Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
Wily D wrote: > On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 8:42 AM, Ian Woollard wrote: > >> If I understand you correctly, you would be (theoretically) fine with >> me creating a wikipedia page of you and filling it with true >> information about you, including your social security number, bank >> account number, telephone number, mothers maiden name, address, entire >> sexual history, provided all of this can be said to be correct by a >> notable source and referenced correctly? >> > The problem with this statement is that the fact that few of these > things are known publicly and the inappropriateness of publishing them > in Wikipedia are correlated. My telephone number is already on the > internet where any idiot with ten seconds to spare can find it > (http://www.411.ca) which also tells you my street address. The rest > of these things simply aren't available, which is reflective of the > fact that publishing them is seen as inappropriate - > Most of these things on Ian's list are ones that we wouldn't include anyways. The mother's maiden name may be biographically relevant, and in exceptional cases the sexual history, but we can probably achieve near unanimity about keeping the rest out. That doesn't translate into some kind of blanket policy to withhold anything that the subject wants kept out. Ec ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 6:42 AM, Ian Woollard wrote: > 2009/1/2 toddmallen : >> Actually, I do see it as a false dichotomy. We're presenting it as >> "rights" against publication of verifiable, reliable, >> already-published material. These rights do not exist. I do not have a >> right to tell you that you may not talk about me or publish >> information about me, provided what you say is true. > > If I understand you correctly, you would be (theoretically) fine with > me creating a wikipedia page of you and filling it with true > information about you, including your social security number, bank > account number, telephone number, mothers maiden name, address, entire > sexual history, provided all of this can be said to be correct by a > notable source and referenced correctly? > > I'm assuming not, at least I hope not. > > But in practice then, legally and morally and by wiki policy and > guidelines, these rights to demand that information be removed do > exist for certain classes of information. > > So I think what we're really discussing here *which* kinds of personal > information may be published in the wikipedia and under what > circumstances. > > -- > -Ian Woollard > > We live in an imperfectly imperfect world. Life in a perfectly > imperfect world would be much better. > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > I would have a problem with that if all that information weren't already publicly available. On the other hand, if it had already been published on the front page of the New York Times, I probably wouldn't much care-that information would already be out, and I'd already be in the process of changing those numbers and the like. And sometimes sexual history -is- genuinely relevant to an article (see [[Monica Lewinsky]] or [[Gary Hart]] for examples). Of course, a simple factual real name is a bit different than publishing someone's telephone number, SSN, or phone number, none of which I've ever seen in an article (at least not for very long). Nor do reliable sources tend to publish such things. An accurate comparison would more be like saying that my real name is Todd Allen, were there someday to be an article on me. I would expect that such an article would have my real name in it, and you can see how little I mind if that's known. The rest is hyperbole, and no one is arguing to include such things. I can't think of a possible scenario in which someone's social security number or bank account number would be relevant to an article, nor can I think of any circumstances under which a reliable source would publish them. Names are not the same. "Who" is one of the 5 W's that is taught in elementary school writing. An article on a subject that does not answer that question is inherently lacking. The same is not true if it does not include their credit card number. People are readily identifiable by the information given about them anyway. How hard is it to find the Star Wars kid's name, even from our article, where all the sources we use readily publish it, or a google search on the article title brings it right up? If something is in public already (which it by definition is, if reliable sources available to the public have published it), it is no longer private. You can say that's good, or bad, or simply inevitable, but it's still the fact, and to think we can stuff genies back in bottles (even provided that to do so would be desirable, an odd position for a project specifically dedicated to making information available to take) is monumental hubris. We're big, but we're not -that- big. I don't want to see BLPs that protect this notion of privacy, that we should not make people identifiable, because in the end, such an article could say exactly nothing. Giving enough specifics to be worthwhile makes identifiability inevitable. -- Freedom is the right to say that 2+2=4. From this all else follows. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
In a message dated 1/2/2009 5:43:19 AM Pacific Standard Time, ian.wooll...@gmail.com writes: > including your social security number, bank > account number, telephone number, mothers maiden name, address, entire > sexual history, provided all of this can be said to be correct by a > notable source and referenced correctly?<>>> > You are being silly. No one knows Todd's entire sexual history including himself. ** New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom0026) ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 8:42 AM, Ian Woollard wrote: > 2009/1/2 toddmallen : >> Actually, I do see it as a false dichotomy. We're presenting it as >> "rights" against publication of verifiable, reliable, >> already-published material. These rights do not exist. I do not have a >> right to tell you that you may not talk about me or publish >> information about me, provided what you say is true. > > If I understand you correctly, you would be (theoretically) fine with > me creating a wikipedia page of you and filling it with true > information about you, including your social security number, bank > account number, telephone number, mothers maiden name, address, entire > sexual history, provided all of this can be said to be correct by a > notable source and referenced correctly? > > I'm assuming not, at least I hope not. > > But in practice then, legally and morally and by wiki policy and > guidelines, these rights to demand that information be removed do > exist for certain classes of information. > > So I think what we're really discussing here *which* kinds of personal > information may be published in the wikipedia and under what > circumstances. > > -- > -Ian Woollard > > We live in an imperfectly imperfect world. Life in a perfectly > imperfect world would be much better. The problem with this statement is that the fact that few of these things are known publicly and the inappropriateness of publishing them in Wikipedia are correlated. My telephone number is already on the internet where any idiot with ten seconds to spare can find it (http://www.411.ca) which also tells you my street address. The rest of these things simply aren't available, which is reflective of the fact that publishing them is seen as inappropriate - Cheers Brian ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
On Fri, 2 Jan 2009, toddmallen wrote: > Actually, I do see it as a false dichotomy. We're presenting it as > "rights" against publication of verifiable, reliable, > already-published material. These rights do not exist. I do not have a > right to tell you that you may not talk about me or publish > information about me, provided what you say is true. "Having a right" and "doing what is right" are not the same thing. > How do we avoid neutrality violations? We follow, rather than > second-guess, reliable sources. In every case, every time. That's what > NPOV means. Imposing our own viewpoint, including "They SHOULDN'T have > published that!", is the very definition of a violation of NPOV. I'm going to bring up spoiler warnings again, because this is an abuse of NPOV, in the same way that saying "we don't have a source which declares that that is a spoiler" is an abuse of NOR or NPOV. All editorial decisions are viewpoints; NPOV doesn't apply to them. It's our viewpoint that a person is notable, or that a source is unreliable, or that it's wrong to publish something. We don't go around saying "you can't call that non-notable! If you do you're imposing our viewpoint that it's non-notable!". The reason this abuse happens is that NPOV is supposed to take precedence over everything else and leaves no room for discretion. If it violates NPOV, you can't include it, period. This absolute nature makes it very inviting to win an argument by squeezing everything and anything into NPOV (or NOR) regardless of whether it really fits. I've seen this particular abuse enough times that we really ought to have something in the rules specifically to prevent it. Of course, there's no way to do that ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
2009/1/2 David Gerard : > 2009/1/2 Ian Woollard : > >> If I understand you correctly, you would be (theoretically) fine with >> me creating a wikipedia page of you and filling it with true >> information about you, including your social security number, bank >> account number, telephone number, mothers maiden name, address, entire >> sexual history, provided all of this can be said to be correct by a >> notable source and referenced correctly? > > > You're resorting to hypothetical hyperbole. This does not convince. Actually, no, I'm being hypothetical, but not hyperbolic. My point is that there exists classes of information that are true, but are not suitable for inclusion in the wikipedia. Todd Mallens point was that there were no such classes of information possible, and I believe that I have shown this to be false. Indeed within the wikipedia these kinds of information are specifically only protected by the BLP policy. Todd seems to have been actually hyperbolic: "These rights do not exist. I do not have a right to tell you that you may not talk about me or publish information about me, provided what you say is true." Truth or verifiability is not sufficient for the wikipedia. In our heart of hearts we know that, that's what undue weight is mostly about, that's what notability is about. We protect the wikipedia against distortions of information, it seems to me that BLP can be seen as a part of or an extension to undue weight as regards to an article on an individual. > - d. -- -Ian Woollard We live in an imperfectly imperfect world. Life in a perfectly imperfect world would be much better. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
2009/1/2 Ian Woollard : > If I understand you correctly, you would be (theoretically) fine with > me creating a wikipedia page of you and filling it with true > information about you, including your social security number, bank > account number, telephone number, mothers maiden name, address, entire > sexual history, provided all of this can be said to be correct by a > notable source and referenced correctly? You're resorting to hypothetical hyperbole. This does not convince. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
2009/1/2 toddmallen : > Actually, I do see it as a false dichotomy. We're presenting it as > "rights" against publication of verifiable, reliable, > already-published material. These rights do not exist. I do not have a > right to tell you that you may not talk about me or publish > information about me, provided what you say is true. If I understand you correctly, you would be (theoretically) fine with me creating a wikipedia page of you and filling it with true information about you, including your social security number, bank account number, telephone number, mothers maiden name, address, entire sexual history, provided all of this can be said to be correct by a notable source and referenced correctly? I'm assuming not, at least I hope not. But in practice then, legally and morally and by wiki policy and guidelines, these rights to demand that information be removed do exist for certain classes of information. So I think what we're really discussing here *which* kinds of personal information may be published in the wikipedia and under what circumstances. -- -Ian Woollard We live in an imperfectly imperfect world. Life in a perfectly imperfect world would be much better. