[WikiEN-l] The problem with flagging things with {{office}}

Sat Apr 22 10:02:13 UTC 2006

On 4/20/06, James D. Forrester <james at jdforrester.org> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Using the {{office}} template to tag problem content is a nice idea,
> but, I would imagine, has a rather serious drawback: Wikitruth.info
> (amongst other 'helpful' critics) seems to have a sysop working for
> them. Were we to flag an article that was libellous with {{office}}, you
> can bet that they would go and dig out the deleted sections, and repost
> it to their wonderful service. Now Wikimedia has been informed that they
> are likely to be sued, and in response has done something knowing that
> it would increase the publication and spread of this libel. - we're then
> liable for their reposting of the content, and "utterly screwed". I
> know, I know, "that's not what was intended". Well, tough, that's the
> way the Real World(tm) works.

A small point, but you don't need to be an admin to access the deleted
material. You need to have a finger and be...you know....sentient. For
instance here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=NewsMax.com&oldid=48758172
is the NewsMax.com article and here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jack_Thompson_%28attorney%29&oldid=43110194
is Jack Thompson pre-office. The articles arn't deleted, just blanked.

--Oskar