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.

[guy]

So by far the main editor is Bucketsofg (264 edits). Other major ones are:

90 Ceaurus
84 70.25.152.39/70.25.91.205 (possibly one person)
68 Arthur Ellis
59 Homeontherange
58 Pasboudin
51 Samaritan

Homeontherange is of course an old friend.

[WordBomb]

70.25.152.39 = Rachel Marsden
70.25.91.205 = Ceaurus

And indeed, Rachel Marsden might also be Ceaurus, but I have no idea at this point.