I'm very pleased to see this discussed at the Foundation level, and even more pleased that this discussion includes the use of technical features to prevent BLP violations. The discussion that's taken place so far surrounding improving the BLP reporting is good, but I'd rather focus on the ounce of prevention side of things. For that reason, I believe the following:
* the WMF should mandate that all projects adopt a technical configuration (of flagged revisions, or semi-protection, or what have you) that prevents edits made by unregistered users from going immediately live. * at the very least, the WMF should clarify that its policy that no account is needed to edit does not preclude the default semi-protection of BLPs (or any similar configuration of flagged revisions). This has been one of several stonewalling responses at en-wiki when protection of BLPs has been proposed: "Sorry, we can't do it; Foundation issue". * with regards to the significant criticism, it might be worth exploring the creation of some kind of clearinghouse for reporting these, for projects that don't have their own Biographies of Living Persons Noticeboards or equivalent (sort of a meta-BLPN). Obviously language issues are going to be problematic, but it might at least help get light shining. * something like en-wiki's BLP policy should be mandated an all foundation projects, but I don't honestly think that'll do much. The problem isn't in policy not mandating the right content, it's in policy not being consistently applied. Again, I'm pleased to see that this is receiving attention at the levels it should be. Steve Smith Sarcasticidealist _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
