Elonka has been forwarded an email from one of the academics listed in the bibliography endorsing the site, but now seems unable to apologise for her initial aspertions and comment that that particular  history section is not reliable - but I won't hold my breath for a retraction. It's also interesting why someone who clearly loses an argument (having had the link endorsed) then goes on the attack with a load of unsubstantiated claims that she could equally be accused of, including labelling other users with SPA tags (against Wiki policy), defamatory comments about educational attainment, etc.  Or is there one rule and set of policies for those who can rally their sock-puppets and another rule for others who are just trying to get ona and add to the article??