View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Tue May 21, 2019 12:29 am




Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 
Deleting BLPs on request 
Author Message
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am
Posts: 1900
Reply with quote
https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewto ... 35#p237274

Newyorkbrad wrote:
A universal right to opt out has been rejected, as Wikipedia will not agree to delete articles on clearly notable people. (I can readily imagine a request to delete the BLP of [[Donald Trump]], for example, if that were allowed.) However, the BLP policy now incorporates a rule that when a BLP is nominated for deletion and there is no consensus on keeping or deleting, the subject's known preference for deletion can tip the balance in favor of deleting, as opposed to the usual rule that "no consensus" defaults to "keep." I'm not sure how often this has actually been invoked and applied, though.

@Newyorkbrad, the problem is WMF/Wikipedia have not any jurisdiction! Neighter has there CC licence so all that Wikipedia consensus, decisions, point of view are just fur die bühne, for there own stage. Because, they are just some shitty American foundation with a big mouth and a lot of arrogance and to much money and that is all.

Because if you do what I did, with my knowledge of my succesfull Kindergarten education I had a close look in the base of all that wiki-wisdom and consensus and CC licences with there "copyleft", you find out it is all based on nothing. You have find something out no one on this earth noticed before according to Whaledad. Yes, that is what he said to me once.
You have noticed something no one on this planet had noticed before. And you want to know what I found out, Ira? I found out that wiki Emperor is total fake. Yes Ira, that is what I found out.
Because they are no lawmakers, they have not any jurisdiction and for sure no Mondial, there CC licence and copyrightleft is total bull shit and here we are.

And now they are all saying I a have a massive mental defect and I am complete crazy and not real. Weird, isn't it? Should I really be mad or just being right? Well, you are a partner in a law firm, you may give the answer. Was I right all the time Isa and real, or am I just that complete crazy mental wreak who things he is the son of that long ago died and forgotten professor?

_________________
Mijn blog. (In Dutch) of kom eens gezellig bij de Kolonel langs in Eerbeek.
En kijk eens hier, het "Verboden" lijstje van door mij aangemaakte artiklen.

. Image
.Winner of
The SanBan


Mon Apr 29, 2019 8:53 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2018 8:50 pm
Posts: 2357
Reply with quote
The policy says.....
Quote:
Discussions concerning biographical articles of relatively unknown, non-public figures, where the subject has requested deletion and there is no rough consensus, may be closed as delete.
It is worthless. Jess Wade created an article on Kate Bouman because "She is obviously notable enough to have a profile on here." as well as other similarly policy void reasons.

By any reasonable measure, Bouman is not a public figure, and even after that blaze of unwanted publicity, is not a well known figure. By any reasonable measure, she would prefer not to have a Wikipedia biography.......
Quote:
I’m so glad that everyone is as excited as we are and people are finding our story inspirational.......However, the spotlight should be on the team and no individual person. Focusing on one person like this helps no one, including me.


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/11/scie ... -hole.html

It will never be deleted. Even if she specifically asked. She has been given a life sentence by the Wikipedia community. You are notable, you are an inspirational figure, you will be Googleable forever and ever, whether you like it or not. Social media has spoken, Wikipedia answered. Wade takes requests to create new victims via social media. Because why wouldn't that be how such momentous life altering decisions are made?


Mon Apr 29, 2019 9:45 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am
Posts: 1900
Reply with quote
And mister Newyorkbrad, a partner at Ganfer Shore Leeds & Zauderer should not understand the first one who comrade a complain in Europe by the privacy authorities would crumble the complete Wikipedia dream?

In general WMF's shield of wiki legal tricks in Europe does't work. There is no section 230, there is a Lindenbaum-Cohen arrest, unwritten law, unlawful act, the civilian always has a kick-start because a organisation is suppose to be professional, summon the other part is legal suicide, extreme strict deformation laws, with copivio on a large scale you can end up in prison, no, I don't think there "governing by shitstrom" was very wise in Europe.
And, it was of course really bad luck Lomax owns nothing. I mean, you can start a trail agains him but what do you want to reach? Confiscating his canary cage?

How stupide can people be!

_________________
Mijn blog. (In Dutch) of kom eens gezellig bij de Kolonel langs in Eerbeek.
En kijk eens hier, het "Verboden" lijstje van door mij aangemaakte artiklen.

. Image
.Winner of
The SanBan


Mon Apr 29, 2019 12:29 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 8:20 am
Posts: 1900
Reply with quote
Here a similar discussion in the Dutch Village Pump:

https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... _te_worden

Quote:
Verzoeken voor verwijderen van een artikel kunnen wij op basis van onze eigen relevantie criteria behandelen. Indien men een aanvraag doet, en zich baseert op juridische gronden, dan kan je de persoon doorverwijzen naar de legal department van de Wikimedia Foundation in de Verenigde Staten. Juridische verzoeken worden standaard afgewezen, naar ik dacht omdat de wetgeving ons uitzonderd (maar ik ben hierin niet opgeleid), tenzij het een uitzonderlijke situatie betreft, bv levensgevaar. Mvg, Taketa (overleg) 28 apr 2019 17:44 (CEST)



Taketa, student medicine or he just have finished his study. Wikimedia pure san.
.......dan kan je de persoon doorverwijzen naar de legal department van de Wikimedia Foundation in de Verenigde Staten. Juridische verzoeken worden standaard afgewezen.

Just send someone to the foundation in America who'll reject every legal request.

A Docter! Talking like a child of four years old! Just bury the dead body in the garden of the neighbours, problem solved.
European regulation! If the authorities found out what they are doing is there complete Dutch wikipedia in no time out of the air and are they explaining to the judge why it is problem for them to spent the next five years in jail! They simple don't understand WMF and the legal department is a big nothing without a plan B! They think they have build a perfect legal shield but at the moment someone break through that shield there is nothing left! No, nothing, no any protection, no insurance will pay, no legal assistance except from a few wikiidiots, nobody will pay your damage and YOU are responsible! You are on your one and complete lost!

_________________
Mijn blog. (In Dutch) of kom eens gezellig bij de Kolonel langs in Eerbeek.
En kijk eens hier, het "Verboden" lijstje van door mij aangemaakte artiklen.

. Image
.Winner of
The SanBan


Mon Apr 29, 2019 3:40 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 4 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group ColorizeIt.
Designed by ST Software.