Dr Piers Robinson's @Wikipedia page is being deliberately and viciously targeted by editor "NomdeA", whose interests are startlingly similar to those of "Philip Cross", who is banned from such editing. @PiersRobinson1 1/

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:C… "NomdeA" is only active a few times a month or less, most usually to attack someone of whom the Western establishment disapproves. There have been four edits of @PiersRobinson1's page thus far, apparently still going on. 2/

I have read this book, and I think everyone who is interested in the recent history of the Labour Party will find it rewarding. In particular, it is a valuable resource for tracing the development of the anti-Semitism controversy and allegations over the last 5-6 years. 1/6

https://twitter.com/ThinkwellBooks/status/1421880528156901381

The author's position is clear: he is solidly committed to putting the case for Chris Williamson. I should say at once that I have been very critical at times of Mr Williamson's approach, which has seemed a bit blundering. I think Mr Garratt is more forgiving than many. 2/6

So. Whatever anyone may think of him, @MaxBlumenthal has published articles in the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times. This is indisputable fact.

As these are prestigious journals, his @Wikipedia article, not unnaturally, mentioned them. See here.

en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti… Would you like to see evidence that @MaxBlumenthal has written for the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times? Here you are.

nytimes.com/2009/09/03/opi…

latimes.com/archives/la-xp…

Wikipedia administration idiot-in-chief User:JzG [Guy] blunders into the Philip Cross BLP discussion with irrelevant and insulting remarks and a heap of blatant prejudice. How this person ever got to be a @Wikipedia admin is a mystery.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia… "Being attacked by a subject of an article you've already edited doesn't constitute a COI."? Yes, fine. What Philip Cross has done is the exact reverse - gone and edited the @timand2037 and @AbbyMartin articles in a hostile manner *after* their tweets regarding him.

REPOST. Okay. So I had a closer look at this "report", including following the hyperlinks. I'd like the University and others to pay particular attention to this paragraph. @EdinburghUni

@Tim_Hayward_ @PiersRobinson1 @Tracking_Power @McCormack_Tara @MaxBlumenthal @KitKlarenberg There are at least four things wrong with this. Firstly, the words "has also claimed on his blog" include a hyperlink. That link does not, in fact, go to Tim Hayward's blog. @EdinburghUni

@Tim_Hayward_ @PiersRobinson1 @Tracking_Power @McCormack_Tara @MaxBlumenthal @KitKlarenberg

I've been looking a little more closely at #PhilipCross's recent antics regarding the @guardian article on Paul Manafort and Julian Assange on @Wikipedia.

I vaguely recall that Mr Cross is highly protective of the Guardian, for some reason. Maybe others can help me on that. The @wikipedia article Mr Cross is editing on this is that of @ggreenwald, a U.S. writer. However, the Guardian is a British newspaper, reporters are British, and the Embassy involved is in London. It therefore could not be clearer that this is a ban violation from Mr Cross.