Or racist BatBoy?
Posted on 02/23/2008 8:57:45 AM PST by pissant
yesterday, a blogger on the official barack obama campaign website, in the community blogs section, posted that he was starting a wikipedia page about larry sinclair to "debunk" mr. sinclair. see barack obama campaign starts a larry sinclair 'debunking' wikipedia entry.
click pictures to enlarge
The obama campaign blogger was using the wikipedia user name "matteblack".
within a few short hours of its creation, a wikipedia admin jmlk17 summarily deleted the larry sinclair entry pronouncing it an "attack page" prohibited by wikipedia guidelines.
(Excerpt) Read more at wesawthat.blogspot.com ...
PING
Yep.
“a wikipedia page about larry sinclair to “debunk” mr. sinclair”
Mr Obama has never performed oral sex on Mr. Sinclair. Mr. Obama has never smoked crack with Mr. Sinclair.
Mr. Obama has never worn a french tickler on his dangler while having sex with Mr. Sinclair in the back of a limo.
Or racist BatBoy?
the obama campaign blogger was using the wikipedia user name "
matteblack"
within a few short hours of its creation, a wikipedia admin
jmlk17 summarily deleted the larry sinclair entry pronouncing it an "attack page" prohibited by wikipedia guidelines.At least Slick’s ‘bimbo eruption’ team was concerned about women coming out of the woodwork.
The thing I find most outrageous here is that anyone who is being discussed on the web, media, etc. should be allowed to have their own Wiki page, IMO.
For example, if I’m a musician and want to post my biography, with discography of my works, etc. on Wikipedia, shouldn’t I be able to do that? Doesn’t matter how big or small or popular or not popular the music is, the fact that it exists should be enough to merit a page, I would think.
Yeah, but its also a privately owned company, is it not? And they get to set their standards.
The was a web site I read about last year that could locate the older web pages that are somehow still there but unseen. Some type of a Internet history that exists. Sorry don’t remember the name but it could be interesting in several ways and this article brought it to mind.
Thanks. Now we can find all that pesky stuff that we remember. Like, Al Gore in Congress saying he invented the internet on a video (before Sandy Berger or someone removed it) or some other politicians trying to correct or finesse what they said after the fact to educate us on what they ment.
Monday or Tuesday they say the polygraph results will be posted. Snicker . . . maybe the “Hillary will crush Obama” crowd aren’t wearing tinfoil hats after all . . .
The MSM won’t cover it unless he fails the test.
That is interesting.
It is my opinion that the Larry Sinclair situation is being VERY carefully montiored by MANY people, including all of the campaigns. I also suspect that wikipedia admin jmlk17 did not stumble upon the Larry Sinclair entry on his own but was directed there by SOMEBODY.
I think before all is said and done Larry Sinclair will be a household name, Wikipedia site and all.
Like getting a Lewinsky?
"Now you listen to me. I am going to say this just once again. I never had a sexual relationship with that man, Larry Sinclair."
Will Drudge and then FOX force their hands?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
