From: "user_Jamesday" user_Jamesday@myrealbox.com
Where I disagree is in cases like abuse or personal information about
themselves which private people contributing to the Wikipedia
(rather than public record about public figures) want removed.
This is not a copyright issue. If someone places material on Wikipedia, they do so, they have the right to do so and as long as that information is not defamatory or breaking any laws there should be no prohibition against posting any such information. The persons posting information is responsible for posting it, not the volunteers nor Jimbo. It is the person who has posted the information who is responsible for it, not the OSP, this seems to be the case law that you and I have been reviewing lately James.
Our removal also makes it a bit easier for them to pursue a right of
privacy action against whoever is harassing them,
though I wouldn't like to speculate on their chance of success.
I think if a person posts information about themselves anywhere on the internet there is a reasonable expectation that it can be reposted by other people. It is not the job of Wikipedia to determine when to take down information they have put up there. Once it is out there it is irrelevant if it is hidden in the page history files. The person who is harrassing them is abusing that information and they have a claim against that person, not Wikipedia.
There is one fact that you do not seem to keep in mind, the user page creates a link to the person in the world outside Wikipedia. This is important in terms of authorship. Each user has copyright to their contributions and if someone wants to relicense Wikipedia content they have some expectation that there will be some way to determine that a user has contributed. Otherwise such user can be submitting infringing content.
Of course if someone has a reason (like Isis did as it appears to me) then that person can discuss it with Jimbo (and I am guessing it will eventually be a Wikimedia board decision once we become a constitutional monarchy).
Actually the arbitration process that is being created for banning people could also be used to resolve all these types of issues. Personally I would think it would be better to do it in such a context that have these kinds of non-copyright issues discussed to death. I became part of Wikipedia because I liked making contributions to the encyclopedia I am finding that I am spending way too much of my available volunteer time responding to opinions about issues that are just plain wrong or misleading.
Can I make a complaint to the arbitration committee about that?
Alex756