pcplantdb

["Lawrence F. London, Jr." <lfl@intrex.net>]

webmaster@pfaf.org wrote:

> Interestingly the actual text of the wikipedia article was not in my 
> opinion libalous. It stated that some people acused him of involvment in 
> the assination, but it nothing was proved. Technically its probably true 
> in that he was accused. However it was probably inapropriate for 
> wikipedia to report rumors.


He was justified in complaining and raising hell with them. The author of the original entry should have had better 
sense. Wikipedia could have noted that the article was removed or edited as being irresponsible and potentially 
libellous, certainly unfair.

>>He went on to describe Wikipedia as a "flawed and irresponsible research 
tool".
>>
>>"The marketplace of ideas ultimately will take care of the problem but in the meantime, what happens to people like 
  >> me?" he asked.

Still no need to toss the baby out with the bathwater.