"When pressed by a Holyrood parliamentary committee, none of the assembled panel agreed with his criticisms, he admitted that even if GERS were restated as he suggests the impact would only be "a couple of percentage points or so of the stated Scottish deficit ... maybe" and conceded that he could think of no example of a country following the accounting technique he was advocating."
To state the obvious, Hague's rather garbled edit was wholly inappropriate. The criticisms section is not there to mock the people making the criticisms, or to put them in the dock.
Incidentally, Hague incorrectly labelled another of his edits as "minor" - implying that it was merely a spelling correction or a similar unimportant change. In fact it added an entire sentence intended to bolster confidence in GERS. He also made a "minor" edit to the entry on the Barnett Formula to add the following -
"More recently, during a time of low absolute spending increases, application of the formula has in fact lead [sic] not to a "squeeze" but to a divergence in spending per head in Scotland's favour."
Oh, and just for good measure he also put in a propaganda link to the "These Islands" website. Pretty "minor" stuff, huh?