[Foundation-l] Request for your input: biographies of living people
thepmaccount at gmail.com
Mon Mar 2 23:48:59 UTC 2009
my tuppence in amongst the many voices :-).....
> 1) If we're imagining a continuum with smaller/higher-quality/restrictive
> at one end, and larger/variable-in-quality/permissive at the other .... I
> curious to know where the other language versions situate themselves. I am
> assuming that (with some exceptions) they cluster closer to the English
> model than the German, but I am just guessing. Do they?
Generally, I think it's probably best to consider the english wikipedia as a
fundamentally different beast to other projects - for a variety of reasons,
not least the sheer scale of the project. That aside - I'd share the
impression that the German project has evolved stronger structure /
governance processes than many / any others, and to that degree smaller
projects are indeed clustering closer to the english wiki.
> 2) When it comes to the German Wikipedia and other language versions which
> put an unusually high priority on quality ..... I am curious to know what
> quality-supportive measures (be they technical, social/cultural, or
> policy-level) those Wikipedia have in place. Philipp says a high threshold
> for notability is one in the German Wikipedia. Are there others?
You may well have read this before - but it's put rather well by 'Kato' over
at Wikipedia Review;
basically there's a sensible three stage plan to follow to help drive
quality and minimise 'BLP' harm;
1) Semi-protext all 'BLP' material
2) Allow an 'opt-out' for some subjects (eg. non public figures, or those
not covered in 'dead tree sources' for example) - note this is more
inclusive than a simple higher threshold for notability
3) 'Default to delete' in discussions about BLP material - if we can't
positively say that it improves the project, it's sensible and responsible
to remove the material in my view.
It's very heartening to see this important issue getting discussion /
More information about the foundation-l