This is the most prominent problem facing the English Wikipedia today in my view. BLPs are easy to write and easy to get wrong, and there are always newly famous people to write about - so this issue is only going to become more important and more visible with time. Sue's point about the type of people who are subjects of BLPs is important from a public relations perspective; if we tick off people with megaphones, everyone is going to hear about it.
A "report a problem" link (prominently displayed on BLPs in particular) was my first thought as well, and seems like a straightforward way to improve handling of complaints. I agree with Thomas that the article and revision being reported should be included if possible in the e-mail automatically, and I think we should have an OTRS queue specifically for BLPs to handle these reports. I would also like to see the pool of OTRS respondents expanded - some advertising on the need for queue minders, and maybe an expansion of the potential pool (for instance, not being an administrator on any project I wouldn't be eligible). I would like to see Mike's opinion, though, on how deeply the Foundation can be involved in establishing Wikimedia-wide policies on content like BLPs. It would seem to challenge the notion that the Foundation itself hosts but does not control project content. Tomasz' suggestion would be an especially serious departure from past practice. Nathan _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
