quick bit extra - flagged revisions for BLP material is also a bit of a
no-brainer, and should be recommended by the foundation immediately as a
valuable software improvement - it's really part of point 1) (Semi 'protext'
all BLP material - curse my typo!)
cheers,
Peter
PM.
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 11:06 AM, philippe <philippe.wiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Mar 2, 2009, at 5:48 PM, private musings wrote:
basically there's a sensible three stage plan
to follow to help drive
quality and minimise 'BLP' harm;
1) Semi-protext all 'BLP' material
2) Allow an 'opt-out' for some subjects (eg. non public figures, or
those
not covered in 'dead tree sources' for example) - note this is more
inclusive than a simple higher threshold for notability
3) 'Default to delete' in discussions about BLP material - if we can't
positively say that it improves the project, it's sensible and
responsible
to remove the material in my view.
As a general rule, I think pm has given us a common-sense place to
begin discussions about how to cleanup existing BLPs. There will
always be situations that don't fit within this, but as a starting
point for guidelines, I support these.
Philippe
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l