News agencies are not RSs

[Gwern Branwen]

'Keeping News of Kidnapping Off Wikipedia'
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/29/technology/internet/29wiki.html

"A dozen times, user-editors posted word of the kidnapping on
Wikipedia’s page on Mr. Rohde, only to have it erased. Several times
the page was frozen, preventing further editing — a convoluted game of
cat-and-mouse that clearly angered the people who were trying to
spread the information of the kidnapping."
...
"The sanitizing was a team effort, led by Jimmy Wales, co-founder of
Wikipedia, along with Wikipedia administrators and people at The
Times. In an interview, Mr. Wales said that Wikipedia’s cooperation
was not a given.
“We were really helped by the fact that it hadn’t appeared in a place
we would regard as a reliable source,” he said. “I would have had a
really hard time with it if it had.”"
...
"The Wikipedia page history shows that the next day, Nov. 13, someone
without a user name edited the entry on Mr. Rohde for the first time
to include the kidnapping. Mr. Moss deleted the addition, and the same
unidentified user promptly restored it, adding a note protesting the
removal. The unnamed editor cited an Afghan news agency report. In the
first few days, at least two small news agencies and a handful of
blogs reported the kidnapping. "
...
" When the news broke Saturday, the user from Florida reposted the
information, with a note to administrators that said: “Is that enough
proof for you [expletives]? I was right. You were WRONG.”"

--
gwern

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[geni]

2009/6/29 Gwern Branwen <gwern0@...>:
> “We were really helped by the fact that it hadn’t appeared in a place
> we would regard as a reliable source,” he said. “I would have had a
> really hard time with it if it had.”"
> ...

The question is though is is
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pajhwok_Afghan_News genuinely not a
reliable source?



--
geni

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[Sam Blacketer]

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 4:55 PM, geni <geniice@...> wrote:

> 2009/6/29 Gwern Branwen <gwern0@...>:
> > “We were really helped by the fact that it hadn’t appeared in a place
> > we would regard as a reliable source,” he said. “I would have had a
> > really hard time with it if it had.”"
> > ...
>
> The question is though is is
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pajhwok_Afghan_News genuinely not a
> reliable source?


What was that underlying principle which was codified after the Brian
Peppers deletion debates? Ah yes, 'basic human dignity', now to be found at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Basic_dignity.

This case is more about basic common sense. If someone's life may be
endangered by what is on their wikipedia biography but is not widely
reported elsewhere, I would expect that anyone sensible would find some way
of applying policy so as to keep the life-endangering stuff off it. And that
would take precedence over secondary arguments over whether obscure news
agencies were reliable.

--
Sam Blacketer
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[geni]

2009/6/29 Sam Blacketer <sam.blacketer@...>:
> This case is more about basic common sense.

I'm not interested in the collection of prejudices you acquired by the
age of 18. They are a poor substitute for logic, evidence and reason.

> If someone's life may be
> endangered by what is on their wikipedia biography but is not widely
> reported elsewhere, I would expect that anyone sensible would find some way
> of applying policy so as to keep the life-endangering stuff off it. And that
> would take precedence over secondary arguments over whether obscure news
> agencies were reliable.

If editors were not concerned with the reliability of the news agency
they should just cite BLP on the basis that it's pretty much
impossible to show that any given edit doesn't violate it and the side
effects of rule lawyering with it are likely to be more limited.
Lightly labeling a source unreliable is problematical.


--
geni

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[David Gerard-2]

2009/6/29 geni <geniice@...>:

> Lightly labeling a source unreliable is problematical.


There is no evidence this has ever stopped anyone on Wikipedia from doing so.


- d.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[Steve Summit]

Sam Blacketer wrote:
> This case is more about basic common sense...

Well, no.  This case is about whether an editor at (in this case)
The New York Times can successfully collude with editors of other
major media outlets, for the best of reasons, to keep a certain
fact out of the media for N months.  And can this still be done
when one of the other media outlets has 1,000,000 cats as editors,
who actively resist herding, and especially when someone's trying
to suppress some information that "wants to be free".

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[Jussi-Ville Heiskanen]

geni wrote:

> 2009/6/29 Gwern Branwen <gwern0@...>:
>  
>> “We were really helped by the fact that it hadn’t appeared in a place
>> we would regard as a reliable source,” he said. “I would have had a
>> really hard time with it if it had.”"
>> ...
>>    
>
> The question is though is is
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pajhwok_Afghan_News genuinely not a
> reliable source?
>
>
>
>  

If it isn't perhaps it should be removed from the four
other articles that use it as a source.


