Quotes from WIKI
This entry was not authorized or authored by Edward McSweegan. The writer of this error-filled page is identified as freyfaxi@...deleted..., a self-described Lyme disease Activist obsessed with the notion that Lyme disease—caused by the tick-borne bacterium, ‘’Borrelia burgdorferi’’—is actually some kind of engineered bioweapon. Lyme activists have a long history of propagating fantastic fantasies and conspiracy theories through the Internet, and harassing scientists and physicians who disagree with their opinions and delusions (NYT Magazine, June 17, 2001). Some of these activists have been jailed; others apparently have been placed in psychiatric hospitals for a time, though obviously not long enough.
In any case, the information below is inaccurate. This should not come as a surprise when an online encyclopedia allows vandals, children, conspiracy nuts and the mentally ill to write and edit entries. Until this entry can be removed completely, I have made some corrections to illustrate just how farcical are this page and its author. Emcsweegan 17:41, 1 July 2007 (UTC)emcsweegan
What the hell is wrong with you people? Bored? Unemployed? Can't afford enough medication? Emcsweegan 23:28, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
’’’Edward McSweegan’’’ did not approve or author this entry. He has no interest in being part of an online source of transient, inaccurate gossip compiled by anonymous and irresponsible vandals, adolescents, and busybodies.
In keeping with the Wikipedia tradition, some of material below is dated and therefore inaccurate. In addition, all of the material was lifted, without permission, from the IOM and NIAID websites. Yet, this is a huge improvement over the original entry, which was so full of inaccuracies and distortions that every sentence had to be corrected and referenced. That edited entry has since been removed by Wikipedia’s nameless guardians of digital fluff.
Like the guy standing before a firing squad who says, “I’m flattered by the attention,” I have similar feelings about Wikipedia’sinsistence that I be included in their compilation of junk information authored by high schoolers, pseudo-intellectuals, fake experts, crackpots, and online stalkers.
You can only be put before a firing squad once, but Wikipedia offers endless rounds of entries, edits, revisions, rewrites, updates, clarifications, addendums, supplements and postscripts, on and on, into the endless future. At least they spelled my name right.
Why? It's true. None of this online crap was approved or authored by me (EMS). Why do I have to be listed on this site? I did, however, send copies of these latest Wiki entries to various friendly reporters trying to get them interested in doing another story on Wiki as a source of mis- and disinformation and all around junk data. I also included Wikipedia in a note to the Institute of Medicine suggesting the IOM Forum explore the topic of online disinformation related to infectious disease. Emcsweegan 13:25, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit]
Hey! Who keeps editing this crap! What's wrong with you??? Do you really care so much about me? Who are you? You keep writing false information about me and its got to stop. You don't know a goddamn thing about me, about NIH policies, about Lyme disease or anything else. If I want a Wiki entry I'll write one. Not some anonymous asshole.
I can keep adding a disclaimer to my unauthorized entry until the effort attracts the attention of the media and lawyers. I've already contacted the Wiki Comm office asking for a call back about his juvenile nonsense. If Wikipedia thinks I merit an entry in its pages then Wikipedia has yet another thing wrong with it: an inability to discern the important and the notable from the trivial and boring. EMS
Who are you? A somebody or a nobody? One news story and the demented ravings of one woman in Ct. (jailed for internet harassment, by the way) makes me a "somebody"? By that standard only the dead are nobodies. And no I don't inject my opinions. I write a monthly column about infectious diseases for a small town newspaper. Only you and the Internet make it out to be more than it is. But I guess this struggle to prevent Wikipedia from defining who and what I am is going to end up making me a somebody. I guess then I'll really need a Wiki bio. I suppose there's some irony in there somewhere. EMS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Edward_McSweegan
Was up for deletion last year as a result of the previous version being a BLP violation. Article was kept after I found sources to establish notability, and the dodgy edits were oversighted. However today, I got an email from Dr. McSweegan demanding that the article be deleted, as he seems to think even the cleaned-up version constitutes stalking and harassment. Subject meets WP:N--question here is whether it's marginal enough that it should be deleted per his request. Procedural nomination, I have no opinion. Blueboy96 20:09, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
He has no interest in being part of an online source of transient, inaccurate gossip, fluff and factoids compiled by anonymous and irresponsible vandals, adolescents, busybodies, and unemployed journalism majors. In keeping with the Wikipedia tradition, many of the disjointed factoids below—selected by Wikipedia—are inaccurate or completely wrong. But that's in keeping with the Wiki tradition of bad data, bad writing and bad researching. I would make corrections below--and have--but the nameless, faceless editors of Wikipedia remove them as fast as I can post them. (This will be gone too in a few minutes.) I don't know what their agenda is. Maybe I unknowingly offended one them once.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Edward_McSweegan&diff=146185653&oldid=146185585
Edward McSweegan’’’ did not approve or author this entry. He has no interest in being part of an online source of transient, inaccurate gossip compiled by anonymous and irresponsible vandals, adolescents, busybodies and former journalism majors.
In keeping with the Wikipedia tradition, some of disjointed trivial below is dated or just plain wrong. This is the fourth version in 24 hours developed by Wikipedia's namesless, faceless, self-appointed editors and guardians. Apparently, the subjects of Wiki entries are forbidden to disclaim the editors' work, make corrections or complaints. At least without the aid of an attorney.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Edward_McSweegan&diff=146171722&oldid=146161913