Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
_ Biographies of Living Persons _ Rachel Marsden fluffing her BLP again
Posted by: carbuncle
At one point, former Jimbo flame Rachel Marden's BLP was fully protected and carefully watched. Now, anyone can come along and http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rachel_Marsden&diff=456695049&oldid=449355492. Thankfully, a French IP responds to such vandalism as if changes were being automatically sent to Marsden's own Blackberry.
Today a French IP http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rachel_Marsden&diff=459444920&oldid=456802528 some new information to the article. Marsden is apparently now an author:
QUOTE
In November 2011, she published the book, American Bombshell: A Tale Of Domestic And International Invasion, described as a roman à clef.
Here's the synopsis of this self-published ebook from Amazon:
QUOTE
In this breakthrough novel by political and media figure Rachel Marsden, Catherine Carson is the newest right-wing television star and co-host for America's top-rated television news network: BUX News. Carson, a former Republican strategist and Iraq War spin doctor, is known as a gifted sniper in both political backrooms and on-air verbal combat, but quickly discovers that no battle compares with those fought in the corridors of the television news giant. Suddenly leaving the network in a storm of speculation, she heads to Paris, France, on vacation – the last place anyone would expect to find an American right-wing opinion leader. A chance encounter leads to a new position advising the eccentric President of France, as Carson falls under the spell of the country's most popular politician – the President's nemesis – who seduces her into the biggest fight of her life, on the battlefield of love. In both work and romance, she wonders if she finally may have pursued her quest for adventure too far.
Posted by: Silver seren
You missed something. Look at the http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rachel_Marsden&action=historysubmit&diff=459445198&oldid=456802528 for the IP's edit. Now, look at the reference given. If you notice, the actual URL link is to her website, but the IP then added <ref name="wsj"> to the front of the reference, which causes it to form as the Wall Street Journal ref used elsewhere in the article, which, of course, has nothing about her book in it.
The website URL doesn't actually link from anywhere, it's just hidden in the edit code of the page, so i'm not sure what use it is, but that's still pretty sneaky and something i've not seen before.
Posted by: thekohser
QUOTE(Silver seren @ Mon 7th November 2011, 10:13am) 
...that's still pretty sneaky...
I think this is a classic case of where you shouldn't attribute to malice what can be chalked up to error. Marsden probably just copied the earlier citation, then replaced the URL, intending that that is what would and should show up on the WP page.
Posted by: Michaeldsuarez
QUOTE(thekohser @ Mon 7th November 2011, 10:15am)
QUOTE(Silver seren @ Mon 7th November 2011, 10:13am)
...that's still pretty sneaky...
I think this is a classic case of where you shouldn't attribute to malice what can be chalked up to error. Marsden probably just copied the earlier citation, then replaced the URL, intending that that is what would and should show up on the WP page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rachel_Marsden&diff=459465264&oldid=459445198
Silver_seren even included that "sneaky" accusation in his edit summary.
Posted by: Silver seren
QUOTE(Michaeldsuarez @ Mon 7th November 2011, 3:31pm)
QUOTE(thekohser @ Mon 7th November 2011, 10:15am)
QUOTE(Silver seren @ Mon 7th November 2011, 10:13am)
...that's still pretty sneaky...
I think this is a classic case of where you shouldn't attribute to malice what can be chalked up to error. Marsden probably just copied the earlier citation, then replaced the URL, intending that that is what would and should show up on the WP page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rachel_Marsden&diff=459465264&oldid=459445198
Silver_seren even included that "sneaky" accusation in his edit summary.
Do we know that that IP is Marsden? We can assume, I suppose. Is she currently in France?
And I consider it sneaky promotion, nonetheless. Linking to a personal website to publicize an e-book and making sure to put it in the lede so everyone will see it isn't appropriate at all.
Posted by: Michaeldsuarez
QUOTE(Silver seren @ Mon 7th November 2011, 10:34am)
Do we know that that IP is Marsden? We can assume, I suppose. Is she currently in France?
And I consider it sneaky promotion, nonetheless. Linking to a personal website to publicize an e-book and making sure to put it in the lede so everyone will see it isn't appropriate at all.
You could've made your revision without making an accusation. Can you please be more careful with accusations in the future? Innocent until proven guilty. Show some responsibility. You're an editor (in the newspaper sense) now, so please be a responsible editor.
Posted by: Silver seren
QUOTE(Michaeldsuarez @ Mon 7th November 2011, 3:40pm)
QUOTE(Silver seren @ Mon 7th November 2011, 10:34am)
Do we know that that IP is Marsden? We can assume, I suppose. Is she currently in France?
And I consider it sneaky promotion, nonetheless. Linking to a personal website to publicize an e-book and making sure to put it in the lede so everyone will see it isn't appropriate at all.
You could've made your revision without making an accusation. Can you please be more careful with accusations in the future? Innocent until proven guilty. Show some responsibility. You're an editor (in the newspaper sense) now, so please be a responsible editor.
You know, that's sorta funny coming from you.
Posted by: Michaeldsuarez
QUOTE(Silver seren @ Mon 7th November 2011, 10:45am)
You know, that's sorta funny coming from you.
I know what libel and defamation is and how to handle it because I'm an ED sysop, not in spite of it.
