Elisabeth Bauer wrote:
Steve Bennett schrieb:
I would be curious to know - not necessarily with examples - whether we have had legal threats related to articles that did meet WP:V. That is, we published something which was by all accounts true, and had verifiable sources to back it up - and yet was deemed offensive by some miffed party.
It's also worth noting that the response to that complaint was markedly different from some of the others. A neutrally written article, with reputable sources and, as Sarah has pointed out, no original research, should almost never cause problems like this. If they do, I think we're much more likely to dismiss those complaints and deal with whatever the consequences may be. But those are the complaints most of you never see, because they don't require intervention on the wiki.
--Michael Snow
Michael Snow wrote:
Elisabeth Bauer wrote:
Steve Bennett schrieb:
I would be curious to know - not necessarily with examples - whether we have had legal threats related to articles that did meet WP:V. That is, we published something which was by all accounts true, and had verifiable sources to back it up - and yet was deemed offensive by some miffed party.
It's also worth noting that the response to that complaint was markedly different from some of the others. A neutrally written article, with reputable sources and, as Sarah has pointed out, no original research, should almost never cause problems like this. If they do, I think we're much more likely to dismiss those complaints and deal with whatever the consequences may be. But those are the complaints most of you never see, because they don't require intervention on the wiki.
And in this case, of course, we stood our ground. The complaint was not justified, and so we stood ready to fight it to the end.