I am amused and befuddled by
the current ArbCom case re Rachel Marsden. The ArbCom has come down with a bunch of tough-minded words about BLPs.
On the one hand, I can see that the article would be embarassing and damaging to Marsden, resurfacing a 10-year-old false date-rape case and more recent criminal harassment charges. Marsden has apparently complained in person to Wales about this. While not finding any material unsourced, the ArbCom case says that the article is "too negative" and
anyone can essentially blank it. Does this apply to Brandts article? To all BLPs?
On the other hand, the statements in this article, while negative, were well-sourced, and all the information remains in the article history.
Finally, and perhaps most bizarrely, SlimVirgin is the one who has stubbed and full-protected the page -- she isn't ArbCom and has not thus far been involved.
Rachel Marsden: The Fundamental Schizophrenia of BLP
