[WikiEN-l] COO story now in major media
jwales at wikia.com
Fri Dec 21 21:55:59 UTC 2007
There is no problem with covering the situation in appropriate places,
but normal consensus about BLP's is that we don't have articles about
people who have had some new coverage only due to a single negative
event. It may seem like Wikipedia is the center of the universe, but it
actually isn't. :)
Random sample found by searching in google for "coo scandal":
A brief search of Wikipedia shows that in this case of a fraud alleged
by the SEC to have involved $8.2 million profit to the CFO and COO of
this company, we have nothing on either person, nor on the company, nor
on the scandal.
This story talks about the same event as a $200 million fraud. The CEO,
about whom we do not have an article, is charged.
I am not arguing that we should or should not have an article on this
other case (but please let's not have my use of this example trigger an
idiotic war about it!).
I am just arguing that there is absolutely no way in hell we would have
an article in the case of Carolyn Doran, were it not for Wikipedia
navel-gazing. There was no fraud (that we know of), nothing bad
happened to us (that we know of), it is just an embarassment and for
this poor woman, her rather sad life story is now in the Associated
Press. But this whole thing is still amply covered by BLP1E and
non-Wikipedia precedent and tradition.
Nathan Awrich wrote:
> I created the original article, and while I agree that it was
> problematic (in that the only reference to the claim of convictions
> was, originally, the Register article) I think there are sufficient
> other sources to allay BLP concerns - and now sufficient other
> coverage to allay notability concerns. I also believe that the
> attempts by some to deal with the perceived urgent issues were hasty,
> in particular the desysop. I'll wait on the DRV to hear what others on
> this list believe is the appropriate next step. As an aside, how does
> Charles Ainsworth (Cla68, I believe) end up commenting in every news
> article? Sheesh.
> On Dec 21, 2007 4:10 PM, Risker <risker.wp at gmail.com> wrote:
>> The AP has now latched onto the COO story, I caught this when checking out
>> Fox News.
>> Now, I have previously argued that Doran wasn't notable on the talk page of
>> the article (both article and talk page are currently deleted and, I
>> presume, salted) and I will leave it to brighter minds than mine whether or
>> not major media reports make a difference to her notability or the
>> notability of the story. Nonetheless, people might want to put their
>> thinking caps on because somebody is much more likely to take the deletion
>> to DRV now. I'm posting this to the list as opposed to AN to reduce the
>> signal to noise ratio, knowing that there are many people moderated here
>> right now but that a range of opinions is still available and the list is
>> publicly accessible.
>> I feel kind of sad to be posting this, but given that the first round of
>> deletions and other actions led to some hard feelings all around, it's
>> probably better to develop an action plan before someone does something that
>> leads to unnecessary drama. I am AFK for the next 8 hours so won't be
>> involving myself in any discussion.
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
More information about the WikiEN-l