Yours,

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[Jussi-Ville Heiskanen]

Sam Blacketer wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 4:55 PM, geni <geniice@...> wrote:
>
>  
>> 2009/6/29 Gwern Branwen <gwern0@...>:
>>    
>>> “We were really helped by the fact that it hadn’t appeared in a place
>>> we would regard as a reliable source,” he said. “I would have had a
>>> really hard time with it if it had.”"
>>> ...
>>>      
>> The question is though is is
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pajhwok_Afghan_News genuinely not a
>> reliable source?
>>    
>
>
> What was that underlying principle which was codified after the Brian
> Peppers deletion debates? Ah yes, 'basic human dignity', now to be found at
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Basic_dignity.
>
> This case is more about basic common sense. If someone's life may be
> endangered by what is on their wikipedia biography but is not widely
> reported elsewhere, I would expect that anyone sensible would find some way
> of applying policy so as to keep the life-endangering stuff off it. And that
> would take precedence over secondary arguments over whether obscure news
> agencies were reliable.
>
>  

Apparently the news agency is the top of its local area
(Afghanistan), so how you spin that into "obscure" is
frankly beyond me.


Yours,

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[Fred Bauder-2]

> Sam Blacketer wrote:
>> This case is more about basic common sense...
>
> Well, no.  This case is about whether an editor at (in this case)
> The New York Times can successfully collude with editors of other
> major media outlets, for the best of reasons, to keep a certain
> fact out of the media for N months.  And can this still be done
> when one of the other media outlets has 1,000,000 cats as editors,
> who actively resist herding, and especially when someone's trying
> to suppress some information that "wants to be free".
>

When someone's life is at stake, Ignore all rules actually kicks in. I
have no problem whatever with what the Times or Jimbo did.

Fred



_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[Fred Bauder-2]

> 2009/6/29 geni <geniice@...>:
>
>> Lightly labeling a source unreliable is problematical.
>
>
> There is no evidence this has ever stopped anyone on Wikipedia from doing
> so.
>
>
> - d.
>

Yes, but now we should definitely take another look. Most likely it's a
reasonably good source, just not in the Western news loop the New York
Times is depending on. I'm proud to have Wikipedia in that loop, when
appropriate. That doesn't mean that when The New York Times goes to the
White House and gets orders to cover up some pernicious US plot that we
should obey, assuming we have any way of knowing. We did not seem to be
able to sort out the truth about Iraq. Hard to do so when you can almost
always rely on the New York Times.

Fred


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[geni]

2009/6/29 Fred Bauder <fredbaud@...>:
> When someone's life is at stake, Ignore all rules actually kicks in.

The government of Iran has made it fairly clear that further protests
carry the risks of further deaths. It's also fairly clear that the
protests in part at least are aimed at gaining western media coverage.
If they fail at that they are likely to stop more quickly. Should we
remove our content on the Iranian elections? After all lives are at
stake.

--
geni

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[WJhonson]

Can someone explain how reporting that he was kidnapped would endanger his
life?  At least how would it endanger it any further than the kidnapping in
the first place?

Will





**************
Make your summer sizzle with fast and easy recipes for the
grill. (http://food.aol.com/grilling?ncid=emlcntusfood00000005)
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[Sage Ross]

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 2:35 PM, <WJhonson@...> wrote:
> Can someone explain how reporting that he was kidnapped would endanger his
> life?  At least how would it endanger it any further than the kidnapping in
> the first place?
>

It would raise his profile, indicate that Western media had taken
notice of the kidnapping, and therefore raise his value to the
kidnappers (either his value as a negotiating chip or his symbolic
value if executed).

-Sage (User:Ragesoss)

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[Risker]

2009/6/29 <WJhonson@...>

> Can someone explain how reporting that he was kidnapped would endanger his
> life?  At least how would it endanger it any further than the kidnapping in
> the first place?
>
> Will
>
>
> It would raise the price of his release. It would encourage deeper digging
into his background, which could make him appear to be more of an "infidel"
and thus less worthy of basic human dignity, potentially subjected to
greater physical and mental privations. (Kidnappees who are considered to
be aligned with other nemeses are treated more harshly.) It would increase
the danger to those who were kidnapped with him, if they were perceived to
have been working for an infidel, and he and his fellow kidnappees would be
more likely to be executed as "examples" to others.

