On 2/24/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/25/06, SCZenz sczenz@gmail.com wrote:
Um, well... Some people work full-time for the Foundation, and deal with the big-picture issues that all of us volunteer editors don't have to worry about.
You mean people complaining about articles about themselves? Been there done that. Never had to resort to protection. With the exception of the newsmax incident things mostly worked out OK.
I don't know the story behind what's going on with the Harry Reid article. Maybe you do, but from my perspective if an article is getting attention from the Foundation then there might be a reason, and giving them a few days to handle it isn't unreasonable. Anyway, there are almost a million other articles to edit!
Every time the Foundation intervenes on an article because they've received a complaint, there are many cries of overreaction. I think the perspective people are missing is that Jimbo getting a complaint personally is different from a user dealing with a complaint on the General Complaints page--because he runs the Foundation and it is responsible for Wikipedia's content. It's easy to forget that Wikipedia is *about* everything, and so it can seem big compared to the rest of the world, but actually it's very small; we are subject to legal action, bad publicity, and other inconveniences from complaining article subjects. Because average users don't have much perspective on how bad those inconveniences might be, or what the remedies might be, it is necessarily a Foundation issue to deal with complaints they have received.
(I'm assuming here the Foundation even got a complaints from someone about that article--I literally know nothing about what's going on. I just don't see how it could hurt to give them the benefit of the doubt.)
SCZenz