Will Beback wrote:
I can't speak for others, but that's not
a fair summary of my position.
I think that removing material is a standard part of editing. I think
that the project has been improved by removing all kinds of material. I
think that links to self-published sites actively harassing Wikipedia
editors are not reliable sources and should be removed just as we remove
other unreliable sources. Doing so makes for optimal encyclopedia content.
Will, if your idea of optimal encyclopedic content shifts depends on
whether somebody is being mean to you or your friends, then your
definition is based on your point of view. Ergo, your proposal violates
NPOV.
If you want to keep NPOV, you could try plumping for the removal of
links to all mean people. Or better, all people perceived as mean by
someone.
That would have a bonus: there would be a lot fewer articles to try to
keep up.
William
"Being mean" is OK, harassing is not. That's the case even if
you're the
person being harassed. If you're not clear on the distinction between
criticism and harassment then maybe we should have a review.
No part of NPOV requires that we link to the self-published sites of
folks who are trying to improperly affect Wikipedia editing. It does
require that we include all significant viewpoints, but can you give an
example of a significant point of view that is only sourceable to
someone who is actively harassing Wikipedia editors?
W.