BLP: Writing About Living People Safely

Why Living Subjects Change the Rules

Any serious explanation of what is Wikipedia eventually reaches a point where general editorial freedom narrows. That point appears most clearly in articles about real, living individuals. The policy known as Biographies of Living Persons, abbreviated as BLP, imposes stricter standards than almost any other rule on the wiki site. Its purpose is simple in wording and demanding in practice: prevent harm.

Wikipedia presents itself as “a free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.” This formulation anchors nearly every Wikipedia introduction and Wikipedia overview. Openness, though, carries risk when human reputations enter the frame. BLP exists to manage that risk by placing safety, accuracy, and restraint above editorial completeness.

The policy opens with an unusually direct warning:

“Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately.”
— Wikipedia, Biographies of living persons

This instruction shapes how biographies are written, revised, monitored, and sometimes deleted across the online encyclopedia.

The Ethical Foundation of BLP

BLP rests on a moral premise rather than a technical one. Errors about living people can cause lasting damage. Unlike historical figures, living subjects experience direct consequences from online narratives.

The policy states:

“Wikipedia articles about living persons must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject’s privacy.”
— Wikipedia, Biographies of living persons

This approach reflects a shift from encyclopedic neutrality toward precaution. Accuracy remains necessary. Caution becomes mandatory.

In Wikipedia explained terms, BLP signals that openness does not override responsibility. The encyclopedia documents public knowledge, yet it avoids amplifying harm that stems from rumor, speculation, or weak sourcing.

What Makes BLP Different From Other Policies

Most Wikipedia rules apply uniformly across topics. BLP introduces asymmetry. Material acceptable in articles about institutions or historical events may be unacceptable in biographies of living people.

Key differences include:

• Immediate removal of questionable content rather than discussion-first resolution
• Higher sourcing thresholds
• Strong discouragement of speculative framing
• Limited tolerance for primary sources

This asymmetry often surprises new contributors learning wiki basics. It reflects recognition that reputational harm carries ethical weight beyond editorial debate.

Reliable Sources Under BLP

BLP narrows the definition of acceptable sources. Tabloids, self-published blogs, and social media posts fail the standard, even when widely circulated.

The policy explains:

“Poorly sourced contentious content may be removed immediately, without waiting for discussion.”
— Wikipedia, Biographies of living persons

High-quality sources typically include:

• Major newspapers with editorial oversight
• Peer-reviewed academic publications
• Books from reputable presses
• Official court documents, used carefully

Primary sources require exceptional restraint. Editors may cite them for basic facts. Interpretation must come from independent secondary analysis.

This sourcing discipline clarifies Wikipedia definition boundaries. Wikipedia summarizes what reliable publishers state. It does not decide what allegations deserve attention.

Privacy Versus Public Interest

BLP draws a clear line between public actions and private life. Not every verified fact belongs in an encyclopedia.

The policy notes:

“Editors must take particular care when adding information about living persons to avoid violating their privacy.”
— Wikipedia, Biographies of living persons

Public figures receive broader coverage. Private individuals receive stronger protection. Even public figures retain privacy regarding matters unrelated to their public roles.

This distinction becomes critical in biographies of entertainers, activists, or business leaders whose media exposure blurs personal and professional boundaries.

For readers seeking clarity about Wikipedia, this explains omissions that might appear puzzling. Absence often reflects restraint rather than ignorance.

Negative Information and Due Weight

BLP does not ban negative information. It demands proportionality and sourcing.

Criminal charges, lawsuits, or controversies may appear when covered extensively by reliable sources. Minor allegations, settled disputes, or unproven claims usually do not.

The policy states:

“Wikipedia is not a tabloid; it does not aim to include every detail of a person’s life.”
— Wikipedia, Biographies of living persons

This principle limits sensationalism. It reduces incentives for editors to pursue reputational damage under the guise of completeness.

Historical Drivers Behind BLP

BLP emerged from repeated crises during Wikipedia’s early growth. Poorly sourced accusations, hoaxes, and defamatory content appeared with alarming frequency in biographies.

A widely cited incident involved a false claim in the biography of journalist John Seigenthaler Sr., which remained unnoticed for months. The episode prompted public criticism and internal reform.

