[WikiEN-l] Don't remove a WP:OFFICE tag put there by Danny

[Daniel Mayer]

--- geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> The people we are writeing articles about are not customers.

Every single person on the planet is a customer. We plan to serve all. 

> blanking or deleting the article= writeing off the work. Not a nice
> way to treat the previous writers. Telling them what is wrong might
> work better.

We can not leave potentially wrong, libelous, and/or slanderous text up while the article is being
reviewed and checked per an Office Action. Everything is still in the history and all the good
bits will be put back once they are confirmed and cited. Not doing this opens the foundation up to
lawsuit by unnecessarily pissing off the complaining party while we clean up whatever valid issues
(if any) they have with the article. 

> It is a bit difficult to tell how many references [[Jack Thompson
> (attorney)]] had since two different systems were being used but it
> was probably over 100 (absolute minium=99). how many do you want?

Without commenting on those particular references - Not all references are equal. Just because
somebody publishes a completely wrong and biased fact somewhere else does not give us an OK to
cite that information. 

> > That's what WP:OFFICE is all about -- good customer service.
> 
> I seem to recall the justification was something to do with legal
> worries. Are you stateing that is not the case?

Good customer service is a great way to prevent pissing people off so much that they would be
willing to sue. So the two are closely linked.

> > Ideally, it should be thought of as an action that could and should be
> > taken by any good Wikipedian in the face of a bad article.  A very firm
> > "blank and rewrite with proper cites" is a perfectly valid move for
> > articles like this.
> >
> 
> /Temp exists for such purposes. Outright blanking is pretty much
> garenteeded to be reverted.

And reverting an Office Action is pretty much guaranteed to lead to at least temporary desysoping
and blocking. We also need to feel bold enough to do the right thing when we see an utter piece of
POV crap and start over by blanking and verifying each and every fact. Perhaps a better way to do
that is via HTML comments ; text would be commented out until it is verified. 

-- mav 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com