There is an interesting anomoly in the post by Michael Grosvenor Myer.

In describing our troll, correctly I would say, he states:-

It ill becomes an anonymous detractor to animadvert against her qualities and achievements, and then, without revealing who he is or what qualifications he claims, to urge his democratic right to his opinions...

However, he has already stated in his post:-
The author of Shirley's Wikipedia entry speaks of her "plain, austere singing style", adding that her "voice has a breathy, unearthly quality, which alienates some people".

... but we don't know who wrote this. Wikipedia entries are largely uncredited and the huge site is notoriously unreliable and is avoided (or condemned) by large sections of the academic community. Could it be that whoever wrote this opinion of Shirley could be regarded as an 'anonymous detractor'?

Mistakes and misjudgements on Wikipedia? A recent newspaper article began:-
Up to six in ten articles on Wikipedia contain inaccuracies, according to new research.

.. and that article must be the absolute truth because it was published in..... The Daily Mail.