I am not the only editor to remain concerned - see this Talk page entry from September.

I agree that the ""party school"" edit to the University of Wisconsin is, in the larger picture, kind of a silly thing; but between her registered account and the IP she sometimes edits from, she has made the same edit at least four times now - see May 15, June 13, October 3 in addition to today's.  And to be clear, she's not removing the ""party school"" material but just the (perfectly good) citation to Playboy.  Indeed in her October 3 entry, she updated the ""party school"" rankings to 2015 and went out and found a different source to insert in Playboy's stead.

So I take your point, that maybe this particular edit is a trivial thing to template her on; but she has continued her practice (albeit slowed) of idiosyncratic, unexplained or deceptively described removal of content for reasons that can only be explained as in furtherance of a personal point of view.  I don't think that such editing should pass without at least occasional comment, and that's what I did.    "