[WikiEN-l] WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 46, Issue 227

[FloNight]

>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Jeff Raymond" <jeff.raymond at internationalhouseofbacon.com>
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 11:54:51 -0700 (PDT)
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] BLP, and admin role in overriding community review
>
> On Wed, May 23, 2007 11:50 am, Fred Bauder wrote:
>
> > No, any user or administrator who is following the terms and intent of
> > Biographies of living persons may remove grossly inappropriate material
> or
> > delete an offending article even if almost everyone else on Wikipedia
> > objects.
>
> Fred, are you willfully ignoring the questions, or are we missing
> something here?  If Administrator A deletes the entire article saying
> "this was grossly inappropriate," and it wasn't, but no one can see it,
> you seem to have suggested that it's Too Damn Bad - that DRV might not be
> the right forum, and that "dispute resoltion" is the next step.
>
> Uh, you realize what that creates, right?  I'm going to hopefully assume
> your wording was unclear in your statement that suggested that we should
> automatically trust that administrators aren't going to cite BLP to delete
> articles when there's no BLP violation.
>
> -Jeff
>
> --
> If you can read this, I'm not at home.
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Fred Bauder" <fredbaud at waterwiki.info>
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Date: Wed, 23 May 2007 18:55:53 +0000
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] BLP, and admin role in overriding community review
>
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Jeff Raymond [mailto:jeff.raymond at internationalhouseofbacon.com]
> >Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 12:39 PM
> >To: 'English Wikipedia'
> >Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] BLP, and admin role in overriding community
> review
> >
> >
> >On Wed, May 23, 2007 11:36 am, Fred Bauder wrote:
> >
> >> If the person removing or deleting material asserts Biography of living
> >> persons as a basis then that policy rules until there is community
> >> consensus or an Arbitration Committee decision to the contrary.
> >
> >So you're essentially saying that an administrator can remove an article
> >completely from view of anyone else, claim BLP regardless of whether
> there
> >was a violation, and we simply have to live with it until ArbCom gets
> >around to it? Your prior comments seem to indicate that a DRV of the
> >material would not be appropriate, after all, and it's not like anyone's
> >actually allowed to review it.
> >
> >-Jeff
>
>
> You have correctly restated my position. However an administrator who
> repeatedly does this when there are no violations is going to eventually get
> his ears pinned back.


  Fred



=======================

This is the same type of Friendly Advice that I was trying to give on the
Rfc.

Issues related to Biographies of living persons take precedent over other
aspects of the situation. Depending on the exact situation this means that
some decisions are going to stand temporarily (that may be for days or in
some rare instance months) that will later be changed.  But immediately
rehashing the issue over and over because you disagree is not acceptable in
these cases because it has the potential to draw too much negative attention
to the living person and defeats the purpose of the policy.

If an administrator repeatedly misapplies policy then the administrator
needs to be counseled or perhaps desyopped. That should be handled through
regular channels.

Sydney