2009/3/4 Sue Gardner <[email protected]>: > 2009/3/3 Michael Snow <[email protected]> > >> But someone making a request is a sign that the article really needs a >> hard look, and quite possibly should be removed for not meeting our >> standards. So the reversed presumption of "default to delete, unless >> consensus to keep" is a good idea for living subjects. I would add that >> when this is in question, arguments that make excuses for the current >> state of the article are not valid reasons to keep it. >> >> > I am just clarifying - "default to delete unless consensus to keep" would be > a change from current state, right? > > I ask because I got a call the other day from someone asking to have the BLP > about her deleted. The article centred around a single incident in her > life. I handed it off to a longtime English Wikipedian (doesn't matter > who), who told me the subject was notable and therefore the article would be > kept. > > That experience was consistent with my general understanding - that it has > been extremely difficult for even marginally notable people to get the BLP > about them deleted. > > So -again, just to clarify- if Wikipedia adopted a practice of defaulting to > delete unless there's consensus to keep, that would be change from how BLPs > are handled today - yes?
As for the german Wikipedia, that would be a change of policy, The policy mentioned on the en-WP fro BLP is not present on de-WP. Best, Philipp _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
