Just wanted to let you know I linked to your blog in my column on CBSNews.com today. Thanks!

If you want to take a look, here’s the link: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/08/blogophile/main1873436.shtml

Thanks,

Melissa

1) There are many studies showing that there’s no relationship between c-sections and cerebral palsy, as Overlawyered has documented.

2) Whether or not Matt Bish agrees with those studies is irrelevant: if pro-Edwards editors adhered to Wikipedia’s ostensible “NPOV” guidelines, they would acknowledge the argument that Edwards’ lawsuits lacked scientific merit — a point of view that even the New York Times acknowledged in its coverage of Edwards’ legal career.

were actually true, they might have accepted it. But there is no study which has shown that John Edwards’ verdicts lacked a scientific basis.

I did, however, use information obtained here (Overlawyered) on the Ford Pinto article to counter the common distortions about those lawsuits, so that’s at least something – but there’s much else to cover.

Interesting charge.

I’ll be checking out those links, and the histories, to see what the story is.

If true, it indicates a bias in Wikipedia.

I suspect there’s more there than you had time to say in just three sentences.

Is there a blog anywhere, a “wikipedia watch” if you will, that has noted the history of Wikipedia edit wars over tort reform? If not, one could easily be constructed based on the history and Talk pages of the entries involved.

Eh N.