Wikipedia talk:Responsible Editing Pledge

Wrong title
I would hope that responsible editing extends far beyond what an editor does on BLP-related articles. I have some other concerns about this too - do you visualise it applying to all biographical information on living individuals, regardless of the article? If so, then that essentially eliminates pseudonymous or IP editing on most contemporaneous subjects - politics, social issues, historical or current events involving real people, and so on. Here's the nub, though: anyone whose personal ethics would lead them to sign this page is also ethical enough not to have been damaging BLP articles in the first place. I do agree with several of your other proposals, however, and I greatly appreciate and respect your work in this area. Risker (talk) 15:56, 23 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I personally think that the BLP rule should apply to any article that mentions a living person and that this can be applied through the talk page tag, as for instance here. Thanks, SqueakBox 22:16, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Why I would like to sign but am unable to
I'd love to sign the pledge but I have deliberately removed any link to me real life identity after getting trolled by members of a fringe group editing articles that are not living biographies. I am not willing to expose myself any more to these people and it has taken a lot of effort to hide my identity from the general public who read wikipedia, nor do I want to use any sockpuppets because it is much easier and more upfront for me to edit with my primary account, and many people do know my identity through this, nor do I wish to stop adding material to biographies as some are uncontroversial and for instance if Boris Johnson becomes London's Mayor next month I want to add information like this. One person whose controversial article I edit including additions and who hates anon editors has thanked me for revealing my identity to him, but I am fine doing that, what i am not fine to do is to reveal it to everybody. So I wish the pledge was slightly different, i certainly think pledging ourselves to editing BLP ina sensitive way is a great idea, though. Thanks, SqueakBox 19:00, 23 April 2008 (UTC)


 * And on reflection I signed anyway (by revealing my identity). I do hope we can get lots more peopple to make this commitment. Thanks, SqueakBox 21:39, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
 * My hat is off to you. See also my blog, where I opine about this matter. ++Lar: t/c 01:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

No
I pledge to edit responsibly, whether on BLP's or any other article. I will continue to do so anonymously. This page has a very narrow focus, and by exclusion gives the impression that to act different is to edit irresponsibly. While we don't have the disadvantages of journalists and authors, we don't have the advantages either (being paid, having organisations behind you which support you in case of harassment, court cases, ...). Perhaps this essay should be renamed to "accountable editing pledge" or something similar? As it stands, it is unintentionally offensive to those who have edited BLPs responsibly but anonymously for years and will continue to do so. Fram (talk) 08:44, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't agree that it's offensive, deliberately or unintentionally, at all. But then I'm not anonymous. As an essay, you're not obliged to follow it, agree with it, or sign it... you should feel free to craft another essay that puts your point forward and see who signs it instead of (or in addition to) this one. ++Lar: t/c 13:58, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree that it is certainly not deliberately offensive, I respect Doc (and you and the others who have signed) way too much to think that that could have been the intention. I know that it is an essay, not a policy or guideline, but I do believe it is better to discuss it here than to write a counter-essay. Anonymous editing is one of the cornerstones of Wikipedia, setting it apart from e.g. Citizendium. If one of the arguments is that people shouldn't be able to write potentially libelous stuff without liability or accountability, then I think a possible solution may be (in my case, perhaps in general) that I disclose my name, address, and whatever else needed to some trusted body (the Foundation, Jimbo, or Elle MacPherson :-)): but if the idea is that if you want to edit a BLP, you have to give up your anonimity for everybody to see, then I strongly object and would see this as a solution which is worse than the problem (and I'm not saying that there is no problem with BLPs, obviously). Fram (talk) 14:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I put this blog post forward to elaborate on why I think that maybe anonymity is no longer a good idea for BLPs. I'm certainly not saying I know all the answers, and I would be delighted to be wrong. ++Lar: t/c 16:11, 25 April 2008 (UTC)