On 9/6/08, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
2008/9/6 Angela <beesley(a)gmail.com>om>:
You might be better off talking to Wikinewsies
than Wikipedians
considering Wikinews already does allow discussion about the topic (as
opposed to discussion about the article).
<http://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AAllPages&from=&to=&namespace=102>
shows pages from their comment namespace, which is used for non-NPOV
chat not related to improving the article.
There's more information on it here:
http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Commentary_pages_on_news_events
Something like this would be tempting for Wikipedia articles, but it'd
be a BLP and confidential info nightmare on anything controversial ...
Would BLP concerns even need to apply to a project/subproject that is
a straightforward simple message board host? At least in
article-space, someone can make an argument that the foundation
"endorses" the article or otherwise contributes to a libel. But a
message board host should be every bit as free from liability as the
US Postal Service for the letters it carries, or the phone company for
calls that go through its lines, or for the emails written on Gmail.
But of course, I'm not a lawyer, and would love to know if I know what
I'm talking about. :)
Alec