User:Alecmconroy/Brainstorm

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] A first-stab at a guideline regarding inclusions or exclusion of off-site harassment

  • Links to pages that are neither notable nor a reliable source should be probably deleted. (per Reliable Sources, External Links, Wikipedia is not a link farm).
  • Links to the main pages of notable sites should generally be included. (Per WP:EL: "Articles about any organization, person, web site, or other entity should link to the official site if any." )
  • Links to truly notable attacks/outings can be included if they improve the article. (Per NPOV and RS)
  • Links to non-notable attacks/outings of editors should be deleted (per Reliable Sources, EL, Wikipedia is not a link farm).
  • Outside article space, links included for the purpose of harassment should be deleted, per WP:NPA and WP:HARASS.
  • Simple vandalism or other bad-faith edits can be removed at any time, and such removals are not subject to revert-limitation, per WP:3RR and WP:VANDAL
Link Type Example Action
Main pages of notable sites which attack/criticize/out Making Lights,

Michael Moore, Don Murphy

 Include

per EL
Main pages of notable criticism/attack/outing sites Wikipedia Watch, Wikitruth, Wikiscanner Include

per EL
Notable criticisms and outings of Wikipedians Essjay controversy references Include

per RS and NPOV
Pages on notable sites where the linked-to page doesn't attack, but other pages on the site do The multiple references to various MakingLights pages Include

per EL/RS/NPOV
Main pages of non-notable unreliable sites which attack/criticize/out ED mainpage Purge

per EL and RS
Pages of Non-notable, unreliable sites which contain only attack content ED page that attacks an editor Purge

per EL and RS
Non-main-pages of notable sites which only contain non-notable unreliable attacks/outings of editors The specific attacks made on MakingLights's forums or DonMurphy's forums Purge

(unless attack itself is notable enough to merit mention in text) per EL and RL and NEWPOLICY

--Alecmconroy 22:27, 23 September 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Elaborations on NewYorkBrad proposal

Most of the points in NewYorkBrad's proposal flow naturally from our other policies-- something we might want to note in the wordings of whatever final policy gets constructed.


[edit] Point A

Links to an external webpage that reveals the personal identifying information of a Wikipedia editor who chooses to edit anonymously and whose real-life identity is not generally known, or which expressly or impliedly calls for any editor to be harassed in real life or otherwise, are strictly prohibited. Deliberate addition of such links is grounds for blocking, and removal of such links is not subject to 3RR.

Because:

  • Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons is applicable to ALL living persons, including those living persons who are also editors of Wikipedia.
  • Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons says: "Editors should remove any contentious material about living persons that is unsourced, relies upon sources that do not meet standards specified in Wikipedia:Verifiability, or is a conjectural interpretation of a source (see Wikipedia:No original research). If the material is derogatory and unsourced or poorly sourced, the three-revert rule does not apply to its removal. Content may be re-inserted when it conforms to this policy."
  • In particular, decisions regarding linking to Off-Wiki Harassment should be mindful of the portions of BLP which discusses respecting the Privacy of Names, Birthdays, and Contact Information.

[edit] Point B

Links to pages of websites that routinely engage in the practices described in (A), but where the link is not to the specific webpage containing the offending material, are discouraged. In general, a site that engages in these practices is unlikely to fall within the usual definition of reliable sources for article content in any event. Links to such sites should be used, if at all, only where including the link contributes substantially to an article or discussion, and where no other citation for the same information can be reasonably be substituted without loss of content or comprehension.

Because:

  • WP:Reliable Sources says "Extremist sources: Organizations and individuals that are widely acknowledged as extremist, whether of a political, religious or anti-religious, racist, or other nature, should be used only as sources about themselves and their activities in articles about themselves, and even then with caution."
  • Wikipedia:Attribution#Primary_and_secondary_sources says: "Wikipedia articles should rely on reliable, published secondary sources wherever possible." Since websites that engage in the practices are invariably unreliable primary sources, citing them is generally discouraged.

[edit] Point C

Otherwise appropriate links to websites that do not generally engage in the practices described in (A) generally should not be removed because the website becomes engaged in an isolated or specific dispute with a Wikipedia editor, except in extreme circumstances. On the other hand, such links should not be added for an illegitimate purpose, such as the harassment of any editor.

Because:

  • WP:NPOV mandates that "All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing views fairly, proportionately and without bias." Removing otherwise appropriate links might, in some cases, be incompatible with the requirements of NPOV.
  • WP:EL says "Articles about any organization, person, web site, or other entity should link to the official site if any." In rare cases of highly notable websites, articles might need link to websites which contain criticism or attacks of Wikipedia or its editors.
  • WP:VANDALISM says "Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia." Vandalism might in some cases included links to off-wiki harassment added for illegitimate purposes. Vandalism may be removed immediately, and repeatedly vandalizing Wikipedia can constitute grounds for being blocked.
  • WP:Harassment says "Harassment is defined as a pattern of offensive behavior that appears to a reasonable observer to have the purpose of adversely affecting a targeted person or persons, usually (but not always) for the purpose of threatening or intimidating the primary target. The intended outcome may be to make editing Wikipedia unpleasant for the target, to undermine them, to frighten them, or to discourage them from editing entirely." Adding external links for the purpose of harassment can constitute grounds for being blocked.

[edit] Point D

This policy affects only webpages or websites that engage in "outing" or call for editors to be harassed. It has no application to sites that simply offer criticism of Wikipedia or its editors (whether or not our editors believe the criticism has merit), tease our editors without crossing the line into harassment, or the like, none of which are tantament to outing or harassment.

Because:

  • WP:NPOV mandates that "All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing views fairly, proportionately and without bias." Applying this policy to sites that simply criticize Wikipedia or it editors might, in some cases, be incompatible with the requirements of NPOV.

[edit] Point E

In deciding what links should be included in Wikipedia, the effect of including such links on our editors is a legitimate factor to be considered in the exercise of editorial discretion, although except as described above it is not the only factor to be considered.

Because:

  • Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons is applicable to ALL living persons, including those living persons who are also editors.
  • In particular, decisions regarding linking to Off-Wiki Harassment should be mindful of the portions of BLP which discusses respecting the Privacy of Names, Birthdays, and Contact Information.

[edit] For Example

[edit] For example

  Reliabilty   Notabilty   Intention   Frequency   Violation of Privacy
Links to include Highly Reliable OR Highly Notable OR Good-Faith Criticism OR Isolated Event OR Completely Respectful of Privacy
↕ ↕ ↕ ↕ ↕
Links to Exclude Unreliable AND Non-notable AND Intentional Harassment AND Systemic Campaign AND Extreme Privacy Violation
Relevant Policy WP:RS   WP:EL and WP:NOTABILITY   WP:HARASS   WP:HARASS   WP:BLP

The ideal example of a link to include would be a link to a reliable, notable source which is engaged in a good-faith attempt at criticism, while respecting the privacy of editors. For example, an New York Times article which, in an isolated event, criticizes the actions of a specific editor, but doesn't list his fullname/address/phone number.

The ideal example of a link to exlude would be a link to an unreliable and non-notable source engaged in a systemic campaign of harassment which violates the privacy of editors. For example, a disgruntled internet user has a blog posting that lists the names, address, and phone numbers of multiple editors and encourages harassment of them.