[WikiEN-l] An example of a bad biography

[Jimmy Wales]

Risker wrote:
> No, it's a bad biography.  It's exactly the type of biography we don't need.
> This guy is president of a single local of a union. That is the only thing
> that makes him the least bit notable; and his name is only in the news right
> now because his local is in labour negotiations.  This time next month,
> nobody will be interested in him -except of course for the same people who
> have been trashing him thus far.
> 
> These biographies of people with very marginal notability are magnets for
> vandalism. It's a waste of good editor time to expect people to monitor them
> and clean up vandalism in them; yet, failing to actively monitor them (or
> messing up when we actually do look at them) leads to the article Jimmy
> mentions at the beginning.

Precisely.

The key here is not a single anomalous biography, but a question about 
systemic matters.  Wiki is not paper, so we do not have the constraints 
of disk space.  But this does not leave us without constraints.

One of the constraints is precisely the one you point out: maintenance 
of biographies over time takes time and attention, and it is "a waste of 
good editor time to expect people to monitor them" when they are so 
marginal in the first place.  And yet, failing to monitor, leads to use 
being abused in the service of someone else's cause.

--Jimbo