[Foundation-l] Interesting legal action

[Keegan Peterzell]

On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 8:58 AM, FT2 <ft2.wiki at gmail.com> wrote:

> I agree with the point you make, but still think it's the right thing.
>
> Essentially the counter argument boils down to "if they don't know there's
> a
> BLP they can't make work for us about it". Whatever is in the BLP will be
> there whether they know it or not. So the question is, is it ethically
> better, and likely to improve quality, if they do know about it? Probably
> yes. We will for sure get some irate replies or requests that we simply
> can't meet (ie demands or expectations that won't work with a neutral
> reference site).  But we will also be recognized as trying to do right in a
> way few other sources do. I don't think that the problem outweighs the
> clear
> benefits of doing so.
>
>
I discussed this idea with FT2 at length a little over a year ago on Skype,
a couple hours I think.  This was while I was facilitating the Living
Persons task force on strategy (plug here[1]).

Our resources can only stretch so far, and in my opinion, as expressed
previously in this thread, is that contacting websites/press agents/subjects
directly would create much more discord than to reward.  The noted issues
with explaining, now after invitation, how Wikipedia works and what you
can't do after we've invited you to do it is much more probable than
successful resolution.  Our solutions must be internal, from the Board and
the communities.

1. <http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Task_force/Living_persons>  Still
awaiting board approval.


-- 
~Keegan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan