Since there is a fairly firm consensus that has been sustained through repetitive challenges on the enWP against this particular point about the default for deletion, I wonder what the policies of the other large Wikipedias are, to see what is the agreements of the actual Wikipedians upon the so-called "best practice".
At the very least, there needs to be an explicit statement that makes it very clear just what part of the policies are just a suggestion--for "suggestions" of this sort tend to get taken for more definitive than they may have been intended. On 3/18/10, Keegan Peterzell <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Apoc 2400 <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > The recommendations draft >> > is just about ready to move into finalized writing in a couple weeks >> > >> > >> http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Task_force/Living_People/Drafting_pages/Recommendations_to_the_Board_of_Trustees/Draft_2 >> > >> >> It look ok, but coming from enwiki most of it seems rather obvious. It >> this >> recommendation mostly intended for smaller wikis that may not have >> developed >> clear BLP rules? >> >> The exception is the end of the last item: >> >> > [...] and content is suggested to be removed if the result of a deletion >> > debate determines that there is no consensus to keep the hosted content. >> > >> which appears be meant to force "no consensus means delete" onto English >> Wikipedia. Is that correct? >> >> Can you tell me if any of the other items are meant to impose changes on >> enwp? >> >> Btw, are there logs from the March 15 IRC meeting? >> >> Thanks, >> Apoc2400 >> _______________________________________________ >> foundation-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l >> > > Hi there. > > The meeting on the fifteenth didn't come together, I was busy with offline > life last week and didn't get much work done onwiki. > > The recommendations are, as you say, culled from the fairly obvious. They > are meant as a "best practices" approach for smaller projects that have no > local policies on living people, or are starting to develop them. As for > the deletion part, that's just a suggestion and won't change the face of the > English Wikipedia's deletion policies, unless of course they decide to do so > on their own after discussion. > > The idea is that we can write a global living person policy, the "light" > version, which will serve as the default policy for projects without their > own, and provide the framework for projects that have a policy in place or > are working on developing them. The recommendations are just advice, not > an enforceable tool. > > -- > ~Keegan > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > -- David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
