If a new, anonymous (meaning no account, your edits show up as your IP address) person tries to edit that Obama page out of the blue right now, it will block you. They have set it to what is called “semi-protection”, meaning that only “established users” can edit it. So it will block anonymous IP changes, and it will block you if you create an account and go right to that page and try to change it.
I read elsewhere though that there’s an easy way around this. It seems (have not tried this yet though) that what makes a new account become “confirmed” is a simple numerical edit count. Not length of time from account creation, and not quality of edits.
Want to jam the Ayers and Wright info where it rightfully belongs? Everyone reading this should make an account, via some throwaway gmail-like address to register, go edit a dozen or so articles...even simple grammar changes, edit something silly, then edit it back out. Once you have a dozen changes, go to the Obama article and it should let you edit.
Someone should wipe the whole thing out since it’s all bullshit anyway.
It won't help. The liberal editors with administrative privileges are monitoring the article 24/7. Your change will be reverted and you will be suspended for a few days. Try it too many times and you will be banned permanently.
Despite the fact that much of the article is POV fawning over Obama, any attempt to inject some balance will be called NPOV. Anything negative about Obama, even if proven factual, will run up against the BLP (bio of living persons) rule against libel.
In the end you will always run up against the consensus rule, that even if what you have to insert is factual, the consensus (as defined and allowed by the admins) is that it shouldn't be there.