-----Original Message----- From: Trebor Rowntree [mailto:trebor.rowntree@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 04:17 PM To: 'English Wikipedia' Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] BLP, and admin role in overriding community review
On 5/23/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 23/05/07, Jeff Raymond jeff.raymond@internationalhouseofbacon.com wrote:
On Wed, May 23, 2007 3:04 pm, Trebor Rowntree wrote:
Can you point out where in the policy it says that? Reading it, BLP is extremely focused on sourcing and doesn't even touch upon the idea of completely deleting sourced articles on individuals who are negative. There seems to be a gulf between what's written there, and what most people
seem
to think it is.
It's not even most. This is a relatively recent idea, and I don't know where it came from, but there's significant doubt in my mind that this bizarre interpretation has any wide support.
Um, it came from Jimbo declaring it as the right approach here after the Siegenthaler fuckup. Perhaps that was before your time.
Sorry, repeating myself here. The lesson from Siegenthaler was to source source source, and delete anything which wasn't. It didn't (and BLP doesn't) say anything about deletion of articles about individuals famous for negative reasons.
"Editors should be on the lookout for biased or malicious content aboutliving persons in biographies and elsewhere. If someone appears to bepushing an agenda or a biased point of view, insist on reliablethird-party published sources and a clear demonstration of relevance tothe person's notability."
Fred