On 31 July 2016 at 19:15, <jay...@gmail.com> wrote: > Wikimedia Commons will have its own structured data repository soon, and it > will need to tackle this BLP problem also.
This is a side issue, for this case. The primary issue is that an involved admin has deleted some items, refused to restore them when challenged, and other admins are collectively unwilling (for reasons the vast majority of them have not expressed) to restore them so that the community can then discuss them, and reach a proper consensus, in the normal "requests for deletion" arena. > Wikimedians will be worried that while Gerard's intention is noble, when > they have an item about them there is nothing to someone with less noble > intentions from adding more intrusive information to the item. This is speculative; but if it does come to pass, then there are methods of dealing with it (just as there are on Wikipedia) that do not involve deleting items - many of which were not about people - without discussion. Again, the way to deal with it is *not* an involved admin deleting items without discussion, nor the backing or a policy arrived at by consensus > The result will be less people willing to speak at Wikimania. Really? Wikidata (and Wikispecies) have items about anyone who has named a taxon. It is planned to create items about many scientific papers. Will fewer people will be willing to name taxa or write scientific papers? -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk _______________________________________________ Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
