If I understand rightly, [[Robert Black (professor)]] is a respected
Scottish law prof who is from Lockerbie, who has taken a great
interest in the Lockerbie case, and was involved in setting up the
Lockerbie trials of the Libyan agents.
In response to recent activity in the case, in early July he set up a
blog to discuss it. We briefly mentioned the blog and added a link to
it. That link stayed in place until a few days ago, when he gave a
one-sentence mention of the allegations that SV "systematically
altered"
the Wikipedia Lockerbie articles, mentioning what some claim is her
true name. He doesn't claim that they are true, just that they are
interesting.
Here's some more garbage from the page the respected professor linked
to:
"The most curious reaction to the news of SlimVirgin's identity was
demonstrated by the English-language media: apart from personal blogs
and web forums, not a single word appeared in any of the major media!
Previous scandals such the Seigenthaler case, exposing Essjay, and the
WikiScanner program by Virgil Griffith, received wide coverage. But
there was silence about SlimVirgin, comparable to the silence on
classic themes such as UFOs and the assassination of John F. Kennedy."
[rest of quote snipped]
How about them apples...? I've always wondered about that disc
business.
For those who haven't read the blog, just to be clear, Professor Black
only linked to the page containing this, and didn't mention UFOs or
JFK's assassination in his one-sentence summary. The only part that
appears to interest him is that a name already known to him in the
context of the Lockerbie investigation may also be a Wikipedia editor
involved in editing articles related to the Lockerbie bombing.
Fred, are you seriously suggesting that we should only mention a
biography subject's blog when everything they link to meets your
standards? That seems like an unreasonably high bar.
If you're suggesting something else, it would be helpful if you said
what it is.
William