Sage Ross wrote:
From my experience talking with people (mostly
academics) who have
Wikipedia articles, they are often unhappy with their articles but
also either don't want to interfere in a community they aren't part
of, or don't want to be seen as complaining on their own behalf and
thus risk seeming vain. Most often it's not that there is something
really wrong or negative, it's just that the article is so incomplete
or imbalanced that it gives a misleading impression of who they are
and what they do. I'd go so far as to say that the significant
majority of BLPs for academics (at least) are not appreciated by their
I'd guess that it probably holds across a fairly wide swath of people.
I'm not sure what should be done about it, though. And another thing to
consider, for those who have been the subject of media coverage, how
many feel that was really representative and balanced? Dissatisfaction
is common there as well, it's hard to say if we're qualitatively
different. Especially when those are the sources we often draw upon.
I'm likely going to put the general issue of biographies on the board's
next agenda, for what that's worth. Though as I say, there's no simple
blanket solution, and I don't know if we can promise anything beyond
more discussion and more awareness of the issues.