All The Tropes Wiki Project, Part XXXI

[robkelk]

That said, I think that he did break the rules. This is what I was going to say to him before I thought to double-check his history:

You said that the magazine has retracted their statement; we must assume that this was because they could not support their statement in court. Since it has been retracted, we have only your word that this was ever published at all.

Also, even if you ''do'' have evidence that this was said, we cannot find any evidence that the action was ever actually performed the way that you described it.

Please note that "Adding incorrect text and presenting it as fact" is listed as grounds for a warning on the first occurrence and a tempban on a repeated occurrence.
Please note that "Making potentially libellous statements on an opinion page" is listed as grounds for a tempban without warning on the first occurrence.