this was debunked, it wasnt Sony.

Sorry but where is that debunking located? I have checked the IP address behind the edit myself and it DOES point at SCEE.

It could have been anyone?

Well are people surprised by this AND the fact that someone are defending it?

Oh, and there are things called "proxies" you know?

^ But this is just pathetic.

wouldn't surprise me if Bungie said something like "if it looked like Halo 2 to you , you must've played it on the PS3 - plz play Halo3 on the 360" in return , but actually this whole matter doesn't interest me at all and I'm already laughing about those ,who try to blow this affair out of proportion

What do you mean, that whoever was behind this Halo 3 slur was incredibly stupid? :P

Publishers use of wikipedia for self-promotion (or hide some things) was reported in GameSpot last month (Aug-17) http://www.gamespot.com/news/show_blog_entry.php?topic_id=25855103
I think it's bad for the companies to correct issues that being truth could give them a bad reputation (But it's reasonable, after all they've got to keep a business) but it's a shame that others use this same tools to lie or give inaccurate info of the competition to the audience.

The tragedy is that Sony is known to pull stunts without thinking. Sony has had graffiti campaigns, fake blogs, decapitated goats, and even adds that encourage mass panic in some markets. So when people read this they are going to assume the worst about Sony. They are a convicted felon in this area. More then that they are a serial felon.

Perhaps it was a disgruntled employee, or a supportive employee. However that will not change the fact that Sony is the prime suspect. Further more if they do not produce a scape goat the public will assume it was a contrived intentional act on the part of the company. The public would be right in that.

Lets say for arguments sake Sony finds the culprit, and he was not paid to do this. Which to be honest I am sure it is actually a member of management. Then they need to produce the culprit to the public and terminate them. I am sure it is covered under the terms of employment, and would be justified. Unless they do that the public is going to assume it is intentional.

The public would be right to think that. Obviously if it was a lone wolf they are grossly incompetent. Since they were so easily traced it would be easy to identify the offender. That said Sony can turn this situation around by proving that they were not responsible. Now if they fail to do so well that is a obvious indictment on them. Either they would appear callous, or to be covering things up. Very much a this or that situation. Should be entertaining to see if Sony has learned from past mistakes.

 Microsoft Interns I don't know, but MS fanboys : 

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=PlayStation_3&diff=155637737&oldid=155637497