[Foundation-l] Report to the Board of Trustees: Davos

[Michael Snow]

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
> subjects.
>   
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.

--Michael Snow