사용자:Kwj2772/작업실2

If you are a user who is concerned about the accuracy or appropriateness of biographical material in a Wikipedia article about yourself, please see Dealing with articles about yourself, below.

Please report any BLP incidents at the biographies of living persons noticeboard.

Administrators taking special enforcement actions related to this policy are reminded to record them at the enforcement log.

편집자들은 어느 위키백과의 문서이든 살아 있는 인물에 대한 서술을 할 때 특히 주의해야 합니다. 인물에 대한 서술은 아주 민감하기 때문에, 반드시 대한민국의 법률과 위키백과의 정책을 지켜야 합니다. 특히,

• 중립적 시각 (NPOV)
• 확인 가능
• 독자연구 금지

정책을 지켜야 합니다.

위키백과는 문서를 정확하게 작성해야 합니다. 살아있는 인물에 대해서는 주석으로 출처를 반드시 표시해야 합니다. 출처가 없거나 잘못되었을 경우에는, 그 내용이 긍정적이든 부정적이든, 토론 없이 즉시 삭제되어야 합니다.

We must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high quality references. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons — whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable — should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion.

살아 있는 인물에 대한 서술은 문서의 대상 인물의 사생활을 고려하요 항상 신중하게 작성되어야 합니다. 위키백과는 백과사전이지 타블로이드 신문이 아닙니다: 인기를 끄는 것은 위키백과의 임무가 아니며, 인물의 삶에 대한 의혹을 퍼뜨리는 장소가 아닙니다. 살아있는 인물에게 피해를 줄 수 있다는 가능성이 편집을 할 때에 중요한 요인이 될 수 있습니다.

이 정책은 모든 살아 있는 인물에 대한 문서와 관련 문서에 적용됩니다. This policy applies equally to biographies of living persons and to biographical material about living persons on other pages. The burden of evidence for any edit on Wikipedia, but especially for edits about living persons, rests firmly on the shoulders of the person who adds or restores the material.

Rationale

위키백과는 많은 정보를 담고 있고, 전세계적으로 이용되는 웹 사이트입니다. 이것은 사용자가 편집하는 내용이 실제 인물과 가족, 동료, 친구 등에게 영향을 줄 수 있습니다. 인물에 대한 서술은 반드시 위키백과의 정책을 준수하며 작성되어야 합니다.

Writing and editing

Writing style

살아 있는 인물에 대한 서술은 책임있게, 신중하게, 중립성 있게, 백과사전적 문체로 작성되어야 합니다. 다른 분야에서는 결과주의가 적용될 수 있지만, 이 살아 있는 인물에 대해 잘못 서술된 것은 즉시 제거되거나 삭제될 것입니다. Biographies of living people should be written responsibly, conservatively, and in a neutral, encyclopedic tone. While a strategy of eventualism may apply to other subject areas, badly written biographies of living persons should be stubbed or deleted (see #Remove unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material).

The article should document, in a non-partisan manner, what reliable secondary sources have published about the subject and, in some circumstances, what the subject may have published about themselves. The writing style should be neutral and factual, avoiding both understatement and overstatement. Biographies of living persons should not have trivia sections. Instead, relevant sourced claims should be woven into the article.

외부 링크

살아 있는 인물에 대한 문서에서 외부 링크는 정확하고 엄격한 기준에 의해 판단되어야 합니다. 위키백과:외부 링크 지침에 맞지 않는 곳으로 링크해서는 안 됩니다.

Criticism and praise

 Wikipedia:Coatrack 문서를 참고하십시오.

Criticism and praise of the subject should be represented if it is relevant to the subject's notability and can be sourced to reliable secondary sources, and so long as the material is written in a manner that does not overwhelm the article or appear to take sides; it needs to be presented responsibly, conservatively, and in a neutral, encyclopedic tone. Be careful not to give a disproportionate amount of space to particular viewpoints, to avoid the effect of representing a minority view as if it were the majority one. The views of a tiny minority have no place in the article. Care must be taken with article structure to ensure the overall presentation is broadly neutral; in particular, subsection headings should reflect important areas to the subject's notability.

