As far as I know, they limit public access to basically any material with a complaint or request, but keep copies. They may do more, but that seems to be the de

As far as I know, they limit public access to basically any material with a complaint or request, but keep copies. They may do more, but that seems to be the default response. Which seems smart enough: minimize litigation costs while not losing content permanently via court orders or dmcas or similar threats. But it's frustrating for the wayback machine- where sites like Snopes and some newspapers have opted out of having their history published (after being accused of ghost edits to articles). I don't know what the right answer is, but even if they didn't display the page, it would be nice to see the diffs (ala wikipedia), or at least show if and when changes to a page were made. Maybe that's beyond their mission scope, though.