2010/1/22 David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com>: > 2010/1/22 James Farrar <james.far...@gmail.com>: > >> Some people won't be satisfied until Wikipedia has no BLPs. > > > No true Strawman will be satisfied until authority reassures him > Wikipedia has no BLPs. >
Doc Glasgow/Scott MacDonald's position is actually not that far off. Quote: > Wikipedia simply has to admit it cannot maintain BLPs unless they are in the > "highly notable" category. > What they should do is: > 1) Ban the creation of new BLPs. It is highly unlikely that anyone currently > without an article is going to be notable enough to be maintained. Any > exceptions can be created only after discusion on "BLPs for creation". > 2) Delete all unreferenced BLPs - or BLPs referenced only to own website or > IMDB etc > 3) Delete any BLP where there is not an overwhelming consensus that it is > notable. (Afd default to delete) > 4) Semi-protect all BLPs who are not "A-list" > 5) Delete any BLP if a violation of the BLP policy is allowed to stand for > over 24 hours - it is obviously unmaintainable. > 6) Flag all remaining BLPs. http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=28263&view=findpost&p=216970 Pete / the wub _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
