http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Rand_Fishkin
One of several BLPs I've nominated for deletion upon request from the subject. He's notable basically for two things: owning a business and having proposed to his wife at a professional sporting event. When he first discovered someone had created a biography on Wikipedia he was flattered. After a few months, though, it became burdensome to check every week and see whether it had been altered. He began to worry--since his business is a service industry--what would happen if one of his competitors vandalized it strategically while he competed for a contract. He wasn't famous enough to be on many watchlists. If the vandalism occurred the day after he checked the page it'd be six days more before he spotted it, and longer while OTRS processed his request. In that time, would a potential client be misled? Would he lose out on a contract and have to lay off good employees? Overall it simply wasn't worth it. This was one biography that got deleted upon request; many others don't. And that's partly because of opinions that have appeared in this thread: *Some Wikipedians believe that the subject of a BLP should never have a voice in editorial decisions at all. *Some Wikipedians argue that it's easy enough to Googlebomb people by other means, so Wikipedia shouldn't erect any barriers either. *Other Wikipedians believe every instance should be handled "case by case", which means we can never give a simple and direct answer to a BLP subject who raises legitimate concerns. I don't like *any* of those solutions. When I call the phone company with a complaint about my bill, I want to know what the rules are in plain English--I want an outcome that's understandable and consistent. And even if the answer is no, I want a simple plain and direct no. There's no excuse for giving another human being the run-around when we can prevent it. On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 5:02 PM, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2009/6/5 Durova <nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com>: > > > Obviously the bids don't cite Wikipedia. It's not uncommon, though, for > the > > decision maker to run a quick Google search. Now if exploitation is > going > > to happen, Wikipedia happens to be one of the easiest platforms to > exploit. > > Wikipedians try to manage our BLP problems, but very often we fail. Do > we > > shrug off legitimate complaints as easily as you advise? Perhaps this is > a > > philosophical/ethical difference. I say we look for solutions. > > > I say you still haven't provided an example of the problem. > > > - f. > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > -- http://durova.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
