On 5/20/06, Philip Welch <wikipedia(a)philwelch.net> wrote:
If it was reliably established that he was Jewish,
there would be no
problem. Since it isn't reliably established, reporting that he was
Jewish, or that he might be Jewish, constitutes anti-Semitism.
The only reference I've found to Harold Shipman being Jewish is a BBC
news site reporting a comment by [[Abu Hamza al-Masri]], an Islamist
cleric in the UK, who was convicted in February of racial hatred and
incitement to murder. Abu Hamza told the court that the British
Foreign Office and media are controlled by Jews, and part of his
evidence was that, referring to Harold Shipman, "If a doctor kills 250
of his patients there is not a single word about his religion."
This is the attitude that User:Saladin1970 (posting here as Abu Hamza)
brings to Wikipedia. We see it a lot. A few weeks ago, another user,
User:Jamaissur, created a number of articles about British Jews who
were caught up in a financial scandal. There were other people caught
up in it too, but he didn't create articles about them, only the
Jewish ones, and some of the articles ended up consisting only of the
allegations with practically no other information. When he couldn't
find a source saying they were Jews, he'd add things like "is one of
the 'British friends' of the "Israel Center for Social and Economic
Progress," which made the same point.
Or that the person was married to someone whose father was Jewish. He
even created an article about the charity [[Jewish care]] because one
of the men caught up in the scandal was a major fundraiser, and for a
while that's all the page said: British charity, looks after Jewish
people, controversial Lord X was a major fundraiser.
Even if Harold Shipman was Jewish and there's a good source for it,
there's no reason it should be in the intro. His ethnicity/religion
wasn't in any way relevant to his notabilty.