[WikiEN-l] Bauer DRV question - history (was Wikimedia Foundation sued)

[stevertigo]

On 3/26/07, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
> Most deletion, it doesn't really matter if the history is visible or
> not - it's not that the article is damaging as such, we just don't
> want it as part of Wikipedia. In this case, though, the deletion was
> (asserted to be) because the history was actually defamatory; if this
> is the case, we actively don't want to continue publishing it.
> Deleting libellous material, and then undeleting it so lots more
> people can read it, is conceptually a bit sloppy.

This is a circular argument, and one that seems prejudiced toward deletion.
And you don't actually give the reason for this prejudice until your next email:

> I did not say it was defamatory. I said it was asserted to as
> defamatory. As there is A LAWSUIT CLAIMING THIS, I can't possibly
> imagine how anyone got the idea that the content might be dubious.

In this case, because the removal is based on a fear of WP:SUIT, it should be
an OFFICE action, and not a deletion. Not that I think office actions
are a legitimate
way of editing, nor do I think that a fear or SUIT is a healthy
attitude, but the point is
is that if its a WP process, this notion of sanitizing content in a
prejudicial way is unwiki
and against the community spirit.

-Stevertigo