-----Original Message----- From: Jeff Raymond [mailto:jeff.raymond@internationalhouseofbacon.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 12:39 PM To: 'English Wikipedia' Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] BLP, and admin role in overriding community review
On Wed, May 23, 2007 11:36 am, Fred Bauder wrote:
If the person removing or deleting material asserts Biography of living persons as a basis then that policy rules until there is community consensus or an Arbitration Committee decision to the contrary.
So you're essentially saying that an administrator can remove an article completely from view of anyone else, claim BLP regardless of whether there was a violation, and we simply have to live with it until ArbCom gets around to it? Your prior comments seem to indicate that a DRV of the material would not be appropriate, after all, and it's not like anyone's actually allowed to review it.
-Jeff
You have correctly restated my position. However an administrator who repeatedly does this when there are no violations is going to eventually get his ears pinned back.
Fred
On Wed, May 23, 2007 11:55 am, Fred Bauder wrote:
So you're essentially saying that an administrator can remove an article completely from view of anyone else, claim BLP regardless of whether there was a violation, and we simply have to live with it until ArbCom gets around to it? Your prior comments seem to indicate that a DRV of the material would not be appropriate, after all, and it's not like anyone's actually allowed to review it.
You have correctly restated my position. However an administrator who repeatedly does this when there are no violations is going to eventually get his ears pinned back.
You do realize that there's nothing in BLP policy to support this, correct? This might be the most insane thing I've ever read on this list.
Is ArbCom prepared to dive into content disputes regarding BLPs?
-Jeff