I totally support your idea.
I am on irc and on juriwiki-l on a 24/24 basis to answer legal issues as best as I can and tell people when I can't, but people seem to come mainly by luck or because someone else told them.
It would not be difficult to precise in every page that authors are responsible for what they write and that they should get some advice if they don't feel comfortable with something, assuming that we don't endorse any editing role or whatever... just mention that we exist if they have nothing else.
I am certain that simply adding such a precision would greatly improve the legal security on wikipedia.
Le 3 juin 05 à 17:12, David Monniaux a écrit :
I think that all Wikipedia pages should contain somewhere (say, at the bottom) a link to a page where people could complain about the content of the articles. (I'm talking here of complaints about breach of privacy, copyright violation, libel etc.)
Currently, people have nowhere clear to go to. We get messages on the Village Pump or equivalent, by private email to participants (often unrelated to the articles), by emails to the Foundation board, by email to public mailing lists.
This, to me, is deeply unsatisfactory:
- By providing no obvious way for people to complain about
articles, we give the impression of some unreliable, irresponsible group.
- While people look for a way to contact us, they become
frustrated. As a result, their complaint may become unnecessarily accusatory and angry.
- We also incite people to make legal threats to get some attention.
- When people write to public lists, they attract undue attention to
issues that should be better dealt with in the calm - some inflammatory email with legal threats will result in some angry answers, and all can escalate.
- If people have a really legitimate problem, they have little
recourse.
You will say, hey, they can simply edit the wiki. This simply does not work. Many people don't understand the editing process and simply can't do it. Furthermore, some well-meaning contributors may see their awkward efforts as "vandalism" and revert them. This gives people the impression that their edits are refused or that some "censorship" is implemented.
This is not imaginary. I'll spare you the details, but within one week the French association mailing-list received legal threats from two sources, both alleging bad treatment from Wikipedia. In both cases, the legal claims are dubious; but they can be an annoyance and would be better dealt with in a friendly agreement than if lawyers get involved.
Somebody remarked to me that we could, as many professional sites have, have a complaint page. The user would first have to answer some multiple-choice questions, meant for weeding out "non urgent" complaints (i.e. things such as "the birth date of XXX is incorrect"); or, these complaints could be sent to the talk page. Finally, if the reason seems to fit a legitimate "sensitive" category, they would have a form open for typing their message or would obtain some link to a complaint email address.
I think that as we become one of the foremost Internet sites, we will have more of the sort. We should have means so that simple problems don't escalate into full blown confrontations. Remember that even if we win, that's still a lot of frustration and lost time.
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l