on 3/31/07 10:43 AM, Ken Arromdee at arromdee@rahul.net wrote:
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007, Marc Riddell wrote:
This is in response to several recent posts. For the record, the concept of "do no harm" I was presenting to in WP was related to what information we, as editors, choose to include in biographies of persons. My point was that to consciously include gratuitous, tabloid-like junk in a biographical article is unnecessarily harmful to the person.
"Do no harm" and "do no unnecessary harm" are *vastly* different.
Harm - in any form - no matter how it is phrased - should be unacceptable.
Marc