Twitter | Search | |
Neil Clark 9 May 18
When will you be dealing with editor @philipcross63 Jimmy, who uses it as a platform to harass anti-war dissidents? Why no response to complaints from public figures about his activities?
Reply Retweet Like
Jimmy Wales
Because as far as I can tell so far, those complaints are so wrong as to be risible. Look into it further. Or show me some diffs.
Reply Retweet Like More
Neil Clark 9 May 18
So wrong to be risible? Someone carrying out a vendetta via wikipedia against those he regards as his ´enemies’! I urge you to look into Cross’s activities a little closer. This is going to be a big story. Cross’s victims have had enough of his harassment. cc
Reply Retweet Like
Piers Robinson 9 May 18
Clearly if wikipedia allows a person who reveals their political agenda (see attached) to edit pages, there is a huge problem. This is clearly visible on my entry which has been overwhelmingly edited by Cross and which is clearly unbalanced.
Reply Retweet Like
Neil Clark 9 May 18
And Cross breaks wikipedia’s own rules with impunity. He took down reference to my Guardian article on Erich Fromm from Fromm’s wikipedia page even though it met all the reliable source criteria. Pure spite.
Reply Retweet Like
Craig Murray 9 May 18
I am impressed you have replied Jimmy but I think your dismissal is unfair. Is there any way to explain this to you on a medium other than twitter?
Reply Retweet Like
Vagabundo 9 May 18
Reply Retweet Like
Neil Clark 9 May 18
If Jimmy & fail to act against ´Philip Cross’ & the mountain of evidence against him then the only conclusion we can draw is that they condone stalking & harassment. There’s still time for them to do the right thing.
Reply Retweet Like
Jimmy Wales 17 May 18
My user page in English Wikipedia is a good place to start.
Reply Retweet Like