On 27 March 2012 18:05, Ken Arromdee <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 27 Mar 2012, David Gerard wrote: > >> 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. >> > > Anything which is *different* between BLP and policies for other articles, > such as a no-eventualism policy, could conceivably be a benefit. > > My complaint is about BLP rules that do not do this. > > I'm reminded of a story told me by a friend who used to work in PC support, back in the day. He was once called out by a guy who'd deleted all the files whose purpose he didn't understand, and wondered why his machine didn't work. Please don't try this at home.
Charles > > _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
