Jimmy Wales wrote:
I can see
arguments against using Wikipedia to *create* fads, but that
is clearly not the case here. Are we going to delete [[Star Wars kid]]
if his family complains, too? After all, he too is famous against his
own will, and in that case the famous video was even leaked onto the
internet illegally (while in Brian Peppers case the famous photograph
was officially posted by the State of Ohio on its website in accordance
with state law).
I don't know anything about this case, but in general, I would say that
a thoughtful approach to our astounding global power to hurt people
deeply by having inappropriate articles on people who are not famous
through any fault or merit of their own will may lead us to respectfully
decline to have abusive articles about such people.
Have you tried googling for "Brian Peppers" recently? Wikipedia was,
until the article was deleted, the most neutral, calm, matter-of-fact
source of information on the subject, reporting that the poor guy was
the victim of a meme based on his unusual experience likely caused by a
disability, without getting all sensational and/or insulting.
Now, the Snopes article is the best of the remaining lot, and some are a
*lot* worse. I don't see how we're doing this guy any favors by
directing people searching for his name to much more offensive sites
instead of providing factual, encyclopedic information ourselves.
-Mark