Rastl writes: Based on anecdotal evidence from what is probably a single IP group WorldNetDaily is showing that edits critical of Obama are being removed at a rapid rate and the submitters are being banned for submitting them. The provided sample edits seem to be properly formatted, cited and neutral while the reasons for the removal and banning don't quite seem to match the submission. WND also notes that the article for Bush is more biased towards negative events.
Is this a cadre of similar-minded editors or a more general policy of Wikipedia? Enquiring minds want to know!