User talk:Sirex98
If I have posted a question on your talk page, I would be appreciative if you would reply there, and vice versa, so as to keep the conversation in one place. Thank you!
 |
The Wikipedia Signpost
|
[edit] Requesting advice
Heyas, Sirex98! Long time, no see; I hope you're doing well. May I request your advice regarding one of the edits you recently reverted? I have noticed that occasionally some edits are completely removed from Wikipedia's archive if they're deemed offensive or damaging enough, but for the life of my I can't find the page detailing that policy. I believe you know which page I would like to apply it to. All the best. JaeDyWolf ~ Baka-San (talk) 14:22, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- Do you mean the Nguyen article? This addition was missing sources " His children come wide and far and so do the mistresses that he buys with his wealth"
If WP:RS are added then that's a different story. WP:BLP tells us "We must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high quality sources. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be explicitly attributed to a reliable, published source, which is usually done with an inline citation. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." is why removed the content, do you disagree?▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 18:09, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
-
- I'm not disagreeing in the slightest; I was looking for an advice page detailing when it's appropriate to request for an admin to remove the edit entirely. Whilst writing this comment I double-checked a couple of pages and believe I've found what I'm looking for: WP:CRD. Specifically, under section 2. I know there's a lot of speculation regarding Nguyen, but it is all merely that. This would be my first time submitting a request of this nature so I'd appreciate you telling me whether you agree that this is what the facility is for. Thanks for your time once again! JaeDyWolf ~ Baka-San (talk) 19:15, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- I think I'm in the same boat as you :), I hadn't made such a request before. I'm not sure if the Nguyen edit meets the threshold of a redaction or not, You might want to ask Ballonman (as he has been an admin for quite some time) who may have a better idea then me on if a redaction is necessary over a revert.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 20:08, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- Many articles experience BLP violaitons, but unless the edit is so egregiously offensive that it indisputably needs to be removed, it is usually not oversighted. The only time that edits are made impossible to see is if it contained specific false information or was so offensive as to challenge cultural norms at a primal level. There are several reasons for not deleting every occurance of vandalism; but it boils down to being able to view a complete history of edits.
- For example, I don't know if the two of you remember a case from a few years ago where somebody made some highly inflamatory hate speach or something on wikipedia using an IP address. They were able to identify the person who made the edits because they had previously vandalized an article using their real name.
- Another reason for keeping the information is so that people who get bad information can investigate it. Can you imagine reading the above live today. Having a discussion about it, somebody challenges you, so you come back to wikipedia and its no longer there. "But it was there, I swear it." Then you go through the history and can't find it because it had been oversighted? By having the deleted record there with a note that it was vandalism/unfounded, if gives you a better sense that the community is watching the articles and involved. It also lets you know that you weren't crazy when you can't find something you know was there.
- In short, I wouldn't revdel the above comment.---Balloonman Poppa Balloon 15:32, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
- Those are some really good points Balloonman Thank you for the reply. ▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 15:44, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
- I think I'm in the same boat as you :), I hadn't made such a request before. I'm not sure if the Nguyen edit meets the threshold of a redaction or not, You might want to ask Ballonman (as he has been an admin for quite some time) who may have a better idea then me on if a redaction is necessary over a revert.▪◦▪≡SiREX≡Talk 20:08, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not disagreeing in the slightest; I was looking for an advice page detailing when it's appropriate to request for an admin to remove the edit entirely. Whilst writing this comment I double-checked a couple of pages and believe I've found what I'm looking for: WP:CRD. Specifically, under section 2. I know there's a lot of speculation regarding Nguyen, but it is all merely that. This would be my first time submitting a request of this nature so I'd appreciate you telling me whether you agree that this is what the facility is for. Thanks for your time once again! JaeDyWolf ~ Baka-San (talk) 19:15, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your reply from me, too. I certainly feel I understand the policy better. All the best to the both of you. JaeDyWolf ~ Baka-San (talk) 16:32, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
