I thank you for your warning and I respect you administrating articles However I do not personally see my edit as vandalism I do admit however that openly saying he is a crazed lunatic was the incorrect way to go about doing things I believe in the merits of wikipedia and that it should strive for truth and excellence There is absolutely no place in the current article about Camping that states science disagrees with his statements Instead the only mentions of disagreement are As a result some individuals have criticized him for date setting and they a ministry believe his entire method of Bible interpretation is flawed If you would like I can pen a section about the invalidity of his arguments from a fact based scientific stance If I can not do it someone most certainly should Otherwise wikipedia is no more than a medium for which inaccurate science can propagate through the minds of the public When looking at a page such as homeopathy s the second sentence reads The collective weight of scientific evidence has found homeopathy to be no more effective than a placebo Do you not think statements such as those made by Camping should get the same treatment On a final note 24 hours from now nearly the entire article I edited will be proven nonsense The second sentence under this text box states Encyclopedic content must be verifiable Yet despite this the second paragraph of his page states He has used Bible based numerology to predict dates for the end of the world 2 His current end times prediction is that the Rapture will be on May 21 2011 and that God will completely destroy the Earth and the universe five months later on October 21 3 4 He had previously predicted that the Rapture would occur in September 1994 5 The only verifiable thing regarding these predictions is that they are wrong yet that statement is nowhere to be found Tomorrow evening or Sunday if you wish please add the sentence He was wrong about both of his previous predictions to the opening paragraphs of his page