Content should be sourced to reliable sources and should be about the subject of the article specifically. Beware of claims that rely on guilt by association. Be on the lookout for biased or malicious content about living persons. If someone appears to be promoting a biased point of view, insist on reliable third-party published sources and a clear demonstration of relevance to the person's notability.

Categories

 이 부분의 본문은 Wikipedia:Categorization of people입니다.

Category names do not carry disclaimers or modifiers, so the case for the category must be made clear by the article text. The article must state the facts that result in the use of the category tag and these facts must be sourced.

Caution should be used in adding categories that suggest the person has a poor reputation (see False light).

Category tags regarding religious beliefs and sexual orientation should not be used unless two criteria are met:

• The subject publicly self-identifies with the belief or orientation in question;
• The subject's beliefs or sexual orientation are relevant to the subject's notable activities or public life, according to reliable published sources.

Sources

신뢰할 수 있는 출처

살아 있는 인물에 대한 내용은 신뢰할 수 있는 출처가 있어야 합니다. 믿을 수 있는 제3의 출처가 없다면, 이는 독자연구 금지와 확인 가능 정책을 위반한 것이며, 법적인 조치가 취해질 수 있습니다. Material about living persons must be sourced very carefully. Without reliable third-party sources, it may include original research and unverifiable statements, and could lead to libel claims.

Material about living persons available solely in questionable sources or sources of dubious value should not be used, either as a source or as an external link (see above).

자신이 만든 책, 잡지, 웹사이트, 블로그를 살아 있는 인물의 서술에 대한 출처로 사용하지 마세요.

Never use self-published books, zines, websites, webforums, and blogs as a source for material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject of the article (see below). "Self-published blogs" in this context refers to personal and group blogs. Some newspapers host interactive columns that they call blogs, and these may be acceptable as sources so long as the writers are professionals and the blog is subject to the newspaper's full editorial control. Where a news organization publishes the opinions of a professional but claims no responsibility for the opinions, the writer of the cited piece should be attributed (e.g., "Jane Smith has suggested..."). Posts left by readers may never be used as sources.

Avoid repeating gossip. Ask yourself whether the source is reliable; whether the material is being presented as true; and whether, even if true, it is relevant to an encyclopedia article about the subject. When less-than-reliable publications print material they suspect is untrue, they often include weasel phrases and attributions to anonymous sources. Look out for these. If the original publication doesn't believe its own story, why should we?

Be careful of "feedback loops" in which an unsourced and speculative contention in a Wikipedia article gets picked up, with or without attribution, in an otherwise-reliable newspaper or other media story, and that story is then cited in the Wikipedia article to support the original speculative contention.

Remove unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material

출처가 없거나, 자신이 창작한 저작물을 출처로 삼았거나, 문제가 될 수 있는 내용이 있다면 과감히 삭제하십시오. 이 때 3회 되돌림 규칙은 적용되지 않을 것입니다. 이러한 문제로 편집 분쟁이 발생하면 관리자에게 중재를 요청할 수 있습니다.

관리자는 이 정책에 따라 문제가 되는 부분을 제거하거나, 문서를 보호하거나 삭제할 수 있습니다. 부적절한 내용을 계속 추가하는 사용자에게는 경고가 주어지고, 차단 정책에 따라 차단될 수 있습니다.

만약 되돌릴 중립적인 판이 없는 상황에서, 출처가 제시되지 않거나, 부정적인 서술을 보게 된다면 토론 없이 즉시 삭제해야 합니다.

자신이 배포한 정보의 이용

 이 부분의 본문은 WP:SELFPUB입니다.

살아 있는 사람에 대한 경우, 자신이 배포한 자료는 대상 인물이 직접 작성하였을 때만 사용될 수 있습니다. 대상 인물은 보도 자료, 개인 웹사이트나 블로그를 통해 정보를 제공할 수 있습니다. Self-published material may be used in biographies of living persons only if written by the subject themself. Subjects may provide material about themselves through press releases, personal websites, or blogs. Material that has been self-published by the subject may be added to the article only if:

1. it is not unduly self-serving;
2. it does not involve claims about third parties;
3. it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject;
4. there is no reasonable doubt that the subject actually authored it;
5. the article is not based primarily on such sources.