Jimmy Wales addressed the issue shortly afterward:

“We have a serious problem with biographies of living people, and it has to be fixed.”
— Jimmy Wales, 2005

BLP emerged as a direct response, transforming ethical concern into enforceable policy.

Enforcement Without Delay

BLP alters enforcement norms. Editors may remove content immediately when sourcing or tone falls short. Discussion follows removal rather than preceding it.

This inversion prioritizes harm prevention over editorial consensus.

Mechanisms include:

• Immediate reversion of questionable edits
• Page protection on high-risk biographies
• Administrative sanctions for repeated violations

Administrators receive broad discretion under BLP. Their role centers on risk reduction rather than content arbitration.

This structure reinforces the Wikipedia overview of governance: rules adapt to ethical context.

Paid Editing and BLP

BLP intersects sharply with conflict of interest rules. Paid editing on biographies of living persons attracts heightened scrutiny.

The Wikimedia Foundation’s Terms of Use require disclosure of paid contributions:

“You must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive compensation.”
— Wikimedia Foundation, Terms of Use

Undisclosed paid editing on biographies has resulted in bans and public statements. In 2015, the Wikimedia Foundation announced sanctions against hundreds of accounts linked to such activity.

“Undisclosed paid advocacy editing is deceptive and undermines the trust of the community.”
— Wikimedia Foundation, Operation Orangemoody

This enforcement reflects BLP’s central concern: reputational harm magnifies when financial incentives shape narratives.

Academic Perspectives on BLP

Scholars studying Wikipedia often cite BLP as evidence of ethical evolution within open collaboration.

Joseph Reagle, a researcher at Harvard, described the policy in Good Faith Collaboration:

“BLP represents Wikipedia’s acknowledgment that openness must yield to responsibility when human dignity is at stake.”
— Joseph Reagle, Good Faith Collaboration

This assessment frames BLP as a normative rule rather than a technical constraint. It expresses values through procedure.

Statistical Context: Scale and Exposure

Wikipedia hosts millions of biographies across language editions. The English Wikipedia alone contains over one million biographical articles, according to Wikimedia statistics.

Each article remains open to editing by volunteers across jurisdictions, cultures, and legal systems. BLP functions as a common ethical denominator across this diversity.

Without it, the risk profile of the free encyclopedia would rise sharply.

Common BLP Pitfalls

Editors frequently violate BLP without intent. Common errors include:

• Adding rumors reported by unreliable outlets
• Summarizing allegations without outcome context
• Using charged language from opinion pieces
• Treating arrests as convictions

BLP demands precision in language. “Was accused” differs sharply from “was convicted.” Time frames matter. Outcomes matter.

These distinctions form part of wiki basics often learned through reversal rather than instruction.

Transparency and Editorial Humility

BLP encourages editors to err on the side of removal. When uncertainty exists, absence becomes preferable to potential harm.

The policy notes:

“Do not include material that may be harmful unless it is well sourced and clearly relevant.”
— Wikipedia, Biographies of living persons

This guidance promotes editorial humility. Knowledge gaps remain visible. Silence carries ethical weight.

For contributors, this can feel restrictive. For subjects, it offers protection rarely found elsewhere online.

Reader Trust and Public Perception

Public trust in Wikipedia remains high relative to other online platforms. Surveys by the Pew Research Center show that a majority of users express some level of trust in Wikipedia content.

BLP contributes to that trust indirectly. Readers may not recognize the policy by name, yet they benefit from its effects.

Biographies read cautiously. Sensational claims appear rarely. Errors receive rapid correction.

This outcome aligns with the Wikipedia definition as a reference work rather than a news feed.

Final Considerations

BLP reshapes how Wikipedia treats human subjects. It elevates caution above completeness and dignity above curiosity.

For contributors, the policy demands restraint, patience, and respect for uncertainty. For readers, it offers assurance that reputations receive guarded treatment within an open system.

Within a global, volunteer-driven online encyclopedia, BLP stands as a reminder that openness carries ethical cost. Wikipedia accepts that cost through rules designed to limit harm rather than expand exposure.

Understanding BLP clarifies what is Wikipedia at its most human boundary: a project that documents public knowledge without forgetting the people behind the names.