On 27 March 2012 17:20, Charles Matthews <charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> So you have been arguing that without the BLP policy, and without the > noticeboard set up to help compliance with the policy, just the same close > investigations of the actual reliability of sources that nominally fall > within "RS" would be going on? I don't agree, and I wonder if anyone else > does. I'm not the biggest fan of noticeboards, qua unchartered processes; > but in this case it seems to be working, and having WP:BLP there fairly > clearly has something to do with it. The key point to remember about BLPs is: no eventualism. If an article about someone dead 200 years says something nasty and wrong, that's not great, but it's not urgent. If an article about a living person says something nasty and wrong, that is urgent, and we can't just assume the wiki process will on balance fix it in the fullness of time. It's the simplest possible way of doing it and it's a vast improvement over the previous situation. It's not perfection, but calling it a "failure" is hyperbolic. - d. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
