By your definition getting anything from a git repository that's not the main branch is digging and saying "it's on git" to a specific branch or tag would be misleading.

The article history of any article is literally available with just one click on Wikipedia. Well, make that two to show a specific version. Getting to the article itself takes more clicks and key presses than that ... so reading Wikipedia at all counts as digging already?

Surely you know that's a strawman. You can do better.

Isn't "digging" exactly what a good journalist is supposed to do?

Journalism is not digging for the sake of digging, it's digging for the sake of a story. Revealing Scott's name is not for the sake of a story, it's for the sake of enabling harassment.