On 9/9/06, Amgine amgine@saewyc.net wrote:
It is not reasonable to have large, in-depth biographies about living persons. Too much information makes is included, often with such detail that make an en.wp article a considerable risk to the subject's privacy and security (such as identity theft, among other things.) Deep articles are prone to bias, either showing the subject unfavourably or too favourably, and often give undue weight to some minor element of their life to push a point of view (a classic example are US Congressional members, whose articles almost universally contain extensive coverage of the most recent few years of public service - particularly perceived scandals - and may completely lack any mention of previous public positions or private careers.) Subjects can and do dramatically alter their lives and goals, and en.wp articles are not able to be relevant to these changes.
Was this intended as satire? I am reminded of "A modest proposal" by Swift. Of course Wikipedia must and will include relevant information about living people when it is well-sourced. Balance is desirable, but lack thereof should rarely be a criterion for "resetting" an article -- more for restructuring it and adding missing pieces.
The well-intended and necessary efforts to fight against libel and POV must not turn into hysteria and paranoia.