Electowiki talk:Policy

Relevance to election methods

I just notice, the list of all articles seems to be almost entirely comprised of articles related to the science of election methods. I suppose, then, that articles like Robert's Rules of Order,VIRV, and Virginia would be out of place here? What do you think?

Is there another wiki that would be better suited to organizing for electoral reform? 24.154.8.81 08:31, 9 November 2006 (PST)

Electowiki is a great place to talk about electoral reform. Please continue. -- RobLa 21:45, 12 November 2006 (PST)

Articles about living people (BLP policy)

Electowiki hasn't had a policy for articles about living people. Wikipedia has a very complicated Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP) policy, which has evolved over the past several years to avoid problems like the Seigenthaler incident and also frivilous SLAPP lawsuits from people who fail to understand the Streisand effect. It seems that pages about living persons on Electowiki should either be user pages (e.g. Rob Lanphier) or short summary articles in the main namespace that point to the Wikipedia articles. I believe the article about Steven Brams sets a very good example (it's short, and points to a much more detailed article about its subject).

The policy I would like to enact:

Pages about living persons on Electowiki in the main namespace need to be pointers to Wikipedia articles, unless otherwise approved by the Electowiki site administrators.

Psephomancy, do you agree with this policy? If so, then let's make this the policy as soon as possible (and let's figure out if/when/how we allow exceptions). -- RobLa (talk) 06:30, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

In general, I think that anything that can be covered on Wikipedia should just be covered there, since it will be read by more people, maintained by more people, and won't duplicate effort.

Warren Smith doesn't have an article there, for instance, and if one was created, it might be deleted for being "non-notable" (maybe, maybe not, depends what publications he's been mentioned in).

So should we cover it here instead? I don't know.

I certainly don't think we need any general biographical information, like about their family or sports accomplishments, etc. If anything exists here, it should be limited to only neutral and verifiable points that are related to election methods. (But even then, there could be neutral and verifiable facts about election reform organization drama that it's better not to mention.) — Psephomancy (talk) 15:19, 25 November 2019 (UTC)