Posted by: Silver seren
Um...I don't think me making a comment about an anonymous IP would count as defamation. That's the thing about being anonymous on the internet. I can't exactly give an IP address a "negative image".
Posted by: Michaeldsuarez
QUOTE(Silver seren @ Mon 7th November 2011, 10:58am)
Um...I don't think me making a comment about an anonymous IP would count as defamation. That's the thing about being anonymous on the internet. I can't exactly give an IP address a "negative image".
Yet readers can connect that IP address with a location and from there to Rachel Marsden. If your accusation is going to hurt anyone, then it's certainly going to hurt someone with a name.
Posted by: thekohser
QUOTE(Silver seren @ Mon 7th November 2011, 10:34am)
Linking to a personal website to publicize an e-book and making sure to put it in the lede so everyone will see it isn't appropriate at all.
How come it's "publicizing"? I see it as someone "engaged around the world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally". That's pretty much the mission of the Wikimedia Foundation, and here you are bashing someone who was just trying to be a part of that mission.
You think the fact that someone published a book should be suppressed? Perhaps you believe the book should be burned? What are you, some kind of furry Nazi or something?
Posted by: Silver seren
QUOTE(Michaeldsuarez @ Mon 7th November 2011, 4:10pm)
QUOTE(Silver seren @ Mon 7th November 2011, 10:58am)
Um...I don't think me making a comment about an anonymous IP would count as defamation. That's the thing about being anonymous on the internet. I can't exactly give an IP address a "negative image".
Yet readers can connect that IP address with a location and from there to Rachel Marsden. If your accusation is going to hurt anyone, then it's certainly going to hurt someone with a name.
So, you know that that's her IP address and that she's in France? Readers have no way of connecting an IP address with anyone. Besides, isn't calling any IP or new accounts' edits vandalism then also defamation?
Posted by: carbuncle
QUOTE(Silver seren @ Mon 7th November 2011, 4:13pm)
So, you know that that's her IP address and that she's in France? Readers have no way of connecting an IP address with anyone. Besides, isn't calling any IP or new accounts' edits vandalism then also defamation?
Well, I'm sure that when this thread appears on Rachel Marsden's Google alert, Rachel Marsden will read it over, and then Rachel Marsden will file a lawsuit against you from her home in France. The discovery phase of that lawsuit should quickly settle any doubts about who was using that IP and from where. Good luck, Silver!
Posted by: Silver seren
QUOTE(carbuncle @ Mon 7th November 2011, 5:09pm)
QUOTE(Silver seren @ Mon 7th November 2011, 4:13pm)
So, you know that that's her IP address and that she's in France? Readers have no way of connecting an IP address with anyone. Besides, isn't calling any IP or new accounts' edits vandalism then also defamation?
Well, I'm sure that when this thread appears on Rachel Marsden's Google alert, Rachel Marsden will read it over, and then Rachel Marsden will file a lawsuit against you from her home in France. The discovery phase of that lawsuit should quickly settle any doubts about who was using that IP and from where. Good luck, Silver!
*roll* Comments made in edit summaries are pretty much the same as if they are made in other non-article parts of Wikipedia. They are protected under freedom of speech and are not a part of the actual "news" portion of the article.
I would love to make money off of Marsden for harassment and emotional damages.
Posted by: LessHorrid vanU
QUOTE(carbuncle @ Mon 7th November 2011, 5:09pm)
QUOTE(Silver seren @ Mon 7th November 2011, 4:13pm)
So, you know that that's her IP address and that she's in France? Readers have no way of connecting an IP address with anyone. Besides, isn't calling any IP or new accounts' edits vandalism then also defamation?
Well, I'm sure that when this thread appears on Rachel Marsden's Google alert, Rachel Marsden will read it over, and then Rachel Marsden will file a lawsuit against you from her home in France. The discovery phase of that lawsuit should quickly settle any doubts about who was using that IP and from where. Good luck, Silver!
Am I understanding you correctly - it is libel to claim that someone is massaging their Wikipedia BLP, because... ah... it can be proven that you have caused the subject real distress... um.. because the edits were... from their ip address?
I am not an expert on libel and slander, and nor do I play one at Scrabble, but I seem to recall that truth is a really good defence in such cases. Employing lawyers who are adept at joined up thinking is helpful, too.
Posted by: carbuncle
QUOTE(LessHorrid vanU @ Mon 7th November 2011, 8:38pm)
Am I understanding you correctly - it is libel to claim that someone is massaging their Wikipedia BLP, because... ah... it can be proven that you have caused the subject real distress... um.. because the edits were... from their ip address?
Well, let's see. I started this thread with a title which clearly implies that Marsden is editing her BLP and has done so before. This section of the forum is not indexed by well-behaved search engines. You should probably take my statements about lawsuits with a grain of salt...
Posted by: LessHorrid vanU
QUOTE(carbuncle @ Mon 7th November 2011, 10:00pm)
QUOTE(LessHorrid vanU @ Mon 7th November 2011, 8:38pm)
Am I understanding you correctly - it is libel to claim that someone is massaging their Wikipedia BLP, because... ah... it can be proven that you have caused the subject real distress... um.. because the edits were... from their ip address?
Well, let's see. I started this thread with a title which clearly implies that Marsden is editing her BLP and has done so before. This section of the forum is not indexed by well-behaved search engines. You should probably take my statements about lawsuits with a grain of salt...
Ah. Yes.