Their claims that their actions were aboveboard would be amusing if it were not so sad.  They voted multiple times in polls, they used apparently fake names and cover stories and were not honest with the community, in contravention of several guidelines and rules.  It’s totally blatant – and importantly – all publicly available for anyone to verify for themselves.

Maybe in the old days when they gained their power and influence, you could bluster through with outrageous claims of innocence contrary to evidence.  Not anymore. 

Is there a way to make such beahviour expensive? They are definitely not alone. Those concerned sometimes do it or even write their own Wikipedia article. We know Wikipedia is not as reliable as an Encyclopedia. Journos should declare they did NOT research their data exclusively on Wikipedia. But can such articles concerning pollitics, history, public persons etc. be kept under cionstant control?!

Wikipedia’s handy if you want to see what year the keel of the battleship Texas was laid down , as that is beyond dispute. (1911)  But as a reference for events fraught with subjectivity it is completely useless.