Hoi
Ask yourself what it is about.. It is about the Wikimania talks. What was done is removing all the Wikimania talks without any discussion. There is a policy about that and as a policy it failed miserably. The admins failed to take the existing policy seriously and consequently the notions of community are devalued. Why should this be any different for BLP and why would we expect the arbitrary execution to be any different?

When people are notable because of their relation to other items, we create items for them. Why should we have an exception for this. What has not happened is that people were "outed". When an author of a talk was only know by a nick, it was the nick that was used. Meta is a source, the Wikimania website is a source so yes, there are credible sources.
Thanks,
      GerardM

On 31 July 2016 at 15:44, <jayvdb@gmail.com> wrote:
I looked quickly at AN and it seems the issue is about creating items about Wikimedians who dont clearly meet the notability criteria.  Recreating items about users after they haved objected, is dangerous ground to be walking on

Wikidata needs an accepted and enforced BLP.

I assume these items in question would fail the proposed BLP due to lack of reliable source, if it was anything like reliable sources is defined on Wikipedia.

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Living_people

On Sun, 31 Jul 2016 19:47 Gerard Meijssen, <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
Hoi,
John it was documented on the Administrators noticeboard. The "discussion" ran for over two weeks. I feel no need to identify the admin, he is typically the kind of person I greatly admire. If anything I object to the way admins do not take responsibility for what happens. If anything the way this whole controversy transpired proves how little of a community we are.

I have started and added a few items.
Thanks,
      GerardM

On 31 July 2016 at 14:28, John Mark Vandenberg <jayvdb@gmail.com> wrote:

Which items, which admin, etc.

A little context would help.

If the items were appropriate, wait for the community to agree with you before recreating them.


On 31 Jul 2016 17:50, "Gerard Meijssen" <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
Hoi.
Many items were created for Wikimania talks. They were created because Wikimania talks represent the best practices of the Wikimedia projects. All these talks were selected in a process to bring out the best our movement has to offer in the many years Wikimania was held. All the persons who gave these presentation are known by either their nick or their name as they themselves identified them at the time of offering the presentation for consideration/

For whatever reasons a Wikidata admin removed these items without any discussion. In the discussion that followed other people presented the arguments why there are no valid arguments for this deletion. A request was made repeatedly to undelete the items involved.

Given the current state of affair there is little option but to recreate these items. It must be noted that the current situation is problematic on many levels. Among them it became clear that admins do as they wish and are not held accountable for their actions. The only thing asked is for the undeletion of items and some sober thought on what may be expected of a Wikidata admin.
Thanks,
       GerardM

_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata


_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata


_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata