Seth, thanks for the kind words--but reciprocity is never required or expected, particularly given that Cites & Insights doesn't provide live links. (And won't: The HTML is an offshoot of the PDF, not the other way around.)

I think your reasoning for Wikipedia's refusal to allow opt-outs is right--and also stupid. But hey, that's just me.

Hi, Seth. While I sympathize with the troubles you've had with your entry in Wikipedia and with your desire to not be profiled there, I don't understand how allowing opt-out would be an admission of deep flaws in the collective editing process. (I haven't read your previous comments on this, so maybe that would help.)

Walt: OK, though note reciprocity doesn't have to be strict :-).

Scott - see my Wikipedia Guardian article for more.

That's right. I'm pretty sure I read that previously and that's where I heard about your troubles. I think Wikipedia tends to work great as a whole and I'm glad it's there, but there are challenges, clearly. It's kind of abstract until it hits you personally.

I'm very much in favor of having the right to be left alone, or at least to have some choice in the level of effort you have to expend to defend your name and reputation against falsity. It will be tough to work out the boundaries between freedom of online information and personal privacy. Although this is probably more of a question of hassle and nuisance than privacy?