The article still sounds very positive and more seems like promoting Warwick than being of a critical evaluation of him I am an AI researcher myself closely familiar with much of leading AI research world wide and I had never heard about Warwick or his work before and having recently read about I can now certainly understand why The article paints a completely inappropriate picture of Warwick that has nothing to do with the reality of his accomplishments He seems to have lots of acceptance from UK academic and non academic circles but this is disproportional to his actual achievements in AI or in computer science The article desperately needs to be fixed to clear this up