These provisions do not apply to subjects' autobiographies that have been published by reliable third-party publishing houses; these are treated as reliable sources, because they are not self-published.

Dealing with edits by the subject of the article

In some cases the subject may become involved in editing the article, either directly or through a representative. Although Wikipedia discourages people from writing about themselves, a tolerant attitude should be taken in cases where subjects of articles remove unsourced or poorly sourced material.

Anonymous edits that blank all or part of a biography of a living person should be evaluated carefully. When the subject is of ambiguous notability, such edits should not be regarded as vandalism in the first instance, and recent changes patrollers should bear in mind that they may be dealing with the subject. The use of inflammatory edit summaries or vandalism-related talk-page templates should be avoided in these cases.

The Arbitration Committee has ruled in favor of showing leniency to the subjects of biographies who try to remove what they see as errors or unfair material:

For those who either have or might have an article about themselves it is a temptation, especially if plainly wrong, or strongly negative information is included, to become involved in questions regarding their own article. This can open the door to rather immature behavior and loss of dignity. It is a violation of don't bite the newbies to strongly criticize users who fall into this trap rather than seeing this phenomenon as a newbie mistake.
— Arbitration Committee decision (December 18, 2005)

Presumption in favor of privacy

Wikipedia articles that present material about living people can affect their subjects' lives. Wikipedia editors who deal with these articles have a responsibility to consider the legal and ethical implications of their actions when doing so. It is not Wikipedia's purpose to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives. Biographies of living persons must be written conservatively, with regard for the subject's privacy.

When writing about a person notable only for one or two events, including every detail can lead to problems, even when the material is well-sourced. In the best case, it can lead to an unencyclopedic article. In the worst case, it can be a serious violation of our policies on neutrality. When in doubt, biographies should be pared back to a version that is completely sourced, neutral, and on-topic.

기본적 인간의 존엄성

위키백과의 문서는 기본적인 인간의 존엄성을 존중해야 합니다. 위키백과는 백과사전이지, 뉴스 사이트가 아닙니다. 위키백과의 문서는 직간접적이든 관계없이 특정인을 비하하거나 모독해서는 안 됩니다. Wikipedia articles should respect the basic human dignity of their subjects. Wikipedia aims to be a reputable encyclopedia, not a tabloid. Our articles must not serve primarily to mock or disparage their subjects, whether directly or indirectly. This is of particularly profound importance when dealing with individuals whose notability stems largely from their 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.

The Wikipedia Manual of Style outlines guidelines to respect a person's identity.

공인 / 유명인

틀:Policy shortcut 잘 알려진 인물의 경우, 위키백과는 신뢰할 수 있는 여러 출처에서 얻은 정보를 문서화할 뿐입니다. 어떤 주장이나 사건이 유명하고, 문서와 관련이 있고, 신뢰할 수 있는 출처에서 얻은 정보를 잘 문서화시키면, 그 내용이 특정 인물에게 부정적이거나 특정인이 그에 대한 모든 언급을 꺼린다 하더라도, 그 내용은 문서에 남아 있게 될 것입니다. 만약 신뢰할 수 있는 출처에서 얻은 정보를 문서화시킨 것이 아니라면, 과감히 제거해주세요.

예

"A는 B와 비도덕적인 이혼을 했다." 이 내용이 문서에서 중요하고, 신뢰할 수 있는 출처에서 얻은 내용인가요? 그렇지 않다면, 사실만 기술하고 나머지는 제거하십시오: "A는 B와 이혼했다" 로 서술하는 것이 좋습니다.

Example

A politician is alleged to have had an affair. He denies it, but the New York Times publishes the allegations, and there is a public scandal. The allegation may belong in the biography, citing the New York Times as the source.

Exert great care in using material from primary sources. Do not use, for example, public records that include personal details — such as date of birth, home value, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, and home or business addresses — or trial transcripts and other court records or public documents, unless a reliable secondary source has already cited them. Where primary-source material has first been presented by a reliable secondary source, it may be acceptable to turn to open records to augment the secondary source, subject to the no original research policy. See also Wikipedia:Verifiability.