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 7:03 PM, Ian Woollard wrote: > On 31/12/2008, David Gerard wrote: >> 2008/12/31 Ian Woollard : >>> That is A definition of right and wrong, you're saying that the >>> wikipedia is more important than individuals. You're valuing the >>> wikipedia more than them. That's your right. But it's also his right >>> to value individuals above the wikipedia. >> >> False dichotomy. > > No, no. It's not a dichotomy at all, there's a continuum between how > much people value rules/ordered societies and how much they're > prepared to trample over a few rights or people's lives and how much > it's essential not to trample on anyone. It's not about good or bad, > it's just how different people look at things; it's about values. > There's no provable right or wrong on this. > >> BLP only works insofar as it doesn't contradict NPOV. >> >> What part of valuing individuals do you consider requires violating NPOV? > > Well, off hand (and not necessarily a perfect example) the Star Wars > kid's name. It may well be considered that not having his name in the > article violates NPOV. I'm not saying that I think that or that I > don't, but *purely* for the sake of argument let's say that it is > obviously a violation not to have it and let's say in our hypothetical > world that absolutely all sources have it. > > Then one point of view would then be that his name should be in the > article, unless BLP then gets in the way, in which case you can > reasonably argue that NPOV was violated because you value the impact > it could have on the kid and that is more important to *them*. > > On the other hand some people will argue that NPOV should triumph, > because all sources have it, and so it's NPOV to have it and the rule > is intended to improve and give an orderly and well written wikipedia > and so in the long run improve countless people's lives; perhaps even > save their lives, and this is more important to *them* than the > (possibly minor) inconvenience to the Star Wars kid of NPOV forcing > something into the article. > > That's the general idea anyway-this guy probably puts it better than > me (it seems to be about the same idea, although he explains it in > political terms): > > http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jonathan_haidt_on_the_moral_mind.html > >> - d. > > -- > -Ian Woollard > > We live in an imperfectly imperfect world. Life in a perfectly > imperfect world would be much better. > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > Actually, I do see it as a false dichotomy. We're presenting it as "rights" against publication of verifiable, reliable, already-published material. These rights do not exist. I do not have a right to tell you that you may not talk about me or publish information about me, provided what you say is true. People do, to some degree, have a right to privacy, but not nearly as extensive of one as most would believe. We already cover that with NOR, V, and RS-digging through someone's tax records and synthesizing a conclusion is already unacceptable, and if no other reliable source has seen fit to publish what's found in those records, we shouldn't either. However, once something is already -in- public, and reliable sources with ethics departments and legal departments have already published it, it's no longer private information. At that point, there is no BLP issue other than possible neutrality violations. How do we avoid neutrality violations? We follow, rather than second-guess, reliable sources. In every case, every time. That's what NPOV means. Imposing our own viewpoint, including "They SHOULDN'T have published that!", is the very definition of a violation of NPOV. NPOV is still a pillar and the founding cornerstone of our project. BLP is a necessary reaction to a bad incident (Siegenthaler) that was originally well done but now has gotten way out of scope and way out of control. There should be no question about which is primary. The fact that there is any question is unsettling at best. -- Freedom is the right to say that 2+2=4. From this all else follows. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
On 31/12/2008, David Gerard wrote: > 2008/12/31 Ian Woollard : >> That is A definition of right and wrong, you're saying that the >> wikipedia is more important than individuals. You're valuing the >> wikipedia more than them. That's your right. But it's also his right >> to value individuals above the wikipedia. > > False dichotomy. No, no. It's not a dichotomy at all, there's a continuum between how much people value rules/ordered societies and how much they're prepared to trample over a few rights or people's lives and how much it's essential not to trample on anyone. It's not about good or bad, it's just how different people look at things; it's about values. There's no provable right or wrong on this. > BLP only works insofar as it doesn't contradict NPOV. > > What part of valuing individuals do you consider requires violating NPOV? Well, off hand (and not necessarily a perfect example) the Star Wars kid's name. It may well be considered that not having his name in the article violates NPOV. I'm not saying that I think that or that I don't, but *purely* for the sake of argument let's say that it is obviously a violation not to have it and let's say in our hypothetical world that absolutely all sources have it. Then one point of view would then be that his name should be in the article, unless BLP then gets in the way, in which case you can reasonably argue that NPOV was violated because you value the impact it could have on the kid and that is more important to *them*. On the other hand some people will argue that NPOV should triumph, because all sources have it, and so it's NPOV to have it and the rule is intended to improve and give an orderly and well written wikipedia and so in the long run improve countless people's lives; perhaps even save their lives, and this is more important to *them* than the (possibly minor) inconvenience to the Star Wars kid of NPOV forcing something into the article. That's the general idea anyway-this guy probably puts it better than me (it seems to be about the same idea, although he explains it in political terms): http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/jonathan_haidt_on_the_moral_mind.html > - d. -- -Ian Woollard We live in an imperfectly imperfect world. Life in a perfectly imperfect world would be much better. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
