Fred Bauder wrote:
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