[Foundation-l] Request for your input: biographies of livingpeople

jokarwilis2005 at gmail.com jokarwilis2005 at gmail.com
Tue Mar 3 08:43:32 UTC 2009

Any body help ....I have blog for publiser ...but my trafic is low 
Sent from my BlackBerry®
powered by Sinyal Kuat INDOSAT

-----Original Message-----
From: Sue Gardner <sgardner at wikimedia.org>

Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 00:17:14 
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List<foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Request for your input: biographies of living

2009/3/2 philippe <philippe.wiki at gmail.com>

> On Mar 2, 2009, at 5:48 PM, private musings wrote:
> > 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.
> As a general rule, I think pm has given us a common-sense place to
> begin discussions about how to cleanup existing BLPs.  There will
> always be situations that don't fit within this, but as a starting
> point for guidelines, I support these.

It seems obvious to me from the conversation on this thread that part of the
reason the German Wikipedia seems better able to manage its BLPs (assuming
that is true - but it seems true) is because there is a smaller number of
them. Presumably a smaller number of BLPs = fewer to maintain and
problem-solve = a higher quality level overall. (And possibly also, OTRS
volunteers who are less stressed out, resulting in a higher level of
patience and kindness when complaints do get made.)

Assuming that's true, allowing BLP subjects to opt-out seems like it would
have a direct positive increase on the quality of remaining BLPs, in
addition to eliminating some BLPs entirely.  Clearly, there would still be a
notability threshold above which people would never be allowed to opt out -
there will always be articles about people such as Hillary Clinton and J.K.
Rowling and Penelope Cruz. But a decision to significantly raise that
threshold, as well as default to deletion upon request, seems like it would
have a positive effect on quality.

Can I ask: does anyone reading this thread 1) think raising the notability
threshold is a bad idea, 2) believe defaulting to deletion upon request is a
bad idea, or 3) disagree with the notion that other Wikipedias should shift
closer to the German Wikipedia's generally-less-permissive policies and
practices, particularly WRT BLPs?
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

More information about the foundation-l mailing list