[WikiEN-l] BLP, and admin role in overriding community review

[Marc Riddell]

on 5/25/07 12:55 PM, Fred Bauder at fredbaud at waterwiki.info wrote:

> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Fred Bauder [mailto:fredbaud at waterwiki.info]
>> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 10:28 AM
>> To: 'English Wikipedia'
>> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] BLP, and admin role in overriding community review
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Marc Riddell [mailto:michaeldavid86 at comcast.net]
>>> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 10:26 AM
>>> To: 'English Wikipedia'
>>> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] BLP, and admin role in overriding community review
>>> 
>>> on 5/25/07 12:22 PM, George Herbert at george.herbert at gmail.com wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Šif the only things which are verifyably
>>>> known about someone are in the context of a notable event which
>>>> included them, perhaps as a rule the person is not themselves notable,
>>>> and should only be covered in the article about the event.
>>> 
>>> George,
>>> 
>>> I believe this is an excellent idea.
>>> 
>>> Marc Riddell
>> 
>> The exception would be someone like Monica Lewinsky who successfully parlays
>> their 15 minutes of negative fame into a more well rounded notability.
>> 
>> Fred
> 
> The Rachel Marsden article is good example of this problem. The article as now
> constituted
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rachel_Marsden&oldid=132306894
> 
> is a product of long debate regarding such issues. There was great deal of
> press coverage regarding an incident early in her life, but the coverage of
> her current situation was rather thin. A long article about her which focused
> on the earlier situation was a rather nasty piece of work and did not present
> of fair picture of this person who had moved on long ago from the earlier
> troubles. I also think some editors were sticking their oar in because they
> did not like her politics.
> 
> There was an arbitration:
> 
> Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Rachel Marsden
> 
> Here is the basic principle applied: 'Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons
> requires that information which concerns living subjects be verifiable and
> that biographies "should be written responsibly, conservatively, and in a
> neutral, encyclopedic tone."'
> 
> Fred
> 
Thank you for all of this, Fred. I agree with your sentiment here. Too often
a person is so focused on expounding their own views about something, that
they forget they are doing so at the expense of another. Or, perhaps, they
don't really care. To me, this defines fanaticism; and has no place in an
encyclopedia.

Marc