Rod Dreher impersonator available for parties and bar-mitzvahs, Was: "A system that re-rapes the victim" Options

[Doc glasgow]

This debate shows the moral bankruptcy of wikipedia.

A guy gets slandered in his bio. The slandar is removed, but the removal reverted as vandalism.

He then asks that the bio be removed to prevent further slander, and is told that since he's notable the bio will be kept, and he should read "Wikipedia:Autobiography which describes what you can do to keep an article about yourself neutral" (emphasis added).

Wikipedia refuses any quality control, refused to allow any method which will prevent the inevitable further libels (flagged, permanent semi-protection) and tells the victim it is his responsibility to learn wikilanguage and keep libels out of his own biography.

This is the darkside of wikipedia.

[The Wales Hunter]

The situation is ludicrous. Why the heck should people, who know nothing about Wikipedia apart from their high Google search result on their name, be expected to learn the entire system to sort out the shit someone else is throwing at them?

[east.718]

Versus22 (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Until It Sleeps (T-C-L-K-R-D) , and J.delanoy (T-C-L-K-R-D) are responsible for reproducing the libel a total of seven times. Do these guys not have any free thought of their own besides "they blanked the page!!"? Or even any common human decency?

[The Wales Hunter]

It's at times like these when it's tempting to post Rachel Marsden's claims about Jimbo's former 18-year-old mistress on his BLP, but that would be sinking to their level.

[Mike R]

Versus22 (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Until It Sleeps (T-C-L-K-R-D) , and J.delanoy (T-C-L-K-R-D) are responsible for reproducing the libel a total of seven times. Do these guys not have any free thought of their own besides "they blanked the page!!"? Or even any common human decency?

J.delanoy is an admin.

[Doc glasgow]

Versus22 (T-C-L-K-R-D) , Until It Sleeps (T-C-L-K-R-D) , and J.delanoy (T-C-L-K-R-D) are responsible for reproducing the libel a total of seven times. Do these guys not have any free thought of their own besides "they blanked the page!!"? Or even any common human decency?

J.delanoy is an admin.

A textbook illustration of my essay WP:DOLT

[Alex]

When I happen to see a page blanking, I always revert it. If it's blanked again by the same user, I check the article to make sure there's nothing problematic there.

Generally, if the page is blanked, it is better to be more cautious, than if the page was blanked and replaced with text.

[Doc glasgow]

When I happen to see a page blanking, I always revert it. If it's blanked again by the same user, I check the article to make sure there's nothing problematic there.

Generally, if the page is blanked, it is better to be more cautious, than if the page was blanked and replaced with text.

If a BLP is blanked, you should always stop and ask why/

[Alison]

When I happen to see a page blanking, I always revert it. If it's blanked again by the same user, I check the article to make sure there's nothing problematic there.

Generally, if the page is blanked, it is better to be more cautious, than if the page was blanked and replaced with text.

No. First thing when it's page blanking - check what's blanked. Always do this, especially if it's a BLP. If an IP address did the blanking, check to see if it's a school one - they blank 'popular' biogs that their classmates are reading. But in general, page blanking isn't standard vandalism and you should check first.

(you already know all this, Alex )

[Alex]

Sorry I wasn't clear. Any old page (not a BLP) I would generally revert if it was blanked, especially a high target page. BLPs I am always careful of. I certainly do know, Alison!

[Obesity]

J.delanoy is an admin.

And a rapist.

[seicer]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Adm..._of_BLP_subject

[east.718]

A textbook illustration of my essay WP:DOLT

I think you'd be very unsurprised to discover that at least two of those three editors I mentioned are children.

[One]

J.delanoy is an admin.

And a <page blank!>.

And a WReviewer. One is bound to make a few mistakes if one is watching the whole encyclopedia by one's self. Least he has an open mind.

This post has been edited by One: Tue 17th March 2009, 6:49pm

[Alex]

J.delanoy is an admin.

And a ****.

Did Grawp tell you this by any chance?

[Obesity]

Did Grawp tell you this by any chance?

No, it was Doc McGlasgow.

[Alex]

Did Grawp tell you this by any chance?

No, it was Doc McGlasgow.

Oh... ironic.

[Milton Roe]

This debate shows the moral bankruptcy of wikipedia.

A guy gets slandered in his bio. The slandar is removed, but the removal reverted as vandalism.

He then asks that the bio be removed to prevent further slander, and is told that since he's notable the bio will be kept, and he should read "Wikipedia:Autobiography which describes what you can do to keep an article about yourself neutral" (emphasis added).

Wikipedia refuses any quality control, refused to allow any method which will prevent the inevitable further libels (flagged, permanent semi-protection) and tells the victim it is his responsibility to learn wikilanguage and keep libels out of his own biography.

This is the darkside of wikipedia.

Indeed, it's so incredible that newbies have a hard time believing it's even true, and often get themselves blocked while they froth about it. Of course, they'd be even angrier if they knew it's only true for THEM, and not for the bios of peolple who run Wikipedia.

So you see them asking questions like: "I can't even revert errors on my own biography, if some clueless idiot-journalist has printed them somewhere else?" Answer: no.

And they're too unsophisticated to questions like: "If your definition of "neutrality" in my own biolgraphy is just some combination of stuff that appears in published sources, why are you using this simple English word in such a non-standard way? Can't you think of another one?" No.

And of course, the one everybody needs to ask, which is: Okay, basement-dwellers, how are you going to TELL you've acheived this "neutrality" on my bio that you talk about? On whose authority is this judgement to be made? Is it really going to be a consensis of strangers who don't know me, but are going to insist even so that they know more about me than *I* do?? Say what?

[Malleus]

I found the initial complaint that the editor was impersonating himself to be quite amusing as well. "If it looks like a duck ..."

[Doc glasgow]

This comment, leaves me speechless.

Most of us who urge a less capacious construction of BLP understand the problem but (a) recognize that it is appropriate for us to balance the evident harm that befalls a living subject whose biography tends to include libel with the unquantifiable but more than theoretical harm suffered by the reader when Wikipedia fails to cover an otherwise encyclopedic topic for information about which he/she looks (the proposition that there is absolutely no such harm is not untenable, but it does implicate the most fundamental interests and goals of our enterprise, such that it cannot be advanced by anyone who values the project) and (b) have difficulty getting exercised about the well-being of those in whose being well we have no particularized interest. It is, I know, fashionable to suggest, both here and on WR, that those who are not BLP absolutists are immaturely blinded to the real-world consequences of what it is supposed they treat as an [[MMORPG]], but most of us are not factually unenlightened; we simply think differently about some significant ethical and practical issues. [[User:Jahiegel|Joe]] 20:23, 17 March 2009 (UTC)