I think you may misunderstand. I don't see Wikipedia, written properly, to be at odds with an individual. Our articles should be neutral in tone and composed of only facts already published in sources available to the public. Provided we do that properly, and stick to those requirements, we're fine on any BLP you've got. No individual has a right to suppress informtion because (s)he simply dislikes it. Sometimes, the truth hurts. But in the end a lie, whether of omission or commission, is worse. I have no problem enforcing our content policies strictly and immediately to BLPs. No one wants another issue like Siegenthaler. But the Siegenthaler incident was due to false, unverifiable information. What we're talking now is suppressing true, publicly verifiable information. That's different, and that's unacceptable. -Original Message- From: "Ian Woollard" Subj: Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons Date: Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:49 pm Size: 1K To: "English Wikipedia" On 31/12/2008, toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: > NPOV is not just a rule. It's what allows us to have a project at all. It is > not "right" to violate NPOV because reality hurts someone's feelings. > Reality frequently is painful. It's neither possible nor our job to change > that. > It's our job to make a neutral, factual, verifiable reference work. Not > to > impose our notions of right and wrong. That is A definition of right and wrong, you're saying that the wikipedia is more important than individuals. You're valuing the wikipedia more than them. That's your right. But it's also his right to value individuals above the wikipedia. > -Original Message- > > From: Ken Arromdee > Subj: Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons > Date: Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:13 pm > Size: 509 bytes > To: English Wikipedia > > On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: >> I've even been told, by someone who should know better, that BLP is >> more important than NPOV, and saw not a bit of outrage. > > NPOV is a rule. BLP is about doing what's right. > > Some people elevate rules over doing what's right. I'm not one of them. -- -Ian Woollard We live in an imperfectly imperfect world. Life in a perfectly imperfect world would be much better. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
In a message dated 12/31/2008 3:48:59 PM Pacific Standard Time, ian.wooll...@gmail.com writes: But it's also his right to value individuals above the wikipedia.>> --- His right however does not translate into any requirement for change in this project. Everybody has a choice to do what they want, and be where they are. The right of some to present reality with all its warts versus the right of others to hide those warts is a conflict which has existed since pre-history. Will Johnson **New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom0026) ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
In a message dated 12/31/2008 3:12:48 PM Pacific Standard Time, arrom...@rahul.net writes: NPOV is a rule. BLP is about doing what's right. Some people elevate rules over doing what's right. >> --- NPOV is a core policy. BLP is not at that level. NPOV allows carries clout over BLP. Perhaps someone wants to create a new project like _http://www.moralipedia.com_ (http://www.moralipedia.com) "Where we only write bright happy thoughts!" Will Johnson **New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom0026) ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
2008/12/31 Ian Woollard : > That is A definition of right and wrong, you're saying that the > wikipedia is more important than individuals. You're valuing the > wikipedia more than them. That's your right. But it's also his right > to value individuals above the wikipedia. False dichotomy. BLP only works insofar as it doesn't contradict NPOV. What part of valuing individuals do you consider requires violating NPOV? - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
On 31/12/2008, toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: > NPOV is not just a rule. It's what allows us to have a project at all. It is > not "right" to violate NPOV because reality hurts someone's feelings. > Reality frequently is painful. It's neither possible nor our job to change > that. > It's our job to make a neutral, factual, verifiable reference work. Not > to > impose our notions of right and wrong. That is A definition of right and wrong, you're saying that the wikipedia is more important than individuals. You're valuing the wikipedia more than them. That's your right. But it's also his right to value individuals above the wikipedia. > -----Original Message- > > From: Ken Arromdee > Subj: Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons > Date: Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:13 pm > Size: 509 bytes > To: English Wikipedia > > On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: >> I've even been told, by someone who should know better, that BLP is >> more important than NPOV, and saw not a bit of outrage. > > NPOV is a rule. BLP is about doing what's right. > > Some people elevate rules over doing what's right. I'm not one of them. -- -Ian Woollard We live in an imperfectly imperfect world. Life in a perfectly imperfect world would be much better. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
2008/12/31 Ken Arromdee : > NPOV is a rule. BLP is about doing what's right. > Some people elevate rules over doing what's right. I'm not one of them. NPOV is more than a rule - it's the fundamental defining characteristic of what Wikipedia is. If you really think NPOV is optional, Wikipedia is not the project for you. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
NPOV is not just a rule. It's what allows us to have a project at all. It is not "right" to violate NPOV because reality hurts someone's feelings. Reality frequently is painful. It's neither possible nor our job to change that. It's our job to make a neutral, factual, verifiable reference work. Not to impose our notions of right and wrong. Polarizing the issue into "those who agree with me are right and all others are wrongdoers" is unhelpful. -Original Message- From: Ken Arromdee Subj: Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons Date: Wed Dec 31, 2008 4:13 pm Size: 509 bytes To: English Wikipedia On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: > I've even been told, by someone who should know better, that BLP is > more important than NPOV, and saw not a bit of outrage. NPOV is a rule. BLP is about doing what's right. Some people elevate rules over doing what's right. I'm not one of them. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: > I've even been told, by someone who should know better, that BLP is > more important than NPOV, and saw not a bit of outrage. NPOV is a rule. BLP is about doing what's right. Some people elevate rules over doing what's right. I'm not one of them. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
