3 ms·
For living persons, Wikipedia takes misleading / contentious material quite seriously: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons htt
by ignoramous 5mo ago
For living persons, Wikipedia takes misleading / contentious material quite seriously: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_livin...
That said, Wikipedia is pretty unapologetic about its preference for verifiability, not truth: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability,_not_truth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability,_not_t...
- zeusdclxvi 5mo agoNo reliable secondary sources that you are still alive I'm afraid
- leoc 5mo agoTo be fair, there actually is an exception specifically for just this kind of thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:BLPSELFPUB https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:BLPSELF... .
- ralferoo 5mo agoThat policy itself seems wrong though. It seems to imply that anything someone claims about themselves on a personal blog doesn't need verification. People often have a vested interest to lie about themselves, and often people may not remember historical details about their lives as accurately as they believe they do. That said, "no really, I am still alive" seems like something that should be trusted as a source.
- ClikeX 5mo agoThey did add nuance to that quote a long time ago. It's a good stance, it's fine if someone knows something to be true. But other visitors of Wikipedia don't know that, so anything that's added without a source is questionable.