I do not agree. I think NPOV covers the fact that we should not give negative information more weight than appropriate, V covers that we shouldn't use garbage sources such as tabloids or gossip blogs, and NOR covers "no investigative journalism". If several reputable sources have chosen to mention something, it is not a BLP violation to include it. At that point, if someone believes it shouldn't be included, it's a content dispute. BLP is a very powerful policy with exceptional enforcement powers, and it needs a narrow scope, that being unsourced or poorly sourced information. It should not be morphed into an easy "HARM!" hammer for content disputes. Those should be handled through the normal consensus, discussion, and if necessary dispute resolution process when valid sourcing exists. Mainly, BLP should say "Enforce our content policies strictly and immediately when a living person is involved", not "Go beyond them".
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 3:08 PM, Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) newyorkbrad@gmail.com wrote:
For context, your statement as quoted was: "The point of WP:BLP is (or should be) that our fundamental content rules NPOV, NOR, V are all that's needed - but we need to apply them very harshly and we really can't be eventualist about bad info in living bios."
What about the advances we've made over the past two years in agreeing that the well-being of article subjects is also a legitimate consideration. In Wikipedia jargon, I could simply say that "you left Notability off your list." But it's a deeper sense of respect for our obligations, as reflected in such places as [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Badlydrawnjeff]] and [[/Footnoted quotes]]. See also [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Doc glasgow#Outside view by Newyorkbrad]]; [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/QZ Deletion dispute#Outside view by Newyorkbrad]]; the DRV log for May 28, 2007 (Hornbeck/Ownby); and the Shawn Hornbeck thread currently on ANI.
There is plenty of accurate, neutral, fully sourceable material about living persons that still has no place in Wikipedia. Or anywhere else on the Internet, really, but we can only control our own site.
Newyorkbrad
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 5:01 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
2008/10/1 Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) newyorkbrad@gmail.com:
Well, you can certainly quote David for that statement, but I for one
don't
agree with it at all.
What parts?
- d.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l