Risker
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[WJhonson]

In a message dated 6/29/2009 11:42:48 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
ragesoss+wikipedia@... writes:


> It would raise his profile, indicate that Western media had taken
> notice of the kidnapping, and therefore raise his value to the
> kidnappers (either his value as a negotiating chip or his symbolic
> value if executed).>>
>

----------------------

So we're now going to set a "higher" moral position than any other
information outlet does?  Because I'm pretty darn sure that they would report it, if
they had a reliable source from which to do so.

Or maybe someone can point out another situation where an information
outlet suppressed information of this import because it might "endanger someone's
life".  I'm not talking about outing secret agents here.

Will




**************
Make your summer sizzle with fast and easy recipes for the
grill. (http://food.aol.com/grilling?ncid=emlcntusfood00000005)
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[WJhonson]

So instead what we did, instead of merely reporting it and moving on, is to
make it into another front-page example of Wikipedia censorship, so it can
go around the world in the opposite direction as well.  And for twice as
long.

Smart thinking.  Let's raise the profile by trying to suppress it.
Has.. that.. ever... worked... before?
No it hasn't.

Will





**************
Make your summer sizzle with fast and easy recipes for the
grill. (http://food.aol.com/grilling?ncid=emlcntusfood00000005)
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[Risker]

2009/6/29 <WJhonson@...>

> In a message dated 6/29/2009 11:42:48 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> ragesoss+wikipedia@... <ragesoss%2Bwikipedia@...> writes:
>
>
> > It would raise his profile, indicate that Western media had taken
> > notice of the kidnapping, and therefore raise his value to the
> > kidnappers (either his value as a negotiating chip or his symbolic
> > value if executed).>>
> >
>
> ----------------------
>
> So we're now going to set a "higher" moral position than any other
> information outlet does?  Because I'm pretty darn sure that they would
> report it, if
> they had a reliable source from which to do so.
>
> Or maybe someone can point out another situation where an information
> outlet suppressed information of this import because it might "endanger
> someone's
> life".  I'm not talking about outing secret agents here.
>
> Will
>
>
>
> The reporter's kidnapping was well known amongst the Western media, but was

deliberately not reported, often at the request of the New York Times.
Similar situations have happened involving Canadian reporters and members of
NGOs who have been kidnapped; there is usually no report until they are
either released, escaped from captivity, or executed.  In almost every case,
the news media has been well aware of the situation and has a report ready
to run once safety/death is confirmed.

Risker
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[Sage Ross]

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 2:47 PM, <WJhonson@...> wrote:
>
> So we're now going to set a "higher" moral position than any other
> information outlet does?  Because I'm pretty darn sure that they would report it, if
> they had a reliable source from which to do so.

No.  In fact, the New York Times contacted a wide range of mainstream
media organizations (NPR, other national papers, etc.) to coordinate
the media blackout.  See
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=105775059

-Sage

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[Fred Bauder-2]

> In a message dated 6/29/2009 11:42:48 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> ragesoss+wikipedia@... writes:
>
>
>> It would raise his profile, indicate that Western media had taken
>> notice of the kidnapping, and therefore raise his value to the
>> kidnappers (either his value as a negotiating chip or his symbolic
>> value if executed).>>
>>
>
> ----------------------
>
> So we're now going to set a "higher" moral position than any other
> information outlet does?  Because I'm pretty darn sure that they would
> report it, if
> they had a reliable source from which to do so.
>
> Or maybe someone can point out another situation where an information
> outlet suppressed information of this import because it might "endanger
> someone's
> life".  I'm not talking about outing secret agents here.
>
> Will
>

Easily done; news of the D-Day invasion was suppressed.

Fred


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[geni]

2009/6/29 Sage Ross <ragesoss+wikipedia@...>:

> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 2:35 PM, <WJhonson@...> wrote:
>> Can someone explain how reporting that he was kidnapped would endanger his
>> life?  At least how would it endanger it any further than the kidnapping in
>> the first place?
>>
>
> It would raise his profile, indicate that Western media had taken
> notice of the kidnapping, and therefore raise his value to the
> kidnappers (either his value as a negotiating chip or his symbolic
> value if executed).
>
> -Sage (User:Ragesoss)

We are not the western media and that page gets under 500 views a month.

--
geni

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l