"

 Melanie Phillips 

Hi, thanks for your message. I reverted three attacks on her, I think I muddled yours with another one (prob. The New Statesman one) hence my edit comment when reverting yours was inappropriate, and I apologise for this. Regarding your the refs, the first one says:

""Lovers of the unusual, rejoice! Within days Melanie Phillips will make a public apology. In July 2008, Mad Mel lifted and embellished a mistake from the neocon website, Harry's Place, regarding Mohammad Sawalha, a Palestinian-born British man whom Al Jazeera had mis-transcribed referring to ""evil/ noxious"" Jews at a rally"" 

This is a cheap and nasty throwaway remark, it contains nothing of substance, and in fact is a pure ad hominem attack. So I'm not sure that under BLP guidelines it's appropriate at all. 

The second one says:

""Indeed, within much of the liberal commentariat, she has long been dismissed as ""Mad Mel"", as someone who has lost her rational and moral compass"".

Here, the writer is reporting unnamed third-party sources. This hardly seems a good source for what in effect amounts to a grievous BLP violation. 

I have two other comments about the page:

 wouldn't it be much better to try and find sources which engage critically and rationally with her views, instead of regurgitating the above types of nastiness?
 there have been some quite vile instances of vandalism on the page recently and in addition there seems to be a general tendency/trend at the moment to denigrate her in some way, almost as though it's the only way of editing the article. As editors we should I suggest be careful not to be influenced by this, and to steer well clear of ad hominem-type slurs and focus on her views instead. Best wishes,   "