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

[Ray Saintonge]

Fred Bauder wrote:

>>From: Fred Bauder [mailto:fredbaud at waterwiki.info]
>>    
>>
>>>From: Marc Riddell [mailto:michaeldavid86 at comcast.net]
>>>
>>>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."'
>
This seems like support for activist judges. I didn't recognize the name 
until I went to the article. The Fox Channel is generally not available 
in the Vancuver area where I live. The incident that led to her criminal 
conviction is certainly well-remembered even if I could not have 
remembered the names of the parties involved. If you want to suggest 
that her opponents were commenting because of her politics, you need to 
admit that her supporters were doing exactly the same thing.

I did not participate in the debate when it happened, and don't 
particularly want to get involved now. I don't see the benefit of 
raising this matter when it would only stir up old wounds.

Ec