[Foundation-l] Request for your input: biographies of living people
wikimail at inbox.org
Mon Mar 2 16:16:45 UTC 2009
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 6:38 AM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com>wrote:
> I've just looked at a BLP and nowhere can I see an guidance on how to
> complain. I suggest a "Report a problem with this article" link to
> added to the sidebar of all articles as a mailto link to the
> appropriate OTRS address.
Sounds good, but how good is OTRS at handling these issues? Are there any
statistics available as to what percentage of OTRS complainers are satisfied
with the resolution? Does OTRS provide any escalation for people who aren't
satisfied with their initial results?
Flagged Revs is an excellent way of dealing with vandalism to BLPs,
> technical solutions to more subtle problems are a little trickier.
> Flagged Revs could be used with addition levels - a "free of
> vandalism" level and a "well balanced, fact-checked and free of
> anything remotely libellous" level. Two separate levels are necessary
> since the 2nd takes far too long to be a practical vandal fighting
> tool - I'm not sure which level would be shown by default to whom,
> that needs to be worked out.
Another good idea, but how would an article be accepted as "well balanced"?
You just can't write about a topic which has any level of controversy and
come up with an article which everyone will agree is "well balanced". No
matter what you write, someone is going to have a problem with it, so
marking an article as "well balanced" is more likely to increase the
complaints rather than reduce them. I think Citizendium's "approved
articles" is about the best you can do in this type of situation, and their
articles certainly aren't "well balanced".
More information about the foundation-l