English wiki Unsourced BLP Drama Pragmatic Review

For point 3.

I start an unsourced BLP clean-up driven within my project. I have a relative control on How we fix them, At what pace we fix them and Which one to fix first. From the moment the compromise is enacted, i relinquish part or all the control i have on the clean-up agenda and is put in the position of the one reacting instead of having the initiative. Because the clean-up is under way in my project, i don't feel in hurry to see a compromise made. I won't do delaying action, just that i won't pressure both sides and go to a corner watching the bouts and keeping the score. Meanwhile my project is fixing the articles at its own paces.

For point 1.

I have to jury rig unsourced BLP then i only need one reliable in-line citation to fix one article. At the worst i can put a ref to the BLP blog and be done with it. Reading thoughtfully in search for libelous contents is out of question because there are hundreds articles needing to be fixed. Finding enough sources to assert notability is also out of question because it isn't a BLP notability assessment drive and again a waste time that could be used to "rescue" others unsourced BLP.

That illustrates to some extreme how to have it done by the book but not in the spirit.

-

From my perception ArbCom should have separated the most clearly the decision on the involved editors and the one on the unsourced BLP. In present case the decision on editors clearly overshadowed the strong statement of the ArbCom to have the unsourced BLP issue resolved once for all.

Once the situation went awry with one party having suspicions of partiality the options are rather limited one is to have an uninvolved Arbiter jumping in. Another is to have Senior editors jumping in. The last is keep going and do your best to salvage the situation which is what Risker do with skill and chutzpah.