Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
The header explaining that it is a policy is best at the top |
→Summary deletion, creation prevention, and courtesy blanking: Just clarifying |
||
| (10 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
<noinclude>{{pp-semi-indef}}{{pp-move-indef}}{{short description|Wikipedia policy on material about living persons}}{{For|the guideline on whether a person is sufficiently noteworthy to have an article|Wikipedia:Notability (people)}}
{{policy|WP:BLP
{{notice|{{strong|Report problems about particular biographical material on Wikipedia}} to the [[Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard|biographies of living persons noticeboard]]. {{xref|See also {{section link ||Dealing with articles about yourself}}, below.}}}}
{{nutshell|Material about living persons added to {{em|any}} Wikipedia page must be written with the greatest care and attention to [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiability]], [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view|neutrality]], and [[Wikipedia:No original research|avoidance of original research]].}}
Line 92:
==Presumption in favor of privacy==
===Avoid victimization===
{{Policy shortcut|WP:AVOIDVICTIM|WP:VICTIMIZE}}
When writing about a person noteworthy only for one or two events, including every detail can lead to problems—even when the material is well sourced. When in doubt, biographies should be pared back to a version that is completely sourced, neutral, and on-topic. This is of particular importance when dealing with living individuals whose notability stems largely or entirely from being victims of another's actions. Wikipedia editors must not act, intentionally or otherwise, in a way that amounts to participating in or prolonging the victimization.
Line 112:
===Privacy of personal information and using primary sources===
{{shortcut|WP:BLPPRIVACY|WP:DOB}}
{{see also|#Privacy of names}}▼
With [[identity theft]] a serious ongoing concern, many people regard their full names and dates of birth as private. Wikipedia includes full names and dates of birth that have been widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object to the details being made public. If a subject complains about our inclusion of their date of birth, or the person is borderline [[WP:N|notable]], err on the side of caution and simply list the year, provided that there is a reliable source for it. In a similar vein, articles should not include postal addresses, e-mail addresses, telephone numbers, or other contact information for living persons, although links to [[WP:ELOFFICIAL|websites maintained by the subject]] are generally permitted. See {{slink||Avoid misuse of primary sources}} regarding the misuse of primary sources to obtain personal information about subjects.
Line 118 ⟶ 117:
If multiple independent [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] state differing years or dates of birth in conflict, include all birth dates/years for which a reliable source exists, clearly noting discrepancies. In this situation, editors must not include only one date/year which they consider "most likely", or include merely a single date from one of two or more reliable sources. [[Wikipedia:No original research|Original research]] must not be used to extrapolate the date of birth.<ref>[[Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 165#People's birthdate, conflicting (reliable) sources, and WP:SYNTHESIS]]</ref>
A verified social media account of an article subject saying about themselves something along the lines of "today is my 50th birthday" may fall under [[Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published and questionable sources as sources on themselves|self-published sources]] for purposes of reporting a full date of birth. It may be usable if there is no reason to doubt it.<ref>[[Special:Permalink/1030363909#Tweets announcing "Happy birthday to me! I'm 21 today!"|June 2021, talk page discussion]]</ref>▼
If you see personal information such as phone numbers, addresses, account numbers, etc. in a BLP or anywhere on Wikipedia, edit the page to remove it and {{strong|[[WP:RFO|contact the oversight team]]}} so that they can evaluate it and possibly remove it from the page history. To reduce the chances of triggering the [[Streisand effect]], use a bland/generic edit summary and {{em|do not}} mention that you will be requesting Oversight.
▲A verified social media account of an article subject saying about themselves something along the lines of "today is my 50th birthday" may fall under [[Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published and questionable sources as sources on themselves|self-published sources]] for purposes of reporting a full date of birth. It may be usable if there is no reason to doubt it.<ref>[[Special:Permalink/1030363909#Tweets announcing "Happy birthday to me! I'm 21 today!"|June 2021, talk page discussion]]</ref>
{{shortcut|WP:BLPNAME|WP:LPNAME}}▼
Caution should be applied when identifying individuals who are discussed primarily in terms of a single event. When the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed, such as in certain court cases or occupations, it is often preferable to omit it, especially when doing so does not result in a significant loss of context. When deciding whether to include a name, its publication in secondary sources other than news media, such as scholarly journals or the work of recognized experts, should be afforded greater weight than the brief appearance of names in news stories. Consider whether the inclusion of names of living private individuals who are not directly involved in an article's topic adds significant value.▼
The presumption in favor of privacy is strong in the case of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved, otherwise low-profile persons. The names of any immediate, former, or significant family members or any significant relationship of the subject of a BLP may be part of an article, if reliably sourced, subject to editorial discretion that such information is relevant to a reader's complete understanding of the subject.{{efn|This is generally interpreted by the community to include the removal of names of non-notable minors from articles about their notable family members, such as when a notable individual births or sires a non-notable minor. Notability is not presumed or inherited with extremely limited exception (such as heir to a throne or similar).}} Names of family members who are not also notable public figures {{em|must}} be removed from an article if they are not properly sourced.▼
===Subjects notable only for one event===
Line 141 ⟶ 146:
If different judicial proceedings result in seemingly contradictory outcomes that do not overrule each other,{{efn|For example, [[O. J. Simpson]] was [[O. J. Simpson murder case|acquitted]] in 1995 of the murder of [[Nicole Brown Simpson]] and [[Ronald Goldman]], but was later found liable for their [[wrongful death]]s in a civil trial.}} include sufficient explanatory information.
