[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia's destiny

[Jimmy Wales]

Bryan Derksen wrote:
> Ben Emmel wrote:
> 
>>No, I do agree that it's not a open-and-shut decision. But like Jimbo said,
>>if we still care about this article in a year, then we can argue then.
> 
> Woah, a whole _year_? I'd thought the article was just temporarily 
> deleted while some details got sorted out. _Now_ I've got a serious 
> grounds for objection.

The point here is not the article itself, it is the abuse of process
that was involved.

As I said in another post, I'm happy to reduce the time period from one
year, but what I'd really like to see first is for us to all take a
really serious look at WP:LIVING, and in particular a strengthening of
the "Presumption in favor of Privacy".

"In borderline cases, the rule of thumb should be "do no harm."
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper. It is not our job to be
sensationalist, or be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating
claims about people's lives."




-- 
#######################################################################
#    Office: 1-727-231-0101       |  Free Culture and  Free Knowledge #
#    http://www.wikipedia.org     |     Building a free world         #
#######################################################################