Jimbo and the Shadow of Murdoch, Is there any connection? Options

[Zoloft]

I haven't seen any mention of this, so just merge to existing discussion if any.

Rupert Murdoch's Sunday paper, the News of the World, is embroiled in a vast phone-hacking scandal, and he shuts it down, while Rebekah Brooks gives out denial after denial about any knowledge of what her employees were doing...
→
Rebekah Brooks worked hand-in-hand with Freud Communications, and there are quite a few stories that may have been planted by that firm...
→
Freud Communications employs Kate Garvey (former Tony Blair aide), who fills the role of Director, and who probably at this moment has her hands full, what with all the unraveling threads at Freud Communications and her engagement to Jimbo Wales, a close relationship since the May previous at least.
→
Is Jimbo blissfully counting baby photos and keeping the long-distance-relationship with his fiancee fresh? Or is he reviewing in his mind any correspondence and agreements with Freud Communications he may have left behind in London?

Of course, this might all be just a big ball of coincidence...

[thekohser]

Damn, you guys caught me.

Still, it does tend to show how careless Jimbo is. He shouldn't be creating Wikipedia BLPs without having a stronger sense of source materials, the site's own policies, and (frankly) more competency in writing. He thinks "dabbling" like this is fun and interesting, while other people's reputations are being (potentially) permanently affected.

This post has been edited by thekohser: Wed 20th July 2011, 5:34pm

[Abd]

Damn, you guys caught me.

Abd looks out to make sure that the sky is not falling.

Congratulations, Greg. An authentic response, not in denial. I like that.

William M. Connolley, after he blocked me for making a harmless self-reverted correction to Cold fusion after he'd banned me, was asked about his prior comment, when it was ScienceApologist making spelling corrections under ban, that this was "silly," and he responded that he'd "nailed his colors to the yard-arm," a remarkable, and very honest, comment. WMC was great at that, sometimes, WYSIWYG. It was refreshing compared to the Wikipedia norm, the pretense of neutrality, while acting and asserting what was far from neutral.

Of course, he was acting as an administrator, and acknowledging strong bias. So, why did it take a bloody RfAr to do something about it?

I don't blame WMC, he was just doing what he'd long been enabled to do, by others who are still administrators, and who still do it.