-Original Message- From: Falcorian Subj: Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons Date: Wed Dec 31, 2008 8:53 am Size: 450 bytes To: "English Wikipedia" On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 7:13 PM, Scientia Potentia est < bibliomaniac...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > In the end, BLP is not one of our five pillars. The fact that we are an > encyclopedia is. > > bibliomaniac15 > That pretty much says it all. --Falcorian ___ I'll put another "yes and hell yes" on that. Having reasonable BLP standards is great, but we passed "reasonable" many miles back. About time to bring it back to "Nothing unsourced or poorly sourced, no hatchet jobs, no pseudo-biographies that only cover the person'ss role in one event." We've gotten to the point of literal censorship on BLPs, where we're withholding relevant and well-sourced information like names, not because they can't be well-sourced (they can), but because of panic over "privacy." I've even been told, by someone who should know better, that BLP is more important than NPOV, and saw not a bit of outrage. BLP is a necessary beast, but it's well past time to get it back on the leash, and make sure that leash stays short. If it's gotten to the point we're worried about it over neutrality, that just hammers home the need for real and immediate reform. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
On 12/29/08, Andrew Gray wrote: > In many ways, the most effective solution would be a hard-and-bright > line like the DNB uses - no-one who is alive, end of story, and we > could deal with living people as tangential notes in their work. But > it certainly wouldn't be popular! How many sentences can be written about the late Tommy Burks without including the non-late Byron (Low Tax) Looper as a more-than-tangential note? Truth be told I think "notability" arguments would favor a merge in the opposite direction. > I remember talk of ja.wp having a more hardline definition of > notability, roughly defined as "is a public figure", thus neatly > eliding anyone who isn't Pretty Damn Famous - any idea if they still > hold to that and if so how it works out? The Japanese definition of "notability" seems to be a rough translation of ours (and I don't mean "super karate monkey death car"-rough either): http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:特筆性 —C.W. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 7:13 PM, Scientia Potentia est < bibliomaniac...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > In the end, BLP is not one of our five pillars. The fact that we are an > encyclopedia is. > > bibliomaniac15 > That pretty much says it all. --Falcorian ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
On 12/29/08, Joe Szilagyi wrote: > And like anything on Wikipedia, "subject to change". Who says we can't > have Six Pillars? Why not five marble pillars and five plastic ones, depending on the topic? —C.W. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 7:15 PM, wrote: > < andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk writes: > > In many ways, the most effective solution would be a hard-and-bright > line like the DNB uses - no-one who is alive, end of story, and we > could deal with living people as tangential notes in their work. But > it certainly wouldn't be popular!>> > > Oh silly that would never fly! > No article on George Bush? No article on John Major? > No article on Brad Pitt? > That might look odd but it could certainly be justified. However, the real problem with only including biographies after the deaths of the subjects is that this is a general encyclopaedia and not a specific list of biographies; biographical information is found in a very wide range of articles. Hence it is no use having a rule which prohibits a biography of (for example) Bill Clinton until he dies, which then permits an article about the impeachment in 1998 which must discuss other claimed examples of his infidelity in order to be comprehensive. -- Sam Blacketer ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
<> Oh silly that would never fly! No article on George Bush? No article on John Major? No article on Brad Pitt? Will Johnson **One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom0025) ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
And what might you suggest as a sixth pillar in terms of this issue? bibliomaniac15 --- On Mon, 12/29/08, Joe Szilagyi wrote: From: Joe Szilagyi Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons To: "English Wikipedia" Date: Monday, December 29, 2008, 6:36 AM On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 7:13 PM, Scientia Potentia est wrote: > In the end, BLP is not one of our five pillars. The fact that we are an encyclopedia is. > > bibliomaniac15 And like anything on Wikipedia, "subject to change". Who says we can't have Six Pillars? - Joe ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) wrote: >> >> Correct. Opt-out will violate NPOV. >> - d. >> > > Why? > > Newyorkbrad > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > Because then the subject of any given biography can say "Remove the parts I don't like or I'll request opt-out." In essence, it means we can only have hagiographies approved by subjects and/or their PR department. We should be careful to impeccably source and duly weight negative or controversial information, and note that it is in dispute if it is. We should -not- remove it upon request if this is done. -- Freedom is the right to say that 2+2=4. From this all else follows. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
2008/12/29 Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) : >> Correct. Opt-out will violate NPOV. > Why? As answered by others, opt-out will select for whitewashes and publicity pieces. BLPs have two problems: 1. Puff pieces. 2. Hack pieces. We can't fix 2. by doing something that will bias to 1. BLP does not and cannot override NPOV, or this isn't Wikipedia but something else that isn't an NPOV encyclopedia. Is it possible to write bios that are NPOV? Of course. Are there strong forces pulling them away from being NPOV? You've got them right here in this thread. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
> > Correct. Opt-out will violate NPOV. > - d. > Why? Newyorkbrad ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
> > 347 basic directives does resemble the question barrage in a lot of RFAs > ;-) > d. > If you think the volume of questions on RfA is bad these days, try running for ArbCom. :) Newyorkbrad ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
2008/12/29 Joe Szilagyi : >> Correct. Opt-out will violate NPOV. > > I think opt-out more than flagged, more than semi, more than anything > else would be fought to the death over by some extremists. But I don't > know if it would violate NPOV. Is an absence a violation? Philosophically, it probably wouldn't violate NPOV. *Practically*, it might well - as was pointed out upthread, anyone who has on balance a negative article would be more likely to ask for it to be removed than anyone who has one which is on balance positive. In many ways, the most effective solution would be a hard-and-bright line like the DNB uses - no-one who is alive, end of story, and we could deal with living people as tangential notes in their work. But it certainly wouldn't be popular! I remember talk of ja.wp having a more hardline definition of notability, roughly defined as "is a public figure", thus neatly eliding anyone who isn't Pretty Damn Famous - any idea if they still hold to that and if so how it works out? -- - Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
