[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia privacy concerns

[Ray Saintonge]

Blu Aardvark wrote:

> May I point out an interesting double-standard here? Most Wikipedians
>
>believes that publishing personal information is harmful (I agree with 
>them for the most part, by the way). Why, then, are there no qualms 
>about Wikipedia editors publishing personal information of those that 
>have fallen from favor?
>
I agree that whatever policy is generally agreed to must be applied 
evenly across the board.

>Wikipedia currently has several pages which contain my real name, city 
>of residence, and phone number (granted, I initially supplied these 
>myself, but the point stands). 
>
When you add these yourself your permission to include the material is 
implicit.

>Wikipedia contains virulent personal 
>attacks alleging that I am a neo-Nazi/anti-Semite/Nazi 
>sympathizer/holocaust denier - attacks that still remain on Wikipedia's 
>servers. This all has been copied to numerous websites all over the 
>internet as Wikipedia's content is scraped and spammed by anyone looking 
>to make a few quick advertising bucks, and I have actually received 
>telephone calls from people who got my number from Wikipedia. Yet that 
>information is not removed - or when it is, it is re-instated. (I'll 
>admit all this pissed me off at first, but I've found I don't really 
>care anymore).
>
If you are indeed involved in the kind of activities that you describe, 
your personal involvement in Wikipedia is irrelevant to including this 
information.  What becomes important is whether the activities were 
reliably reported elsewhere.  Since many would consider that mentioning 
one's involvement with such activities as derogatory, the sourcing of 
such information is particularly important.

>So let's get this straight - we're proposing a Wikipedia policy to ban 
>all links to any website which might have a page identifying a Wikipedia 
>editor, and yet Wikipedia editors not only publish personal information 
>on their own servers, they ensure that that information stays in place, 
>and they allow it to be copied by any fuckwad hoping to get some cheap 
>content on the internet that they can use to hopefully turn a profit on.
>
We cannot control the behaviour of external "fuckwads".

>I personally believe that [[WP:BADSITES]] is unneeded. Current policy 
>already allows for reverting and blocking editors who post personal 
>information or links to such information. The proposed policy seeks to 
>ban all links to any site that has published the personal information of 
>Wikipedians, but I'll admit that I find the proposal quite silly. There 
>are occasions on which such links are not only beneficial to 
>discussions, but also necessary (in the proper citing of resources, for 
>example, or in relevant articles such as the one on Wikitruth). An 
>outright ban on them would amount to nothing more than blatant censorship.
>
It is presumptuous and arrogant to judge the behaviour of participants 
on other sites.  It is also contrary to the spirit of NPOV to impose 
that principle on other sites.  Of course other sites will engage in 
libel or copyright infringement, or other activity that may be illegal.  
Assuming good faith should include assuming that what is put on these 
other sites is perfectly legal.  If there is something illegal there it 
is up to those affected to demand that they clean up their site.  When 
they do that our links will then be to cleaned up sites or dead.

Ec