Hacker News Reader

For living persons, Wikipedia takes misleading / contentious material quite seriously: 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_t...

View on HN

No reliable secondary sources that you are still alive I'm afraid

To be fair, there actually is an exception specifically for just this kind of thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:BLPSELF... .

That 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.

They 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.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com