Re: OT: Third of bloggers 'risk the sack'

On Jun 4, 4:30 am, Jeff Lawrence <jeff.lawren...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 4 Jun, 12:27, Sofa - Spud <comfyso...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On 4 Jun, 07:44, Jeff Lawrence <jeff.lawren...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 4 Jun, 08:29, Alan Hope <not.alan.h...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

You haven't got one, have you?

This is one of those sour grapes moments, isn't it?

Oh, he'll have a Wikipedia page no doubt. But one that was created by
him and him alone. But it will have been swiftly deleted by the
administrators
due to him lacking any "notability". Only "notable" people can have a
Wikipedia
page, not just any old Tom, *** or Christopher. So yes, it could well
be
considered as an indicator of success.
Cheers
Jeff

I suppose we can take it that he doesn't then approve of the reggie
oliver Wiki page that has his name and wesite mentioned?

Which he added incidently. Apparently there was a lot more stuff
relating to
him too but the administrators deleted it as they said that it was all
"vanity
editing". They are all too well aware of him at Wikipedia it appears.
He's
had his fair share of battles there too.
Cheers
Jeff- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Quite. Barkingmad attempted to sabotage my entry and was quickly given
the boot by admins. For the record, my entry is none of my own doing,
it was prepared by a chap who has created several dozen entries on
contemporary genre writers. He did a rather nice job and even had a
more accurate bibliography than the one I have in my files!

Cheers,

The Piper


.

Loading