Jennifer McCreight, thins one's extra-stinky Options

[EricBarbour]

Need an example of Wikipedia being used to troll a science blogger?

Jennifer_McCreight (T-H-L-K-D)
and Boobquake (T-H-L-K-D)......

The AFD.
Her blog post.

Is that stupid enough for you? Read the Boobquake talkpage for more.....

[The Joy]

I figured she would be known more for her atheist activism than Boobquake? While Wikipedians yell about COI and whatnot, she can still take part and offer her opinion. Seeing as the AFD has someone accusing Jennifer of violating WP:CANVASS while ignoring her concerns about the article and assuming she is sending her readers like flying monkeys to descend upon the AFD and article. I'm not seeing anyone trying to get a positive dialogue between the Wikipedia Community and Jennifer McCreight. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/hrmph.gif)

I'm against BLP articles since the Wikipedia Community can't properly maintain and defend them. However, if Jennifer McCreight has no objections to the article, I can begrudgingly accept it. Unfortunately, it does not look like even that will happen. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/dry.gif) (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/sad.gif)

Let me tell you Wikipedians something. Jennifer McCreight is a force to be reckon with. She has a strong reader and follower base as well as powerful friends in the atheist community. If she really hates her BLP article and calls Wikipedia out on it, you all are going to be in for a world of anguish and misery ten-times worse than your wars with Daniel Brandt and ColScott combined. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/mad.gif)

[carbuncle]

Let me tell you Wikipedians something. Jennifer McCreight is a force to be reckon with. She has a strong reader and follower base as well as powerful friends in the atheist community. If she really hates her BLP article and calls Wikipedia out on it, you all are going to be in for a world of anguish and misery ten-times worse than your wars with Daniel Brandt and ColScott combined. (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/mad.gif)

So, uh, you think that McCreight's friends might have a problem with her BLP? Let's check out a couple of the comments from her blog post:

Ethan says:
October 13, 2011 at 5:56 PM

There’s a project by Susan Gerbic over at http://guerrillaskepticismonwikipedia.blogspot.com/ to make sure skeptics have up to date wikipedia articles. I’d give her a shout and see if she can’t add you to her to-do list.
Reply

susangerbic says:
October 14, 2011 at 8:23 PM

Thank you Ethan!

Jennifer mentioned this on a blog a month or so ago, her followers really came together and helped out her page. As Ethan says I am trying to mobilize a editing “army” that will write/improve ect Wikipedia pages for critical thinking. The project is really important, Wikipedia is an amazing resource, we can’t ignore it. Seize these paranormal pages back from the woo that tries to change edits into promotional nonsense for themselves.

We also need to have the backs of our skeptical spokespeople which is exactly where Jennifer’s WP page falls. How can we ask the non-skeptical world to respect Jennifer (and others) if we don’t respect them enough to maintain their page?

My to-do list is pages and pages long. Please add her and others to YOUR list.

Please join me. If you want to remain just a part of the skeptical community, then fine, continue bitching over your beer at the next skeptics in the pub. But when you are ready to join the Skeptical Movement and you think editing Wikipedia might be just up your alley then visit my blog for ideas.

Then let's have a look at the Guerrilla Skepticism on Wikipedia blog. Here's a July 25 post mentioning the "makeover" of (among others) McCreight's article. I don't know where people are getting the idea that this is an unwelcome BLP or that McCready and her supporters will be weighing in to delete the BLP that they themselves created. This isn't a tempest in a teapot, it's an imaginary tempest in an imaginary teapot.

This post has been edited by carbuncle:

[Milton Roe]

I don't know where people are getting the idea that this is an unwelcome BLP or that McCready and her supporters will be weighing in to delete the BLP that they themselves created. This isn't a tempest in a teapot, it's an imaginary tempest in an imaginary teapot.

Indeed. People who instigate semi-pointless giant public demos in which they show off their tits are not likely to be upset about a WP BLP. These are people who live to be the center of attention, no matter what kind of attention.