[WikiEN-l] BLP messiness]

[JodyB]

Ray Saintonge wrote:
> JodyB wrote:
>
>   
>> The Cunctator wrote: 
>>  
>>
>>     
>>> The problem is that Bios of Living Persons policy is too draconian --
>>> there's no flexibility in it as stated. As stated it's a pretty good
>>> standard for new additions, but it encourages people to lazily delete
>>> massive amounts of content from existing articles long after material
>>> was added.
>>>    
>>>
>>>       
>> I'm not sure it's too draconian especially when the issue is 
>> "contentious" material. While I agree that we should encourage all 
>> people to help with sourcing, the onus is still on the author to get it 
>> right and get sourced right too. Unfortunately, there is no way to 
>> codify and encouragement. There's also no way I can think of that would 
>> "grandfather" in contentious material dating from before BLP was 
>> implemented.
>>
>>     
> I don't think that any realistic editor expects a soft ride for 
> contentious or derogatory material.  There will always be need to be 
> unrelenting about that.  Determining whether something is contentious or 
> derogatory should always be the question that a reviewer asks himself 
> about a libing person article.
>
> If the answer is "No," a more relaxed approach can be taken.  Sure the 
> onus ultimately falls on the cotributing author to establish sources for 
> information, but using that as the only excuse for removing information 
> is just being a dick, or trying to make a Point.
>
> Ec
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>
>   
Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't the original message about rewriting 
the section on unsourced contentious statements? If not, I apologize 
because that was the intent of my comment. As I read it, the policy 
toward non-contentious statements is already more relaxed.

Jody