[WikiEN-l] News agencies are not RSs

[Ken Arromdee]

On Mon, 29 Jun 2009, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
> > This case is more about basic common sense. If someone's life may be
> > endangered by what is on their wikipedia biography but is not widely
> > reported elsewhere, I would expect that anyone sensible would find some way
> > of applying policy so as to keep the life-endangering stuff off it. And that
> > would take precedence over secondary arguments over whether obscure news
> > agencies were reliable.
> Apparently the news agency is the top of its local area
> (Afghanistan), so how you spin that into "obscure" is
> frankly beyond me.

Besides, if someone's life would actually be endangered by the information,
it should be taken out under IAR.  It should *not* be taken out by abusing
the rules to take it out.  That's why we have IAR in the first place.  If
you do it by abusing the rules, you undermine the trust that people have
placed in the system.