Whether the information should have been leaked or not is an interesting question, but ultimately a 'what if' scenario. The important question is what we do with this information. Or, if you're the government, how to get the people to not care.
That speculated risk is one which no one has been able to connect to a single actually death or injury. Its not like government PR would not love to bring proof of the dangers of leaks.
The reason why no actually body has been found, is that the included names was mistakes made by the people in the field who mistakably put some in the low security reports. Normally, such names are only added to high level security reports, which mean that the number of names in the low level reports where quite few/limited, and possible already evacuated long before the reports were made public.
High level security reports was sorted out by Wikileaks/leaker before publishing.
But they have handled the Snowden case well it seems and that gives me some confidence.
I have to give them credit for that. Assange didn't jump in and hog the limelight and for the most part, WikiLeaks has stayed quiet and reserved during this whole ordeal.
They acted incredibly professional throughout.
However I do think an earlier poster was right - a change of personnel at the top of wikileaks might be their best chance of staying the course
I personally am under the impression that he has given much more thought to his policies for releasing information and organizing Wikileaks than you give him credit for.