Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/ForrestLane42

Necessary counterbalance
I just wanted to say that I agree that "counterbalance" can be a good thing for an article like the one on Ken Wilber, but I don't think that ForrestLane42 has what it takes to play an effective counterbalancing role. As virtually everyone seems to agree, he's unnecessarily rude and aggressive, but I think more importantly he doesn't have a proper understanding of Wilber's work or anything "spiritual" and so is all too frequently unable to take part in a proper discussion of the issues. He also frequently seems unable to focus on the issue at hand and continues to debate points that are largely irrelevant to the actual editing of the article. (And then, of course, there is the issue of policy violations....)

Personally, I think there are already enough editors of the Wilber page (and all things "integral") who aren't (entirely) pro-Wilber to provide the needed counterbalance to the pro-Wilber camp and that ForrestLane42's influence is almost entirely unnecessary and most certainly unnecessarily distracting. --Grey 14:09, 6 February 2007 (UTC)