Comments on: Interesting Wikipedia Edits – Anonymous No More

By: VirusHead

VirusHead — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 19:01:12 +0000

Ok…. that’s enough. None of this has anything to do with the post. I’ve edited out names and links in the comments above.

Take this disagreement, gossip, and drama somewhere else.

I don’t have the time or inclination to sort it out, and I won’t approve any other comments or links unless it is to the story of a legal judgment on the matter.

By: Wilma

Wilma — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 23:40:49 +0000

Oh, (Edited) did "resign" all right. The offices of the (Edited) were in quite a tizzy when they found out how many journalism rules she had vilated.

By: From the (Edited) web site

From the (Edited) web site — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 00:31:35 +0000

I edited this story and I can assure you that (Edited) did not get fired for this story or any other. Mary decided to leave the paper to take a job with a local documentary filmmaker. She gave her notice before the Wikipedia story was published. She disclosed to me early in the reporting process her sister's fights with (Edited) and her sister's role is mentioned high up in our story. Bottom line: We stand by the story. Comment by (Edited), Managing Editor, (Edited) on Feb 26th, 2008, 13:55 pm

By: davey

davey — Sun, 25 May 2008 04:38:56 +0000

In my experience, Wikipedia is a place where misogynistic cyberbullies go to harass independent artists and riot grrrls. Case in point: (Edited) a leading artist and tarot card reader, had her article yanked from Wikipedia for no apparent reason. And when her sister (Edited) a print journalist, wrote an article about it, she was forced to resign for “violating journalistic ethics.” You can read about it here: (Edited) BTW, you can also read what happened according to the creep who sexually harassed (Edited) on Wikipedia starting here:: (Edited) Remember: Information is only as good as its source. Garbage in; garbage out…