People who are relatively unknown (Non public figure = NPF)

틀:Policy shortcut Wikipedia also contains biographies of people who, while notable enough for an entry, are not generally well known. In such cases, exercise restraint and include only material relevant to their notability, while omitting information that is irrelevant to the subject's notability. Material from third-party primary sources should not be used unless it has first been published by a reliable secondary source. Material published by the subject must be used with caution. (See Using the subject as a source.)

Material that may adversely affect a person's reputation should be treated with special care. In the laws of many countries, simply repeating the defamatory claims of another is illegal, and there are special protections for people who are not public figures. Any such potentially damaging information about a private person, if corroborated by multiple, highly reliable sources, may be cited if the Wikipedia article states that the sources make certain "allegations", without the Wikipedia article taking a position on their truth.

Articles about people notable only for one event

 이 부분의 본문은 Wikipedia:Notability (people)입니다.

 WP:NOT § NEWS, WP:BIO1E 및 Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not § Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information 문서를 참고하십시오.

Wikipedia is not a newspaper. The bare fact that someone has been in the news does not in itself imply that they should be the subject of an encyclopedia entry. Where a person is mentioned by name in a Wikipedia article about a larger subject, but essentially remains a low-profile individual, we should generally avoid having an article on them.

If reliable sources only cover the person in the context of a particular event, then a separate biography is unlikely to be warranted. Marginal biographies on people with no independent notability can give undue weight to the events in the context of the individual, create redundancy and additional maintenance overhead, and cause problems for our neutral point of view policy. In such cases, a redirect or merge are usually the better options. Cover the event, not the person.

개인 정보

위키백과의 문서는 유명한 인물의 생일을 포함하고 있을 수 있습니다. 다만 아주 유명한 경우가 아닌 경우에는 그렇지 않을 수도 있습니다. 개인 정보 유출이 발생하면서 생일을 개인 정보로 여기는 사람이 늘고 있습니다. 해당 인물의 요청이 있을 경우, 태어난 해만 적거나 생년월일을 삭제하여야 합니다.

마찬가지로, 위키백과의 문서는 주소, 이메일 주소, 전화번호나 다른 연락처를 포함해서는 안 됩니다. 이러한 경우 해당 판은 삭제되거나 영구히 숨겨져야 합니다. 다만, 해당 인물이 운영하는 웹사이트를 가리키는 링크는 일반적으로 허용됩니다.

Privacy of names

Caution should be applied when naming 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 evaluating the inclusion or removal of names, their 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.

Take particular care when considering whether inclusion of the names of private, living individuals who are not directly involved in an article's topic adds significant value. The presumption in favor of the privacy of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved persons without independent notability is correspondingly stronger. In all cases where the redaction of names is considered, discuss the issue on the article's talk page.

A note on marital status

In a biography of a living person, an event such as marriage, divorce, legal separation, or when the intention to marry, divorce, legally separate is verifiable by its wide publication in several reliable sources, the name of the subject's intended spouse, spouse, or ex-spouse is not private, unless there has been a court seal on the disclosure of the name.

Maintaining biographies of living persons

Report any BLP incidents at the biographies of living persons noticeboard.

As a continuously updated encyclopedia, Wikipedia naturally contains many thousands of articles about living persons, both widely and less widely known. From both a legal and ethical standpoint it is essential that a determined effort be made to eliminate defamatory and other undesirable information from these articles as far as possible. On the other hand Wikipedia's standing and neutrality must not be compromised by allowing the editing of articles to show a bias in their subject's favor, the inclusion of articles about non-notable publicity-seekers, or the removal of appropriate and well-sourced information simply because the subject objects to it.

Article improvement to a neutral high quality standard is preferred if possible, with dubious material removed if necessary until issues related to quality of sources, neutrality of presentation, and general appropriateness in the article have been discussed and resolved. When in doubt, biographies should be pared back to a version that is sourced to good quality sources, neutral, and on-topic. However in many cases the appropriate use of administrative tools such as page protection and deletion is necessary for the enforcement of the biographies of living persons policy.

Semi-protection and protection

Administrators who suspect malicious or biased editing, or who have reason to believe that violating material may be re-added, may protect or semi-protect the page after removing the disputed material. It is generally more desirable in the medium and long term to obtain compliance with this policy by editors, in order that the article may be kept open for editing wherever possible.