2008/12/29 Joe Szilagyi : > On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 6:42 AM, David Gerard wrote: >> 2008/12/29 Joe Szilagyi : >>> And like anything on Wikipedia, "subject to change". Who says we can't >>> have Six Pillars? >> I'm thinking now of the scene in Robocop 2 where they come up with 347 >> basic directives for Robocop. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/ED-209 347 basic directives does resemble the question barrage in a lot of RFAs ;-) - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 6:42 AM, David Gerard wrote: > 2008/12/29 Joe Szilagyi : > >> And like anything on Wikipedia, "subject to change". Who says we can't >> have Six Pillars? > > > I'm thinking now of the scene in Robocop 2 where they come up with 347 > basic directives for Robocop. > > > - d. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/ED-209 - Joe ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
2008/12/29 Joe Szilagyi : > And like anything on Wikipedia, "subject to change". Who says we can't > have Six Pillars? I'm thinking now of the scene in Robocop 2 where they come up with 347 basic directives for Robocop. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
Its absence is not a violation provided we write biographies with tact as blp advises us to do. On 12/29/08, Joe Szilagyi wrote: > On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 6:14 AM, David Gerard wrote: >> 2008/12/29 David Goodman : >> >>> If we permit opt out, we will have a situation where we have, for all >>> medium-level people who are somewhat less than famous, favorable bios >>> only. There is no possible way to have both NPOV content and >>> subjects owning the articles on themselves. Whatever way we solve the >>> difficulties with BLP, it shouldn't be turning us into an publicity >>> platform. >> >> >> Correct. Opt-out will violate NPOV. >> >> >> - d. > > I think opt-out more than flagged, more than semi, more than anything > else would be fought to the death over by some extremists. But I don't > know if it would violate NPOV. Is an absence a violation? > > - Joe > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 6:14 AM, David Gerard wrote: > 2008/12/29 David Goodman : > >> If we permit opt out, we will have a situation where we have, for all >> medium-level people who are somewhat less than famous, favorable bios >> only. There is no possible way to have both NPOV content and >> subjects owning the articles on themselves. Whatever way we solve the >> difficulties with BLP, it shouldn't be turning us into an publicity >> platform. > > > Correct. Opt-out will violate NPOV. > > > - d. I think opt-out more than flagged, more than semi, more than anything else would be fought to the death over by some extremists. But I don't know if it would violate NPOV. Is an absence a violation? - Joe ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 7:13 PM, Scientia Potentia est wrote: > In the end, BLP is not one of our five pillars. The fact that we are an > encyclopedia is. > > bibliomaniac15 And like anything on Wikipedia, "subject to change". Who says we can't have Six Pillars? - Joe ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
2008/12/29 David Goodman : > If we permit opt out, we will have a situation where we have, for all > medium-level people who are somewhat less than famous, favorable bios > only. There is no possible way to have both NPOV content and > subjects owning the articles on themselves. Whatever way we solve the > difficulties with BLP, it shouldn't be turning us into an publicity > platform. Correct. Opt-out will violate NPOV. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
2008/12/29 Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) : > See also my comments on the on-wiki discussion of semiprotecting BLPs and > related issues, where I present a string of basic facts and assumptions that > color my view of this and related matters. Flagged revs would solve many more problems than general protection would. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
<> First, are you saying that all journalists are unethical and immoral? Secondly, I agree that an opt-out for the "marginally notable" is not as extreme as an opt-out for everybody. Third, it's not an issue that we *must* be that agent "of their perpetual embarrassment", but only that we *can*. Once you allow can, you allow *an* editor, but not necessarily *all* editors, to be so. I would submit, however, that deliberately ignoring or whitewashing a bio, because we don't want to "embarrass" a subject, seems fairly opposed to our supposed purpose. Which is, to write a biography, not a hagiography. Fourthly, whether an article is a frequent target of libel is not material, to how we write it. Will Johnson **One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom0025) ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
On Sun, 28 Dec 2008, Scientia Potentia est wrote: > In the end, BLP is not one of our five pillars. The fact that we are an > encyclopedia is. Fortunately, Ignore All Rules also applies to the five pillars. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
If we permit opt out, we will have a situation where we have, for all medium-level people who are somewhat less than famous, favorable bios only. There is no possible way to have both NPOV content and subjects owning the articles on themselves. Whatever way we solve the difficulties with BLP, it shouldn't be turning us into an publicity platform. On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 11:00 PM, Wilhelm Schnotz wrote: > Perhaps we just need stricter criteria on what makes a *person* notable? > > On 12/28/08, Jon wrote: >> Is it really, *our duty* to report it? And at what cost to a living >> person? I think that for those marginally notable, an opt out is not an >> "extreme step", not as extreme as my first suggestion. >> >> I'll agree, that it is their life, and their choice to make it public. >> But must we be the agents of their perpetual embarrassment? Most >> especially, if their articles are frequent targets of hatcheting and >> libel. Most especially, if the notability is 'marginal'. >> >> Jon- >> >> wjhon...@aol.com wrote: >>> <>> newyorkb...@gmail.com writes: >>> >>> But this >>> response really does not sufficiently take into account the profound >>> impact >>> that our coverage has on the subjects of our articles.