[WikiEN-l] Koch brothers articles doctored says Think Progress

[Charles Matthews]

On 10/03/2011 18:16, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> On 10 March 2011 13:11, Fred Bauder<fredbaud at fairpoint.net>  wrote:
>>> What is an "airbush"? I think we should be told.
>> Our article "Airbrush" does not include information on the use of
>> "airbrush" as a metaphor
> Charles' point was that the article says "airbush" not "airbrush" in
> the headline.
There's a more serious kind of point that goes like this: the article in 
question being a BLP, we should very much judge the content in the light 
of BLP policy rather than who inserted it or edited it. What to an 
activist intensely interested in the subject of a BLP may seem like a 
whitewash may, in the light of the way we handle BLPs, be simply a 
scrupulous application of our criteria on referencing, due weight, 
salience and so on. In fact if that doesn't happen in such a contested 
area as US politics, something is probably wrong: we're writing an 
encyclopedia, after all, not operating a political seismograph tracking 
every little uptick of comment. That is not to excuse the activities of 
those who'd wish to put spin-doctor content onto the site.

In short,  the way COI applies to BLPs ought to be even-handed, because 
the coverage we want is neutral.

Charles