[Foundation-l] Interesting legal action

Risker risker.wp at gmail.com
Sat May 21 22:01:38 UTC 2011

On 21 May 2011 17:35, Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemowiki at gmail.com> wrote:

> MZMcBride, 21/05/2011 22:25:
> > Marco Chiesa wrote:
> >> Is there any project which allows usernames such as Administrator,
> >> Bureaucrat, Oversight or Steward? Isn't that confused and probably not
> >> allowed? Or which project allows a user name for more than one person?
> >
> > <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Title_blacklist>  prohibits those names
> > across all Wikimedia wikis.
> But sysops can override the title blacklist.

That is correct, which is precisely why we were able to create this
account.  It has been very helpful in reducing the number of on-wiki posts
saying "I need oversight for this diff!" which was not really terribly

On the other hand, it would probably  only be useful for larger projects
with a lot of oversight requests and also use an email notification system.

Nonetheless, it's a bit off-topic.

As to the comments from MZMcBride and Sarah, I would like to see a
significantly higher minimal level of notability for BLPs.  In the past few
years of working with the Arbitration Committee, I have seen literally
thousands of BLPs that easily meet the current notability standards, but
have been turned into coatracks to highlight a particular belief of the
subject (whether or not that is why they are notable), to self-aggrandize,
to attach all the negative information that can be found about the subject
regardless of its comparative triviality.

Worse yet are the ones that are userfied instead of deleted, or never even
made it into article space; they often come up as top google hits for the
subject, because Google "crawls" user space.  (They don't seem to crawl user
talk or article talk, or if they do, they do not include them in their


More information about the foundation-l mailing list