On 4/1/07, Anthony wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
On 4/1/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 01/04/07, Anthony wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
OK, but what about information which I have no idea whether it is true or false, such as the paragraph I removed?
{{fact}}
Is this your personal opinion, or policy? Because I swear I've read emails from a certain prominent Wikipedian suggesting otherwise (I'll look up the email first, then name him). And I should point out this *is* a biography of a living person we're talking about.
Ah ha, here it is. The post is entitled "[WikiEN-l] good example of overuse of {{fact}}" by Jimmy Wales on Oct 15, 2006 10:43 AM. His example is not a BLP:
"Political correctness is a real or perceived attempt to refine or restrict language and terms used in public discussion to those deemed acceptable or appropriate. For example "blackboard" is now perceived by some as being "politically incorrect" in the United Kingdom [citation needed]"
Isn't this exactly the type of anecdotal fluff which I just removed from the Hofstadter article? I have no idea whether the claim is true or false.
Now, something I didn't remember is that Wales was complaining not over the use of the tag, but that it was used for so long. He says that he "would recommend that anything like this for which no citation appears within 7 days be removed or edited in some fashion to remove the need."
So {{fact}} tag this for 7 days, and then remove? Or is this different because it's a BLP? Does it matter whether the statement could be construed as a bad thing or not? Does it matter that the person in question has stated that our article is filled with errors?
I still think I did the right thing. But the fact that it's being questioned doesn't surprise me one bit. At times Wikipedia seems to be filled with these anecdotal statements and preconceived notions that are off-limits for removal.
Anthony