[WikiEN-l] A further descent into self-referential idiocy

[Sheldon Rampton]

Ken Arromdee wrote:

> On Mon, 4 Jun 2007, Sheldon Rampton wrote:
>
>> (2) A presumption against publishing articles on people who have been
>> victims of stalking, in cases where publication of an article on
>> Wikipedia might subject them to additional harassment.
>
> For a while I've thought something like "Wikipedia is not the  
> creator of
> news" should apply.  (Probably badly worded; reword as you wish).  If
> creating a Wikipedia article itself helps to spread or advance  
> something
> described in the article, we shouldn't have it.  (This only applies  
> when
> that article specifically, not just Wikipedia in general, advances  
> a cause.
> We wouldn't delete the article for Internet or the one for  
> Wikipedia itself.)

What Ken is describing sounds more like a reiteration of Wikipedia's  
existing "no original research policy" than something specifically  
addressing stalking or cyberstalking. I think stalking happens  
frequently enough that it deserves to be treated seriously in its own  
right rather than subsumed under some other concept. In the case of  
Allison Stokke, the young woman whose experience was the spark of  
this thread, Wikipedia's article about her didn't *create* any news.  
Her situation has been reported in the Washington Post and elsewhere.  
Ken's policy therefore would not be particularly helpful in this case.

It's not 100% certain to me, by the way, that the Wikipedia article  
on Stokke would need to be deleted even under an anti-stalking  
policy. The versions of the Wikipedia article that I've seen have  
have not sensationalized or dwelt on the blogosphere's sexualized  
treatment of Stokke that is the cause of her distress. In fact, it's  
possible that Stokke herself might be fine with Wikipedia having an  
article about her, even if (and perhaps especially if) it mentions  
the harassment and her objections to it. She doesn't seem to object  
to ALL mentions of her. She just wants the heavy-breathing stuff to  
stop. The Washington Post article on her situation states that she  
has sought media consultant advice to help "get this all under  
control," and it's clear from reading the article that Stokke and her  
father were both interviewed by the Post's reporter. It seems likely  
that they cooperated with the reporter because they hoped that the  
Post's story would help put out the word that she objects to the way  
bloggers are using her image. An appropriately-written Wikipedia  
article might serve the same purpose and therefore might be something  
that she would welcome.

To determine whether this is the case, of course, someone would need  
to contact Stokke or her family on behalf of Wikipedia and inquire  
directly about their wishes, and this sort of inquiry cannot be done  
by the entire collective. (The last thing she needs is a mob of  
Wikipedians calling.) Someone would therefore have to serve as a  
designated agent of Wikipedia in making the inquiry, and I don't  
think Wikipedia has a structure in place to accomplish this.

The question of how Wikipedia should handle this particular situation  
is less interesting to me than the question of what policies and  
procedures would help address this CLASS of situations. A number of  
other cases come to mind such as Richard Jewell or the Star Wars Kid  
where people have become objects of unwanted and unwarranted public  
attention. Existing policies such as NOR, Notability or NPOV may not  
be the right policies with which Wikipedia should address these cases  
when they arise.

--------------------------------
|  Sheldon Rampton
|  Research director, Center for Media & Democracy (www.prwatch.org)
|  Author of books including:
|     Friends In Deed: The Story of US-Nicaragua Sister Cities
|     Toxic Sludge Is Good For You
|     Mad Cow USA
|     Trust Us, We're Experts
|     Weapons of Mass Deception
|     Banana Republicans
|     The Best War Ever
--------------------------------
|  Subscribe to our free weekly list serve by visiting:
|  http://www.prwatch.org/cmd/subscribe_sotd.html
|
|  Donate now to support independent, public interest reporting:
|
https://secure.democracyinaction.org/dia/organizations/cmd/shop/ 
custom.jsp?donate_page_KEY=1107
--------------------------------