[WikiEN-l] Attack blogs in WP:LIVING articles

[charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com]

David Boothroyd wrote

<snip>

> The question is
> not whether the blog is a 'source'; it is clearly not a source for
> anything other than what is said on the blog. The issue is whether or
> not to mention it in the article; the subsidiary issue is, should that
> question be answered in the affirmative, it should be linked to.

>From WP:BLP:

[...] insist on reliable third-party published sources and a clear demonstration of relevance to the person's notability.

NB that it is the _person's notability_ in question. It is not just a matter of whether the blog has some notability, for close watchers of UK politics. It is a question of whether an MP, attacked by a blog, is in some way characterised for notability by such an attack. You are saying 'the only': i.e. the only pair of blog and MP in such a relationship.  

> 3) The fact that Anne Milton is quoted by Sandra Howard asserting that
> Tim Ireland was "stalking" her through the weblog is particularly
> significant. It is a notably extreme accusation.

Well, the jury will have to describe whether objecting to such harassment makes Anne Milton more notable than otherwise. Or whether she is reacting as a normal person might well do. Of course being a normal person among Westminster politicians could be notability in itself?

I think the case for saying the blog must be mentioned in the Anne Milton article is weakish.

Charles

-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software 
Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information