On 28/01/2008, daniwo59(a)aol.com <daniwo59(a)aol.com> wrote:
In a message dated 1/28/2008 6:38:33 AM Eastern Standard Time,
I agree about the PR value - but do we still
have to delete the
article and give up our integrity after just one feeble letter?
So we basically agree.
but the article should be fixed because as it is now,
it is a hatchet
job, plain and simple.
I agree about that too, but probably its not very interesting to this
mailing list. As with any other Wikipedia article what you wrote
should go to its talk page.
It appears that you have a lot of sources about the subject, so you
are welcome to edit the article accordingly. I don't have these
sources, and i'm not talking about the article's content here. I'm
talking about the unbearable lightness of deleting all versions of an
article after one vague letter from a lawyer.
Your not-so-positive opinion about the article is relevant though,
because some people at the talk page there claim that deletion and
rewriting from scratch was a good solution, because the article is
better now. I claim that it is totally irrelevant, because it doesn't
prevent another legal letter about this article, or about any other
I don't have an easy solution. Maybe WMF will announce that it is a
project-wide policy to delete articles when there are legal threats
and that Wikipedia must only stick to safe scientific and historical
subjects. It will be disappointing, of course, but at least it will be
a firm written policy.
Amir Elisha Aharoni
English - http://aharoni.wordpress.com
Hebrew - http://haharoni.wordpress.com
"We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace." - T. Moore