[WikiEN-l] More Seigenthaler fallout

Mon Dec 12 22:51:41 UTC 2005

Well, I guarantee this gentleman is going to come back from his block tonight around 11:45 PM EDT, and start talking about all this stuff again, including his feelings about Mr. Lavergne.  What happens then when the discussion that needs to be excised is an active concern?  It's easy enough to remove comments that are 5 months old and nobody's still whanging on about them, but in this situation -- I mean, should we just erase his comments every time he puts them back up?  Do we get into the business, then, of censoring someone actively whenever he broaches this subject?  And I feel certain that he will.  (I don't mean these questions rhetorically, and I myself have no answers...)

K.

----- Original Message ----
From: Guettarda <guettarda at gmail.com>
To: Katefan0 <katefan0 at yahoo.com>; English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2005 5:45:35 PM
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] More Seigenthaler fallout

    The article doesn't contain this speculative information currently, although at one time Subwayjack did insert it and it was summarily deleted (Inserting edit here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Charles_Whitman&diff=30745179&oldid=30739441).  It does remain on the talk page, and I suppose in the article's page history. What's the general feeling about how to proceed?  I don't think a person's comments on the talk page can be considered libellous, but maybe it's advisable to delete that edit from the article itself's revision history. 

K.

Kate - my feeling would be to remove the information from the talk page.  There seem to be a lot of complaints about material on talk pages because search engines can find them.  If it looks really bad, the edit history might be worth removing too, but as long as it's on the talk page it's likely to remain an issue. 

Ian (Guettarda)