Wikipedia:Central aspects of BLP
 | This is an essay on the Biographies of Living Persons policy. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
Central aspects of the Biographies of Living Persons policy
For all practical purposes, the WP:BLP policy has devolved into bureaucratic minutae. In reality, BLP started as an application of the principle of Primum non nocere, "first, do no harm". Here is the WP:IAR interpretation of BLP--violations of this subset of core BLP principles should always result in appropriate action--generally, the least necessary response needed to take such material out and keep it out of the encyclopedia.
- 1. Can I envision a situation where [the material in question] will cause real harm to a currently living person?
- 2. Is the sourcing supporting [the material in question] ironclad, rock solid, or otherwise unassailable?
| Response matrix | Question 2: Yes | Question 2: No |
|---|---|---|
| Question 1: Yes | It generally stays in.[1] | Blank it, oversight it, nuke it... whatever it takes. |
| Question 1: No | It stays in, period. | Remove it via normal means. No 3RR exemption, etc. applies. |
Thus, the rest of WP:BLP amounts to collected thoughts and commentaries on...
- What is "real harm" to a living person?
- How likely or plausible does such potential harm have to be in order to take action?
- What is unassailable sourcing?
- And, finally, shouldn't this also apply to positive stuff too, per WP:NPOV?
... Which are all perfectly fine questions for debate, discussion, and developing consensus.
But they're not CORE BLP. Clear harm to living persons, caused by poor sourcing of serious allegations in Wikipedia, is CORE BLP.
Notes
[edit]- ^ Unless Jimbo and/or Arbcom overrule things, a la Star Wars Kid