Deletion

See also the deletion policy page for more specific information.

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, containing primarily unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons, then it may be necessary to delete the entire page as an initial step, followed by discussion.

Page deletion should be treated as a last resort, with the page being improved and remedied where possible and disputed areas discussed. If the dispute centers around suitability of the page for inclusion – for example, if there are doubts as to notability or the subject has requested deletion – then this should be addressed at xFD rather than by summary deletion. Summary deletion in part or whole is relevant when the page contains unsourced negative material or is disparaging and written non-neutrally, and when this cannot readily be repaired or replaced to an acceptable standard. (Replacement might include a high quality older revision or high quality rewrite.)

The deleting administrator should be willing to explain the deletion to other administrators, by e-mail if the material is sensitive; administrators and other editors 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 deletion review, but any 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.

 Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Badlydrawnjeff § Summary deletion of BLPs 문서를 참고하십시오.

Deletion of comments about other editors

Pages used for legitimate Wikipedia administrative purposes and discussions, such as users' own user pages, dispute resolution pages, project and community pages, and comments between users, often contain opinions and observations by editors that may relate to other editors. Although applicable to these, deletion is not the usual means of addressing users issues on these pages, and leeway to allow the handling of editorial issues by the community should be allowed. For personal attacks and negative or disparaging comments against editors, see the policy no personal attacks which contains its own deletion discussion.

After deletion

After the deletion of a biography of a living person, consider moving data to another article, but bear in mind that this policy applies to all pages of Wikipedia; never move material from a deleted biography of a living person as a way of thwarting the point of the page deletion. Also, when merging content from a biography of a living person, editors must preserve the edit history due to the GFDL.

Full information on merging, including how to do it whilst respecting the conditions of the GFDL and Wikipedia's copyright policy, is available at the #Performing the merger section of Help:Merging and moving pages.

Restoring deleted content

In order to ensure that biographical material of living people is always policy-compliant, written neutrally to a high standard, and based on good quality reliable sources, the burden of proof is on those who wish to retain, restore, or undelete disputed material.

If the material is to be restored without significant change, then consensus must be obtained first, and wherever possible, disputed deletions should be discussed with the administrator who deleted the article. If the material is proposed to be significantly repaired or rewritten to address the concerns, then it may need discussion or may be added to the article; this should be considered case-by-case. In some cases users may wish to consider drafting a proposed article in their user space and seek discussion at WP:DRV. In any event if the matter becomes disputed it should not be added back without discussion and consensus-seeking.

Courtesy blanking of deletion discussions

If a biography of a living person is deleted through an Articles for deletion (AfD) debate, the AfD page and any subsequent deletion review that fails may be courtesy-blanked or deleted if there was inappropriate commentary. After the deletion of a biography of a living person, any admin may choose to protect the page against recreation.

Blocking

 이 부분의 본문은 Wikipedia:Blocking policy입니다.

살아 있는 인물에 대해 출처가 없거나 잘못된 내용을 반복적으로 올리는 편집자는 차단될 수 있습니다.

Templates

This policy applies to all living persons in an entry, not merely the subject of the entry. {{Blp}} may be added to the talk pages of biographies of living persons so that editors and readers, including subjects, are alerted to this policy. It also may be added to the talk pages of articles which mention living persons. Alternatively, if a {{WPBiography}} template is present, you can add living=yes to the template parameters. On pages with multiple WikiProject templates, the message can be added by adding the code |blp=yes to the {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} template.

For problems with editors editing in contravention of this policy, you can use these templates to warn them on their user talk pages:

• {{uw-biog1}}
• {{uw-biog2}} or {{blp0}}
• {{uw-biog3}} or {{blp1}}
• {{uw-biog4}} or {{blp2}}
• {{blp3}} for when a block is issued

{{Blpdispute}} may be used on biographies of living persons needing attention. {{BLPsources}} may be used on BLP pages needing better sourcing, with {{BLPunsourced}} for those BLPs having no sources at all.