>> >>> - >>> >>> And the counter-argument is, if someone has taken the step to become a >>> public person, say the mayor of Santa Cruz, no one is to *blame* for that >>> step >>> except themselves. If we then turn up an article from a newspaper 20 >>> years >>> earlier that states that they were arrested for three DUIs, well, again >>> they did >>> it. The fact that we re-report it, and that we can collect it all >>> together >>> with other tidbits, into a biography, is the mere fact of our project to >>> create >>> a biography on the person. >>> >>> We aren't here to meekly parrot press releases, that would be a slap in >>> the >>> face of what creating an encyclopedia means. >>> >>> The "profound impact" is merely that Sarah Palin doesn't want you to dig >>> into her past as reported in reliable sources, once she has become a >>> bigger name >>> than merely the mayor of a tiny Alaskan town. However we do, they do, >>> that's the purpose of writing a biography. "This is your life" it's not >>> our fault >>> you messed it up. It is however our duty to report it. History is not >>> always nice and sweet. >>> >>> Will Johnson >>> >>> >>> **One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, >>> Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. >>> (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom0025) >>> ___ >>> WikiEN-l mailing list >>> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l >>> >> >> >> ___ >> WikiEN-l mailing list >> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l >> > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > -- David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
Perhaps we just need stricter criteria on what makes a *person* notable? On 12/28/08, Jon wrote: > Is it really, *our duty* to report it? And at what cost to a living > person? I think that for those marginally notable, an opt out is not an > "extreme step", not as extreme as my first suggestion. > > I'll agree, that it is their life, and their choice to make it public. > But must we be the agents of their perpetual embarrassment? Most > especially, if their articles are frequent targets of hatcheting and > libel. Most especially, if the notability is 'marginal'. > > Jon- > > wjhon...@aol.com wrote: >> <> newyorkb...@gmail.com writes: >> >> But this >> response really does not sufficiently take into account the profound >> impact >> that our coverage has on the subjects of our articles.>> >> - >> >> And the counter-argument is, if someone has taken the step to become a >> public person, say the mayor of Santa Cruz, no one is to *blame* for that >> step >> except themselves. If we then turn up an article from a newspaper 20 >> years >> earlier that states that they were arrested for three DUIs, well, again >> they did >> it. The fact that we re-report it, and that we can collect it all >> together >> with other tidbits, into a biography, is the mere fact of our project to >> create >> a biography on the person. >> >> We aren't here to meekly parrot press releases, that would be a slap in >> the >> face of what creating an encyclopedia means. >> >> The "profound impact" is merely that Sarah Palin doesn't want you to dig >> into her past as reported in reliable sources, once she has become a >> bigger name >> than merely the mayor of a tiny Alaskan town. However we do, they do, >> that's the purpose of writing a biography. "This is your life" it's not >> our fault >> you messed it up. It is however our duty to report it. History is not >> always nice and sweet. >> >> Will Johnson >> >> >> **One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, >> Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. >> (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom0025) >> ___ >> WikiEN-l mailing list >> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l >> > > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
Is it really, *our duty* to report it? And at what cost to a living person? I think that for those marginally notable, an opt out is not an "extreme step", not as extreme as my first suggestion. I'll agree, that it is their life, and their choice to make it public. But must we be the agents of their perpetual embarrassment? Most especially, if their articles are frequent targets of hatcheting and libel. Most especially, if the notability is 'marginal'. Jon- wjhon...@aol.com wrote: > < newyorkb...@gmail.com writes: > > But this > response really does not sufficiently take into account the profound impact > that our coverage has on the subjects of our articles.>> > - > > And the counter-argument is, if someone has taken the step to become a > public person, say the mayor of Santa Cruz, no one is to *blame* for that > step > except themselves. If we then turn up an article from a newspaper 20 years > earlier that states that they were arrested for three DUIs, well, again they > did > it. The fact that we re-report it, and that we can collect it all together > with other tidbits, into a biography, is the mere fact of our project to > create > a biography on the person. > > We aren't here to meekly parrot press releases, that would be a slap in the > face of what creating an encyclopedia means. > > The "profound impact" is merely that Sarah Palin doesn't want you to dig > into her past as reported in reliable sources, once she has become a bigger > name > than merely the mayor of a tiny Alaskan town. However we do, they do, > that's the purpose of writing a biography. "This is your life" it's not our > fault > you messed it up. It is however our duty to report it. History is not > always nice and sweet. > > Will Johnson > > > **One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, > Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. > (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom0025) > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
<> - And the counter-argument is, if someone has taken the step to become a public person, say the mayor of Santa Cruz, no one is to *blame* for that step except themselves. If we then turn up an article from a newspaper 20 years earlier that states that they were arrested for three DUIs, well, again they did it. The fact that we re-report it, and that we can collect it all together with other tidbits, into a biography, is the mere fact of our project to create a biography on the person. We aren't here to meekly parrot press releases, that would be a slap in the face of what creating an encyclopedia means. The "profound impact" is merely that Sarah Palin doesn't want you to dig into her past as reported in reliable sources, once she has become a bigger name than merely the mayor of a tiny Alaskan town. However we do, they do, that's the purpose of writing a biography. "This is your life" it's not our fault you messed it up. It is however our duty to report it. History is not always nice and sweet. Will Johnson **One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom0025) ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
