Any proposals to allow input from the person on the deletion of the article will inevitable tend to reject the medium-important articles which show something unfavorable but documented and relevant and keep those that show only favorable things. What this amounts to is saying, that if someone is really notable they can't censor the article, but otherwise they can. And not just favorable/unfavorable, they will want to delete the articles that do not praise them enough. I can think of a number of academics and what we call creative professionals where just this has been the problem.
If we do this, we will have then become for many of our articles on living people a who'swho, and are no longer an encyclopedia. Articles on medium important authors will either contain uncritical praise, or be deleted. NPOV is indeed negotiable, we can negotiate it away, and become useless. On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 11:00 PM, quiddity <pandiculat...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Those that involve themselves in BLP matters should perhaps frequent >> AFD more often. Provided that is still how we delete articles that aren't >> speedyable. >> >> -Chad > > I've left a suggestion at > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Biographies.27_AFD_category > to add a link to the [[Category:AfD debates (Biographical)]] on the > noticeboard. (Possibly that category could be further refined to a > category just listing living folks?) > > -Quiddity > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > -- David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
