[WikiEN-l] Encyclopedia or Gossip Rag

[Thomas Morton]

On 7 October 2012 14:56, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Oct 7, 2012 2:44 PM, "Marc Riddell" <michaeldavid86 at comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> > I came across this today in the English Wikipedia:
> >
> > "In 2011, it has been reported that [the subject] has been caught
> cheating
> > on his wife with a 30 year old intern turned reporter."
> >
> > Is this worthy of a credible Encyclopedia or, if it needs reported at
> all,
> > in a gossip tabloid rag?
>
> I'd prefer it if we didn't make that kind of decision ourselves. Has it
> been reported in mainstream (non-gossip) media? (We have to make a
> judgement about whether a particular source is respectable or not, but
> that's better than making judgements on individual facts.)
> ______
>

We do it all the time.

I write historical biographies (amongst other things) and if I recorded all
of the detail discussed in the numerous reliable sources (i.e. books) used
for each then I would still be writing the first one (and just about got to
the length of a medium novel!).

Editorial judgement is a key skill for any competent WP editor, and we
should focus less on rigid rules (which encourage the inclusion of trivia)
and more on good editorial judgement.

In this case, good editorial judgement suggests that this is relative
trivia. It is not really related to his reason for notability and is
distinctly about his private life. It also seems to be something along the
lines of an allegation mostly covered in tabloid gossip.

I'd suggest that with good editorial judgement this is something we would
pause for some time before covering, if at all, whilst BLP applies.

Tom