On 7/14/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 18:34:47 -0400, Anthony
<wikilegal(a)inbox.org>
wrote:
> How many articles do we have on people known
only for their
> deformities? The only one I can think of is Joseph Merrick.
I have no idea how many. I also don't think
it's accurate to say that
Peppers is known *only* for his deformities. There are plenty of
people more deformed than Peppers, after all.
Really? So what else is he famous for? Apart from people laughing at
his deformities? The extent of them is not relevant to this question,
obviously.
I've actually never heard someone laugh at his deformities. I'm just
saying if the only reason Peppers is know is because of his
deformities, there would likely be a lot more people of equal fame.
Show me someone else with the level of google searches as peppers.
Looking at Google trends I see the number of searches for his name
since 2005 are roughly equal to the number of searches for "stephen
hawking". Surely his deformities alone have not been the only factor
in this. If they were, then he wouldn't be the only one.
> Ahem -
that's *attempted* gross sexual imposition (which specifically
> excludes actual sexual contact). The man is by all accounts disabled
> and his address is a nursing home.
Snopes says "registered due to a conviction
for Gross Sexual
Imposition in Lucas County, Ohio, in 1998". It doesn't say
"attempted". Maybe Snopes is wrong. And maybe if Wikipedia had an
article on Peppers it would be easier to find out if Snopes is wrong.
The conviction record does say attempted. This illustrates quite
powerfully the entire problem with an article on Peppers: there is so
little to go on that without original research there is virtually
nothing that can be said. We don't even have contemporaneous news
reports.
First of all, looking at the info, you're right. He pled guilty to
two counts of attempted gross sexual imposition. And going back to
the topic which brought that up, I still don't think it's in the realm
of reality to call attempted gross sexual imposition "a minor
technical offence".
In any case, I'd say the fact that Snopes is wrong on this illustrates
quite powerfully one of the reasons Wikipedia *should* have an article
on Peppers.
Anthony