User:Zenswashbuckler/Thoughts on the Santorum Affair

I am sorry to see that the following disclaimer is necessary, so here it is.

This is intended as a page to gather my reflections on this powder keg. I do not intend it as a polemic, subtle or gross, against any editor, group of editors, class of editors, or any category of editors defined by editorial position, philosophy, faction, or any other conceivable means by which some may be inclined to see accusations where there are none. Even where I describe things/actions/edits that "appall," "dismay," "disappoint," "anger," or "sadden" me, I am nowhere assuming that the things/actions/edits are undertaken in anything but good faith.

If you think you see any patterns or kinds of editors/edits described here, you are wrong. Do not use this page as a bludgeon against editors you disagree with. If this page is being used as a bludgeon against you, I apologize (but you can see it's by someone who is willfully disregarding the first two rules of Fight Club, as it were).

Like any other userspace page or essay I will add and subtract occasionally, as I continue to evolve my thoughts and the ways in which I word them. I of course welcome comments here or here.

The War Between BLP Enforcement and WP:AGF

It is beginning to be disturbingly easy to disregard AGF when BLP is in play. I am dismayed by a position taken by some editors who believe santorum is a BLP violation. Some editors claim it is inconsistent to want to keep the santorum article while arguing for the deletion of Lewinsky (neologism). I'm not sure about all the particulars, but it looks like the belief is that anyone wanting to keep santorum but delete lewinsky is guilty of IDONTLIKE Rick Santorum and ILIKE either Bill Clinton or Monica Lewinsky (or at least IDONTLIKE Ken Starr).

This position is predicated on the belief that both of these articles objectively constitute BLP violations, and that no other interpretation is possible. There is no room there for disagreement. For some editors, both articles are so obviously BLPvios that there is no way an honest person could argue with a straight face that they aren't. And instead of realizing that the existence of so much disagreement means that perhaps they may not be BLPvios, all that some can see is a rising tide of bias that is sending the project to hell in a handbasket.

I understand that if you believe BLP is being violated, it's hard to see consistency in a position that argues to keep one and delete the other. But if BLP is not being violated, it comes down to WP:V and WP:NOTE, and on those terms it's easily possible that one article should be kept while the other is deleted. If you cannot understand how it's possible to see no BLP violations in these articles, I urge you to take another look. You don't have to agree that there are none, but if we can't assume each other's good faith, the entire project is doomed.