[WikiEN-l] Tightening the "do no harm" screws.

[The Cunctator]

We're really better off if we try not to apply moral judgments to
content when we don't have to. This falls under that. Our current
system is more than sufficient.

On 6/7/07, Joe Szilagyi <szilagyi at gmail.com> wrote:
> BLP idea:
>
> Negative or contentious facts should not be in a BLP article unless more
> than one unrelated source covers it. That would keep the one-note negative
> crap right out. Apply notability standards to *facts*, not just topics. Ben
> Affleck had a nasty divorce from Jennifer Lopez: Notable, lots of sources.
> Keep. Ben Affleck did x, y, or z illegal thing to J-Lo, reported by one
> otherwise "good" or acceptable source. No other independent coverage.
> Exclude ferociously. The base notion is that while some people may be
> 'notable', not all they do is, or can be. What George Bush for example does
> in private at the Crawford ranch, outside his official duties, is not
> inherently notable--unless society makes it so. We don't get to decide on
> that either; we report. By that token, we can choose to not include facts
> that aren't corroborated and multiply sourced that are of a negative or
> contentious tone.
>
> Good idea, or bad?
>
> Regards,
> Joe
> http://www.joeszilagyi.com
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>