Are there less radical solutions that we have not tried out yet? Remember, we have MediaWiki:Sitenotice at our disposal to focus the attention of all registered users. We could have a global call to sign up for BLP patrol on Special:Recentchangeslinked/Category:Living_people -- make sure that hundreds of people look at the logs at least once per day. I would not rule out more rigid application of semi-protection until we have revision tagging, but it seems like a poorly scalable solution. The problem certainly extends beyond BLPs to articles about high schools and universities, where teachers and professors are often targeted by drive-by idiots. -- Peace & Love, Erik The notion that we don't need to worry as stuff gets reverted quickly is false. I've got about 200 articles on my watchlist that I monitor because we've had BLP/OTRS problems in the past. I went away for a week, and came back to find a number or so had had dubious or libelous material (re)inserted and it had been left standing until I returned. Even where people's mothers complain and we apologise profusely and remove it - if the character assassin returns a few weeks later there is a high chance that the new libel won't be spotted until mum (sorry 'mom') sees it again. We can't even promise genuinely upset people that it won't happen again. I think semi-protecting all bios is overkill and in any case unlikely to be accepted by the community. However, I wonder if we could get the community to accept permanent semi-protection where there article meets three criteria 1) it is a BLP 2) It is fairly low-nonbility/profile - hence probably underwatched. 3) there have been real BLP problems in the past. At least we can then tell the offended party that we've done something. (Yes, I know it won't solve the determined libeler) Erik is looking for less radical solutions. I don't have the solution, but if anyone thinks anything less than a radical solution will fix this problem than they simply have not understood the problem. Wikipedia has a very ugly downside - and real people are getting hurt. Doc -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Libeling-NFL-players--or%2C-our-abject-failure-to-pro… Sent from the English Wikipedia mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

The problem is that recentchanges only goes back for certain amount of time. If something falls of the list without being checked, though luck. We need some system to inform people an edit hasn't been checked and is about to fall off the radar. Mgm On 4/19/07, Blu Aardvark <jewbowales(a)wikipedia-lol.cjb.net> wrote: