![]() |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daniel Brandt |
![]()
Post
#1
|
Postmaster ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Regulars Posts: 2,473 Joined: Member No.: 77 ![]() |
slimvirgin AT gmail.com
cc: info AT wikimedia.org December 24, 2006 Dear Sarah: I am looking for a Florida-based attorney to negotiate with the Wikimedia Foundation to take down my biography. If this fails, I plan to file an invasion-of-privacy lawsuit against the Foundation. Considering the fact that all the Talk pages are also made available to the search engines, I may include a defamation-of-character complaint in the suit. My main interest in litigation is to establish in a Florida court that Section 230 of the U.S. Communications Decency Act does not provide immunity to the Foundation, due to the fact that the Foundation's entire structure is designed to moderate the content on Wikipedia. I will argue that because of this, the Foundation functions as a publisher rather than a service provider. Only service providers are immune under Section 230. I appreciate the fact that you supported my request to delete the article in October 2005, after we worked on it for a week and were unable to reach agreement. You warned me that you lacked the power to make the deletion stick, if some other administrators disagreed. This is exactly what happened. I also appreciate your support of Linuxbeak's effort in December 2005 to move the content into other relevant articles on Wikipedia, so that most of the content would still exist, but not be featured in one Wikipedia article under my name. This effort was one that Linuxbeak and I agreed to at the time, but which failed due to a lack of support. I deleted hivemind.html as Linuxbeak made his effort, but then restored it when his effort failed. As you can see, the hivemind.html page is much larger now and also has small photos of most of the perpetrators. The last meaningful AfD on my bio was concluded on April 9, 2006. Now I am asking you to initiate another AfD. This is something only a major administrator can do, because minor administrators will intervene on the grounds of "Speedy Keep." I believe that one last meaningful AfD for my biography is warranted before this issue escalates further, and I hope you agree with me. If the article gets deleted, I will take down the hivemind.html page on www.wikipedia-watch.org (but not the hive2.html page), and will also take down the findchat.html page, the 1,545 chat log files that are linked from there, and the chat search engine. Thank you, Daniel Brandt |
![]() ![]() |
Somey |
![]()
Post
#2
|
Can't actually moderate (or even post) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Moderators Posts: 11,816 Joined: From: Dreamland Member No.: 275 ![]() |
Hey now, you guys are going off on a tangent here...!
All I was saying was that these people are now "notable" enough for their own articles. If they don't want articles written about them, then that should be their right - but they should extend that right to others as well, in the interest of fairness. They should extend that right to everyone. |
nobs |
![]()
Post
#3
|
#2242 most prolific contributor of out of 1 million+ WP users ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Regulars Posts: 575 Joined: From: North America Member No.: 16 ![]() |
... these people are now "notable" enough for their own articles. If they don't want articles written about them, then that should be their right - but they should extend that right to others as well, in the interest of fairness. They should extend that right to everyone. Spoken by one with a reputation of being ominous: "I know where the bodies are buried..." This post has been edited by nobs: |
Somey |
![]()
Post
#4
|
Can't actually moderate (or even post) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Moderators Posts: 11,816 Joined: From: Dreamland Member No.: 275 ![]() |
Soon people will discover no living person wants a wiki entry about themself, notable or vanity. The very creation of an article, keeping with human nature, will always gravitate in the direction of negativity. Any 'puff piece' short of that is suspect. You don't really believe that though, do you? Thing is, if you've been reading what's posted here on Wikipedia Review fairly regularly, it would be very easy to get that impression, I should think. But the reality of it is that most people do want articles about themselves, and most such articles aren't really negative at all. In cases where people have done bad things, or who have skeletons in their closets that have recently been revealed, those peoples' enemies will occasionally target their bio articles... but I'd say that's a tiny minority of cases. Another thing: You yourself, Nobs, have a history of adding negative information to BLP articles - or at least one or two in particular - and it's ultimately the reason you're here, as I understand it. It may be that the information you added is true and well-sourced, that the subjects deserve to be exposed in that way, and that "the people" deserve to know - and you may very well be right. But again, that's still a tiny minority of articles, and even in those cases I doubt that all but a few would want to risk the additional attention they'd get by asking for an opt-out deletion. At a minimum, Wikipedia must allow for the fact that it is capable of damaging people out of spite, pettiness, and vindictiveness, often having nothing to do with the "notability" of the subject. In other words, it must make allowances for serious flaws in the very nature of its underlying concept. Only if it does that can we even bother to consider the question of whether or not it's a net-positive to society. |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: |