Thread by @PalmerReport

For years, Palmer Report's Wikipedia page has consisted of lies that competing publications have made up about me. I've mostly ignored it. But now they're calling me "center right." This has gone too far. Can all of you please edit and clean up this page:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palmer_Re…

There appears to be one Wikipedia "editor" with a personal grudge against me who keeps trying to override everything. If someone adds a positive about Palmer Report from a public figure, it's removed. If someone points out the inaccuracy of the lies about me, it's ignored.

I'm not allowed to write my own Wikipedia page, of course. And any time one person has jumped in to try to fix the page, the rogue editor has stomped it out. The only solution I see is for several of you to revise the page at once, forcing the issue with the troll of an "editor"

I don't ask this lightly. But imagine if you had a Wikipedia page that was a complete work of fiction, and people read these lies about you every day, and believed them, and discounted your life's work because of it. I need all of you to help me get these lies about me taken down

If you go into the "talk" section on my Wikipedia page, you'll find this absurd debate about whether I'm far left, center right, or some kind of "Hillary Clinton Q-anon." Some of these editors are clearly insane, and clinically obsessed with making up conspiracy theories about me

I know I should have taken broad legal action against these competing publications every time they published a fictional attack piece about me back in 2017 and 2018, but I was too busy taking down Trump. Now I need your help in getting these lies about me taken down.

Here are some that perhaps should be included in Palmer Report's Wikipedia page, at your discretion.

- Former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm called Palmer Report an "interesting read':

https://twitter.com/JenGranholm/status/800192509280296960

Washington Post cited Palmer Report in 2018: washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/11…

Washington Post cited Palmer Report AGAIN in 2019: washingtonpost.com/education/2019…

USA cited Palmer Report in two different articles in 2018:

amp.usatoday.com/amp/1563958002

amp.usatoday.com/story/news/pol…

The Washington Post cited Palmer Report for a third time in January of 2020: washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/01…

By rule, Wikipedia pages must be written from a neutral point of view.

Would they allow Pepsi executives to write Coca-cola's Wikipedia page? Of course not.

So why is Palmer Report's Wikipedia page written entirely from the point of view of my competitors?

I'm not asking any of you to do anything that would be outside Wikipedia's rules. I don't want any rules broken; that wouldn't help things. But my page, as it stands, is in violation of Wikipedia's rules in about seventeen different ways. Which is why I need your help.

For instance the McKay Coppins Atlantic article about me has turned out to be one of the most widely discredited things on the internet. Numerous publications have blasted it for being dishonest, biased, vengeful. For it to be used as a source against me is wildly inappropriate.

The Business Insider article about me relies on the following sources:

- A troll named "Guterman" who has admitted that the Secret Service paid him a visit due to his other antics

- A woman who wrote a rant about me on her knitting blog

Sound like legitimate journalism to you?

The first paragraph on my Wikipedia page quotes Snopes editor Brooke Binkowski, who was later disciplined by Snopes for making inappropriate comments about the journalists she was fact checking. Then Snopes fired her. Why would her quote about me have any remaining merit?

Here's how the Business Insider article about me came about. Someone famous retweeted me, causing Business Insider's executive editor to throw a Twitter tantrum about me. Days later, Business Insider began contacting everyone from my past, decades back, trying to find dirt on me.

Why did Business Insider end up describing me as a "mysterious figure"? After they contacted everyone from my past, and couldn't find one person in my life who had anything controversial to say about me, they painted me as a shadowy figure instead. That article isn't a source.

What's remarkable is that if you look at the "Talk" section on Palmer Report's Wikipedia page, you see that various editors have been trying to talk some sense into the rogue editor for years. This would likely be the place to plead Palmer Report's case:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Palm…

Now I see that one of you got the "center-right" nonsense about me removed, but a rogue editor has since added "alt-left" in its place. What the hell does "alt left" mean? It shows you how clinically obsessed these trolls are when it comes to promoting false information about me.