And this gets down to the hair-splitting issue of on-wiki vs off-wiki.
I have never disclosed my surname on-wiki. Sure it's easy enough to follow off-wiki links to discover it. The same is true for many Wikipedians, including Durova and Filll. Durova has had to wrestle with the issue of her identity being revealed off-wiki and then having that now-public information find its way back to
The Encyclopedia That Anyone Can Edit. As much as I abhor his tactics, Daniel Brandt has been instrumental in amplifying that dreadful feedback loop, much to the horror of many Wikipedians.
In my case, FeloniousMonk relied on an off-wiki chat forum that is hardly a
WP:RS for much of anything encyclopedic, with the possible exception of an
encyclopedic article about the Internet-driven phenomenon of online virtual communities.
But let's skip past that technical rule violation for a minute and suppose that the policies
did allow FM to draw in that material for the purposes of synthesizing some original research about a notorious Internet character named
Moulton. Then what? How does Wikipedia assess its meaning and veracity? Or more to the point, how do Filll and FeloniousMonk make that assessment, since they are the only two Wikipedians who (as far as I know) are relying on that fascinating raw material from World Crossing (and Slashdot, among other such GOODSITES) to prove that I am a worthless vile miscreant, deserving of the harshest treatment that the consensus-building Admins of the English Wikipedia are empowered to summarily dish out, in accordance with the way they do things there.