[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia:News suppression (was: News agencies are not RSs)

[Apoc 2400]

Regarding the recent discussion, I have made a draft proposal at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:News_suppression

The purpose is to codify that Jimbo and other administrators did the
right thing keeping the kidnapping of David Rohde out of his Wikipedia
article. It also aims to define when something should be kept out of
Wikipedia, even if it is covered in a few reliable sources. There can
be no absolute rules for these situations, but some basic principles.

Some would say that we need no rule for this as we have IAR. However,
Wikipedia:Ignore all rules is about ignoring rules when they prevent
you from improving the encyclopedia. The reason to suppress the news
of David Rohde's kidnapping is not mainly to improve Wikipedia, but to
protect Rohde.

It is still a draft, comments are welcome.
/Apoc2400

----

Newspapers sometimes avoid publishing information that could have
severe consequences to individuals if the public interest is small.
While Wikipedia is not a news source it is often updated with the
latest developments, leading to similar concerns.

Therefore, Wikipedia should not include information, even if it can be
reliably sourced, if:

 * Spreading it is likely to have very severe direct negative
consequences for one or more individuals.
 * It has not been widely published in reliable sources.
 * The public interest is small.
 * It is withheld only for a limited time.

Whether mainstream news sources are actively suppressing a news report
should be taken into consideration.

Administrators or other editors enforcing this may avoid directly
explaining why or referring to this rule, if doing so would negate the
purpose (see Streissand effect). In those cases it would be prudent to
explain the reasoning later.

The news suppression should be minimal. Deleting or oversighting old
article revisions or discussion about the topic is often not
necessary.

Examples

 * When New York Times reporter David Rohde was kidnapped in
Afghanistan in 2008, most news media did not report on it, because it
would put his life in greater risk. Only a few, rather obscure news
sources reported on the kidnapping. After nytimes contacted Jimmy
Wales, he and other Wikipedia andministrators kept any mention of the
kidnapping out of the Wikipedia article on David Rohde. They did the
right thing.

 * If there is an other scandal like the [[Abu Ghraib torture and
prisoner abuse]], then it could be argued that publishing it would
lead to more resentment and terrorist attacks against Americans in
Iraq. However, such news is of public interest, the danger is not to
specific individuals and the consequences are not direct. Therefore it
should not be excluded from Wikipedia if published in reliable
sources.

Related

    * Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons
    * Wikipedia is not censored
    * Wikipedia:Office actions
    * Kidnapping of David Rohde
    * Media blackout
    * Gag order