[WikiEN-l] Fwd: [Foundation-l] Board statement regarding biographies of l...

[Carcharoth]

On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 6:55 PM, Carcharoth <carcharothwp at googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 6:52 PM, Ken Arromdee <arromdee at rahul.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 22 Apr 2009 wjhonson at aol.com wrote:
>>>If they are not willing to type two sentences on an official
>>>site, but ARE willing to type a hundred in-project, than I submit it's
>>>*highly* unlikely to be the person in question in the first place.
>>>
>>>IF they write a blog where they complain about process, that is simply
>>>more free publicity for us.  There is no such thing as bad publicity.
>>
>> This is exactly what's wrong with BLP.  We care more about the process than
>> we do about the people.
>>
>> If someone says that a relatively uncontroversial fact in an article about
>> themselves is wrong, we should fix it.  If our process says we shouldn't
>> listen to them, then we need to fix both the process and the article.
>>
>> If you really doubt that the person themselves is sending you a correction,
>> then fine.  But that's only good if you really have some reason to doubt it's
>> them.  Saying "what if it isn't them" and then stretching it to cover all
>> situations whether you believe it's them or not is just elevating process
>> above people.
>
> And when you get two people contacting you, both claiming to be the same person?

It does actually happen, with common names and articles that combine
details of two people...

Carcharoth