▲{{shortcut|WP:BLPNAME|WP:LPNAME}}
▲Caution should be applied when identifying individuals who are discussed primarily in terms of a single event. When the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed, such as in certain court cases or occupations, it is often preferable to omit it, especially when doing so does not result in a significant loss of context. When deciding whether to include a name, its publication in secondary sources other than news media, such as scholarly journals or the work of recognized experts, should be afforded greater weight than the brief appearance of names in news stories. Consider whether the inclusion of names of living private individuals who are not directly involved in an article's topic adds significant value.
▲The presumption in favor of privacy is strong in the case of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved, otherwise low-profile persons. The names of any immediate, former, or significant family members or any significant relationship of the subject of a BLP may be part of an article, if reliably sourced, subject to editorial discretion that such information is relevant to a reader's complete understanding of the subject.{{efn|This is generally interpreted by the community to include the removal of names of non-notable minors from articles about their notable family members, such as when a notable individual births or sires a non-notable minor. Notability is not presumed or inherited with extremely limited exception (such as heir to a throne or similar).}} Names of family members who are not also notable public figures {{em|must}} be removed from an article if they are not properly sourced.
==Use in continued disputes <span class="anchor" id="Importation of off-wiki disputes into Wikipedia"></span> <span class="anchor" id="Using BLPs to continue disputes"></span>==
Line 185 ⟶ 184:
{{Policy shortcut|WP:BLPCRIMINAL|WP:BLPRACIST}}
{{Anchor|CRIMINAL|RACIST|SEXIST|EXTREMIST}}
Caution should be used with content categories that suggest a person has a poor reputation (see [[false light]]). For example, [[:Category:Criminals]] and its subcategories should be added only for an incident that is relevant to the person's [[WP:N|notability]]; the incident was published by reliable [[Wikipedia:Third-party sources|third-party sources]]; the subject was convicted; and the conviction was not overturned on appeal. Do not categorize biographies of living people under such contentious topics as [[:Category:Racism|racism]], [[:Category:Sexism|sexism]], [[:Category:Extremism|extremism]], and the like, since these have the effect of [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch#Contentious labels|labeling a person]] as a racist, sexist, or extremist. {{Crossref |(See also {{slink|Wikipedia:Overcategorization|Subjective inclusion criteria}} and {{slink|Wikipedia:Overcategorization|Opinion about a question or issue}}.)}}
Line 208 ⟶ 206:
{{tl|BLP}} alerting readers to this policy may be added to the talk pages of BLPs and other articles that focus on living persons. {{tl|Blpo}} is suitable for articles containing material on the deceased that also contains material about living persons. If a {{tl|WikiProject Biography}} template is present, you can add <code>|living=yes</code> to the template parameters. If a {{tl|WikiProject banner shell}} template is also present, add <code>|blp=yes</code> to it.
For articles, {{tl|BLP dispute}} may be used on BLPs needing attention; {{tl|BLP sources}} on BLPs needing better sourcing (an alternative is {{tl|BLP primary sources}}); and {{tl|BLP unsourced}} for those with no sources at all
For editors violating this policy, the following can be used to warn them on their talk pages:
Line 238 ⟶ 236:
===Dealing with articles about yourself===
{{shortcut|WP:BIOSELF|WP:BLPSELF|WP:BLPCOMPLAIN|WP:BLPCOMPLAINT}}
{{further|Wikipedia:Autobiography#Problems in an article about you|Wikipedia:FAQ/Article subjects}}
Wikipedia has editorial policies that will often help to resolve your concern, as well as many users willing to help and a wide range of escalation processes. Very obvious errors can be fixed quickly, including by yourself. But beyond that, post suggestions on the article talk page (''see [[Help:Talk pages]]''), or place {{tl|help me}} on your [[Special:MyTalk|user talk page]]. You may also post an explanation of your concern on the [[Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard|biographies of living persons noticeboard]] and ask that uninvolved editors evaluate the article to make sure it is fairly written and properly sourced.
If you are an article subject and you find the article about you contains your personal information or potentially libelous statements, {{strong|[[WP:RFO|contact the oversight team]]}} so that they can evaluate the issue and possibly [[WP:REVDEL|remove it from the page history]].
Please bear in mind that Wikipedia is almost entirely operated by volunteers; impolite or demanding behavior, even if entirely understandable, will often be less effective.
===Legal issues===
Line 282 ⟶ 280:
Biographical material about a living individual that is not compliant with this policy should be improved and rectified; if this is not possible, then it should be removed. If the entire page is substantially of poor quality, primarily containing contentious material that is unsourced or poorly sourced, then it may be necessary to delete the entire page as an initial step, followed by discussion if requested.
Page deletion is normally a last resort. If a dispute centers around a page's inclusion (e.g., because of questionable [[WP:N|notability]] or where the subject has requested deletion), this is addressed via [[WP:Deletion discussions|deletion discussions]] rather than by summary deletion. Summary deletion is appropriate when the page contains unsourced negative material or is written non-neutrally, and when this cannot readily be rewritten or restored to an earlier version of an acceptable standard. The deleting administrator should be prepared to explain the action to others, by e-mail if the material is sensitive. Those who object to the deletion should bear in mind that the deleting admin may be aware of issues that others are not. Disputes may be taken to [[WP:Deletion review|deletion review]], but protracted public discussion should be avoided for deletions involving sensitive personal material about living persons, particularly if it is negative. Such debates may be courtesy blanked upon conclusion. After the deletion, any administrator may choose to [[WP:Salting|protect it against re-creation]]. Even if the page is not protected against re-creation, it should not be re-created unless a consensus
====Relatively unknown subjects====
| |||