Debate and disagreement is always to be expected when we get to the level of specifc improvements that we should make to address BLP issues. But this response really does not sufficiently take into account the profound impact that our coverage has on the subjects of our articles. It bears emphasis once again that almost invariably, if Wikipedia has an article on a living person that article will become the FIRST search-engine result on a search for that person's name. See also my comments on the on-wiki discussion of semiprotecting BLPs and related issues, where I present a string of basic facts and assumptions that color my view of this and related matters. Newyorkbrad On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 10:13 PM, Scientia Potentia est < bibliomaniac...@yahoo.com> wrote: > In the end, BLP is not one of our five pillars. The fact that we are an > encyclopedia is. > > bibliomaniac15 > > --- On Sun, 12/28/08, Jon wrote: > From: Jon > Subject: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons > To: "English Wikipedia" > Date: Sunday, December 28, 2008, 6:57 PM > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > I just want to throw this onlist *before* doing anything on wiki to > see what kind of thoughts are out there. > > I would be interested in an extension of the BLP policy to go as far > as, those who explicitly op out, can have their biography removed for > the duration of their life. This I base on the number of complaints > on site and off site (via our otrs mechanism, for example). Keep in > mind, the English Wikipedia will be around for ages. Thoughts? > > > Best, > > Jon- > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iEYEARECAAYFAklYPJ0ACgkQ6+ro8Pm1AtWhGgCgxE3P8uHcu3XiAK4ymNVFF2UU > nlsAn1eAnPFRNZfGtHqsuEShfhoyxMOv > =VMIk > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > > > > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
On Dec 28, 2008, at 9:57 PM, Jon wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > I just want to throw this onlist *before* doing anything on wiki to > see what kind of thoughts are out there. > > I would be interested in an extension of the BLP policy to go as far > as, those who explicitly op out, can have their biography removed for > the duration of their life. This I base on the number of complaints > on site and off site (via our otrs mechanism, for example). Keep in > mind, the English Wikipedia will be around for ages. Thoughts? I see no reason why our current method of taking requests to opt out seriously, but not treating them as binding is flawed. -Phil ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
In the end, BLP is not one of our five pillars. The fact that we are an encyclopedia is. bibliomaniac15 --- On Sun, 12/28/08, Jon wrote: From: Jon Subject: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons To: "English Wikipedia" Date: Sunday, December 28, 2008, 6:57 PM -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I just want to throw this onlist *before* doing anything on wiki to see what kind of thoughts are out there. I would be interested in an extension of the BLP policy to go as far as, those who explicitly op out, can have their biography removed for the duration of their life. This I base on the number of complaints on site and off site (via our otrs mechanism, for example). Keep in mind, the English Wikipedia will be around for ages. Thoughts? Best, Jon- -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAklYPJ0ACgkQ6+ro8Pm1AtWhGgCgxE3P8uHcu3XiAK4ymNVFF2UU nlsAn1eAnPFRNZfGtHqsuEShfhoyxMOv =VMIk -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 1:57 PM, Jon wrote: > I would be interested in an extension of the BLP policy to go as far > as, those who explicitly op out, can have their biography removed for > the duration of their life. It was suggested before - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographical_optout http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Biographical_optout/Archive_1 Angela ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
I see your point. Perhaps along the same lines, hard criteria for marginal notability, something we can all live with. And for those "marginally notable by our standards, an explicit opt out? Wilhelm Schnotz wrote: > What would we do if say George bush asks. I don't think you can do > this as a broad all blps can do this. > > On 12/28/08, Jon wrote: > I just want to throw this onlist *before* doing anything on wiki to > see what kind of thoughts are out there. > > I would be interested in an extension of the BLP policy to go as far > as, those who explicitly op out, can have their biography removed for > the duration of their life. This I base on the number of complaints > on site and off site (via our otrs mechanism, for example). Keep in > mind, the English Wikipedia will be around for ages. Thoughts? > > > Best, > > Jon- ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
What would we do if say George bush asks. I don't think you can do this as a broad all blps can do this. On 12/28/08, Jon wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > I just want to throw this onlist *before* doing anything on wiki to > see what kind of thoughts are out there. > > I would be interested in an extension of the BLP policy to go as far > as, those who explicitly op out, can have their biography removed for > the duration of their life. This I base on the number of complaints > on site and off site (via our otrs mechanism, for example). Keep in > mind, the English Wikipedia will be around for ages. Thoughts? > > > Best, > > Jon- > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iEYEARECAAYFAklYPJ0ACgkQ6+ro8Pm1AtWhGgCgxE3P8uHcu3XiAK4ymNVFF2UU > nlsAn1eAnPFRNZfGtHqsuEShfhoyxMOv > =VMIk > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[WikiEN-l] Biography of Living persons
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I just want to throw this onlist *before* doing anything on wiki to see what kind of thoughts are out there. I would be interested in an extension of the BLP policy to go as far as, those who explicitly op out, can have their biography removed for the duration of their life. This I base on the number of complaints on site and off site (via our otrs mechanism, for example). Keep in mind, the English Wikipedia will be around for ages. Thoughts? Best, Jon- -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAklYPJ0ACgkQ6+ro8Pm1AtWhGgCgxE3P8uHcu3XiAK4ymNVFF2UU nlsAn1eAnPFRNZfGtHqsuEShfhoyxMOv =VMIk -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
