Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Header

Clarification of "enforcement instructions"
At this diff an editor removed as "Instruction creep" the clarification I added to this sentence (in italics):
 * All editors are encouraged to assist fellow editors regarding the reports below. Administrators should review enforcement instructions regarding sanctioning editors who willfully violate policy.

I believe this is important information that needs adding for the following reasons: Thoughts? User:Carolmooredc  23:39, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I see there was more information in the past, i.e., Feb 2011: Administrators taking actions they consider to be "special enforcement" may wish to note this in the enforcement log. which was removed only here on April 27, 2013 with the unenlightening edit summary: (part of merging blp special enforcement and editing restrictions)
 * Administrators and editors need to know this arbitration happened and this policy exists. I've spent 1/4 of my time on Wikipedia since 2008 dealing with attacks on BLPs by editors who hate the subject of the bio. I've been to BLPN many times. Yet only in the last
 * Somehow I chanced upon a relevant discussion somewhere that made me aware that the Biographies of living persons/Administrator instructions arbitration or logs even existed.
 * Given my frustration with the lax enforcement of BLP policy I've unwatched almost all the BLPs I've watched which were constantly vandalized by Anon IPs and/or POV editors. I'm sure many editors have gotten equally frustrated, and administrators even have felt powerless, because this Arbitration and enforcement sanctions regimes were unknown to them.
 * I do believe that Wikipedia eventually could face a class action lawsuit charging Wikipedia Foundation malfeasance if some creepy-assed lawyers ever decided to put one together with 30 or 40 aggrieved subjects of bios. All they have to do is search throughout the BLP policy, BLPN and its header, ANI and other relevant pages and they could do a real big case based on copious written evidence. (As a DC legal secretary for 15 odd years, I've seen such suits on far less grounds. So let's try to do what we can to not encourage the greedy "diff chasers"...)
 * Discussion taking place here. Please do not open up duplicate discussion in multiple venues on the same issue. It makes it difficult for people to follow and obfuscates things. Only in death does duty end (talk) 23:56, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * What was I thinking taking another editor's advice from BLPNoticeboard Talk. Mea culpa. I give up on the topic. User:Carolmooredc  11:56, 11 July 2013 (UTC)