Rachel Marsden: The Fundamental Schizophrenia of BLP Options

[gomi]

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.

[Somey]

SLIMVIRGIN MASSIVE HYPOCRISY ALERT

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Rachel_M...g_started_again

I'd quote some stuff, but you almost have to read the whole thing to get the full effect. At least Slimmy has finally admitted to being a right-winger, for all intents and purposes.

...Oh, all right, here's one:

My view is that mistakes people make in their early twenties shouldn't be held against them by Wikipedia forever, especially if the mainstream media has stopped writing about it, and if the issue didn't lead to court action. We're an encyclopedia, not a tattoo service. SlimVirgin (talk) 21:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I mean, you see things like this, and you have to think, she's laughing at everyone. Wikipedia is basically her personal revenge platform at this point, and she certainly won't let it be anyone else's revenge platform, either.

There's also some talk towards the end about Marsden's sexual harrassment cases "never seeing the inside of a courtroom." I think it's important here, in the interests of truth and accuracy, to point out that the overwhelming proportion of all sexual harrassment accusations are never brought to trial. Nobody wants to bring those kinds of cases to court; they're extremely ugly for both sides. They're almost always handled internally by the companies involved, or settled out of court, and for good reason.

That kind of rhetoric is deceptive, and typically used by abusers and corporate shills to get the media off their backs. I'm not saying Marsden did (or didn't) do any of those things she was accused of, but she was formally accused, plain and simple. So... the fact that Slimmy uses that form of spin is suggestive, at least to anyone who's paying attention.

[gomi]

SLIMVIRGIN MASSIVE HYPOCRISY ALERT

And in other news, SUN CONTINUES TO RISE IN THE EAST

[Ior]

SLIMVIRGIN MASSIVE HYPOCRISY ALERT

And in other news, SUN CONTINUES TO RISE IN THE EAST

This just in: SMOKING MAY LEAD TO CANCER