On 27 March 2012 18:05, Ken Arromdee arromdee@rahul.net wrote:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2012, David Gerard wrote:
The key point to remember about BLPs is: no eventualism. If an article about someone dead 200 years says something nasty and wrong, that's not great, but it's not urgent. If an article about a living person says something nasty and wrong, that is urgent, and we can't just assume the wiki process will on balance fix it in the fullness of time. It's the simplest possible way of doing it and it's a vast improvement over the previous situation. It's not perfection, but calling it a "failure" is hyperbolic.
Anything which is *different* between BLP and policies for other articles, such as a no-eventualism policy, could conceivably be a benefit.
My complaint is about BLP rules that do not do this.
I'm reminded of a story told me by a friend who used to work in PC support, back in the day. He was once called out by a guy who'd deleted all the files whose purpose he didn't understand, and wondered why his machine didn't work. Please don't try this at home.
Charles