일반 문서가 아닌 공간

토론 문서

토론 문서는 문서 내용에 대해 논의하기 위해 이용됩니다. 출처가 없거나 부족한 내용은 삭제되어야 합니다. 특히 문제가 심각한 경우에는 (전화 번호 등의 개인 정보가 포함되어 있거나 명예 훼손으로 간주될 수 있는 내용), 영구히 제거될 것입니다. Talk pages are used to make decisions about article contents. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material not related or useful to making article content choices should be deleted, and even permanently removed ("oversighted") if especially problematic (telephone number, libel, etc). New material should generally be discussed in order to arrive at a consensus concerning relevance, availability of sources, and reliability of sources. Repeated questionable claims with biographies of living persons issues not based on new evidence can generally be immediately deleted with a reference to where in the archive the prior consensus was reached.

User pages

The rules for talk pages also apply for user pages with the single exception that it is customary to allow the user to make any claim they wish about themselves without sources in their user space. All user pages, must nonetheless, conform to Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, ruling out their use as advertisements, for example. Editors are prohibited from impersonating another individual.

Project space

In project space, we maintain information about users that we need to make administrative choices. These pages are visible to everyone for the sake of openness and transparency, which is essential to the success and health of the WikiMedia mission. Usernames at Wikipedia are often associated with off-Wikipedia identities, and negative comments can be the source of difficulties, including legal problems. It helps both the people behind these identities and Wikipedia itself if this information is dealt with thoughtfully, carefully, and even creatively in edge cases. If in doubt about the appropriateness of publishing certain claims about living persons in project space, unbiased consultation is still important, but one should take care not to publish effectively the same information in seeking advice. Consider using alternative means other than on-wiki posting if necessary, such as e-mail, to discuss the issue with other editors, administrators, or the Arbitration Committee.

Images

Upload and placement of images is subject to this policy, in some circumstances. Relevant content that is inappropriate in text form remains inappropriate in image form.

Information about minors

Children are discouraged from disclosing potentially identifying personal information, even on their own userpages. For more information, see Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Protecting children's privacy.

Dealing with articles about yourself

Help, information
and contacts

 이 부분의 본문은 Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Help입니다.

If you have a query regarding an article about yourself, please see the biographical articles help page which covers how such matters are most effectively addressed, provides contact points, and advises on relevant important information. The most important points are these:

1. Wikipedia has editorial standards and policies which will often help to immediately resolve your concern, many users willing to help if you are unfamiliar with these, and a wide range of escalation processes and means of support. But you need to know they exist and what they say (or where to find them).
2. Wikipedia also has very strict rules on conduct (including politeness) and is almost entirely operated by volunteer editors who aim to help; impolite behavior even if reasonable will often be far less effective and may even lead to a 'block'. Please try hard to avoid heading in this direction! It is ineffective compared to seeking help!
3. Very obvious errors can be fixed quickly, including by yourself. But beyond that, or if disputed, there are "basics" that you will need to know if you wish to do much more, or make it easier.
4. There are certain things you have a complete right to expect, and also things you cannot expect. It is important to understand these.

위키미디어 재단 연락처

위키미디어 재단의 우편 주소는:

Wikimedia Foundation Inc. P.O. Box 78350 San Francisco, CA 94107-8350 United States 전화번호: 1-415-839-6885 팩스: 1-415-882-0495 이메일: infowikimedia.org

입니다. 위키미디어 재단에 문의하는 자세한 방법은 이곳을 참고하십시오.

See also

Relevant policies

• Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
• Wikipedia:No original research
• Wikipedia:Verifiability
• Wikipedia:Ownership of articles
• Wikipedia:No personal attacks
• Wikipedia:Resolving disputes
• Wikipedia:Libel
• Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy (this includes Wikipedia)
• Wikipedia:Blocking policy
• Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not

Relevant guidelines

• Wikipedia:Reliable sources
• Wikipedia:Notability (people)
• Wikipedia:Autobiography
• Wikipedia:Conflict of interest
• Wikipedia:Don't bite the newbies

Editors under the age of adulthood

• Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Protecting children's privacy

Relevant essays

• Wikipedia:Avoiding harm, an essay about this topic
• Wikipedia:Coatrack
• Category:User essays on BLP

Discussion forums

• Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Living people

Further reading

• Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
• Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy