[WikiEN-l] Corporate vanity policy enforcement

• Previous message: [WikiEN-l] Corporate vanity policy enforcement
• Next message: [WikiEN-l] Corporate vanity policy enforcement
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I've replaced the G11 that was added with (what I think is) a
better-worded A9. The current text of it (assuming no reverts) is:

'Vanity articles. An article about a real person or corporation which
appears to have been written by the subject, by one of its employees, or
by a third party hired by the subject to write the article, regardless
of the notability or otherwise of the subject.'


This solves the concern that admins would use the 'shoot on sight' as an
excuse to delete good articles which they thought were 'non-notable'. My
 A9 draft makes it clear that an article has to be a VANITY article to
qualify - and that its notability is not the issue. Thoughts anyone?

Cynical
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFH9sgg8fvtQYQevcRAmHjAJ9OfegOxx5wQVXieU7Bla0pNuQNyQCfWcWh
a7AdDdrBs+IOuAT8jcS8T6I=
=VXIC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

• Previous message: [WikiEN-l] Corporate vanity policy enforcement
• Next message: [WikiEN-l] Corporate vanity policy enforcement
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]