[WikiEN-l] Defamation policy hypothetical

[Steve Bennett]

On 8/19/06, jahiegel <jahiegel at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Consider a situation in which unsourced criticism appears in a biography.
> Assume arguendo that we can be certain that the subject will not essay a
> legal claim against the Foundation and that we can be relatively certain
> that bad press will not entail (an issue that, for the purposes of this
> discussion, we set aside in any case).  Should, then, we treat that
> unsourced negativity in a fashion different from that in which we'd treat
> unsourced comments in, to pick the first three random articles I find,
> [[Mancor de la Vall]], [[Sherston Software]], or [[Danzig III: How the Gods
> Kill]]?  I imagine that there are those who will say "yes", and I suppose I

If by "unsourced criticism" you mean "unsourced defamatory
accusations" then, yes, I think we should make more of an effort to
keep the articles of likely suers clean than other articles.

I don't think we're ever justified in adding trashy accusations about
anyone without a source, but it makes sense to focus our effort
wherever it's most needed.

> motivation tends to underline BLP.  In view of the failure to command a
> consensus of either [[Wikipedia:Wikiethics]] or [[WP:NOT EVIL]], and of the
> disfavoring by the community of Jimbo's "human dignity" formulation with
> respect to deletion, I cannot abide the suggestion that the community writ
> large truly believe, legal/publicity concerns aside, that we ever ought to
> concern ourselves with the external consequences of our editing.

I do. For barely notable people, information in Wikipedia could have a
disproportionate effect on their life. We should be aware of that, and
behave accordingly.

Steve