the contactbox wrote:
Whilst discussing membership, there is one group who
may have a problem
worth considering.
Wikipedia encourages editor privacy. This is built into every policy, so
much so that Checkuser is not accessible without at least two checkusers to
monitor each others' actions. Personal information is very well protected,
for many good reasons, and on the whole this works well and is core policy
on all Wikimedia-operated sites.
Some of our best editors prefer to work anonymously. In my case for example,
I edit on controversial articles, and I'm listed as an admin (and editor of
several years standing) willing to make difficult blocks where vicious
personal attack may arise on and offline. I've been involved in blocks of
vandals who have pursued other editors offline into their daily activities
and professional lives in revenge, and I have had a stalker on Wikipedia who
has made libellous claims..... all of which is water of a ducks back that I
don't have a concern over, and doesn't influence editing and mediating as
seems most appropriate within Wikipedia ... because no public link to an
offline ID is provided.
I don't know the situation with UK (or England and Wales?) law, but at
least on the Italian chapter the list of members is not public. On the
members only part of the website
http://www.wikimedia.it/ we have a list
of members, but most of them only appear with their wiki nickname, so
their privacy is not violated. Real names are known only by the board
members (or maybe only by the treasurer) but there's no need to make
them public.
Cruccone