" 

 == Unexplained reverts == 

  was reverted by Threeafterthree adn Prolog WITHOUT any explanation. I agree they dont have room here because the page is too long, but if sources then criticism should be somewhere.   
 :Way too much detail, I think. We don't need this article to detail every single part of his presidency when it's bursting to the seams already. Obvious conservative bias too. Which we absolutely don't need in an FA. Also, apparently a banned user. '   
 ::I mean, really: 
 ::*""Obama pretended to be shocked and outraged at the bonuses"" 
 ::*""Obama violated the Fifth Amendment""  
 ::*""News host Glenn Beck gave Walpin an on-air state certified senility test"". 
 ::Also, the amount of citations to Breitbart, which is now unreliable under any circumstances because we can't trust their reports to be undoctored. I mean, if this user posted this on Conservapedia, they'd probably find it too insane. '   
 :::I have also seen that same information inserted in this article over 5x now and it is the same user, a banned sock. So, every time it reappears in the article it is reverted.    
 I'm moving the discussion here because you asked the question, and it's well known to those familiar with the article.  The content in question keeps getting added by one particular user who is banned from editing Wikipedia due to his unrelenting edit warring.  Before he was banned he posted much of this numerous times, and it was consistently rejected.  Since then he has made dozens of sockpuppet accounts, the sole purpose of which is to add a growing laundry list of items intended to show that Obama is a liar, hypocrite, incompetent, etc.  Although the editor in question is a very cordial, likable guy, the general feeling is that we should not dignify his antics by acknowleding them or allowing them to trigger dissent, somethign that WP:DENY speaks to.  For that reason his accounts are simply blocked and his edits summarily removed without comment rather than going through the usual sockpuppet procedures.  -   "