I think I remember stating somewhere that I gave just
the recent editions.
The first edits were *awfully* biaised.
But, I really don't think the last ones were so much.
In any case, there were not so biaised that the only
reaction to them be to *remove* them immediately,
without trying any cooperative editing. Cooperation is
not about removing what doesnot please you. It is not
about saying people are vandals and write only loads
of shit when you don't agree with them. It is slightly
more nicer than that.
Racism and anti-Semitism are not a problem of biais.
Firstly it is attack to human dignity.
Secondly it is forbidden by the french law.
It is interesting to note you stated the info on
racialism was probably coming from "My Kampf", and it
It was a joke on a talk page. Please don't put my sentence outside the
context
turned out to come from a "sos racism" site
:-)
Not only from that site.
Whatever.
The last edits do not justify banning
For the moment, only Curry started to talk about banning.
Personnaly, I don't care.
I didn't touch the Philippe articles that I though to be acceptable.
But I will still move to talk page all atrocity his is able to say.
There is nothing to justify the insults you use
There is nothing to justify incitement to racism
The french-speaking wikipedia does not have to follow
the french law. Lybiens also speak french, and quite a
number of countries in northern africa. Some of them
are under islamist republic. I am sure some of them
would find the actual content going against some of
their laws; Would you accept them saying it should be
removed because it goes against their laws ? I don't
think so, but where is the difference ? When the
french-speaking wikipedia is printed to be distributed
in France, we'll have to worry about that. When it
will be printed and distributed in Lybia, we'll have
to worry about law. Not now.
ok
Following the UN point of view on wikipedia is wrong.
It is *against* the very idea of a neutral and
extensive encyclopedia.
?
And whether it is true or not that human races do not
exist, some have theorized there were several races,
and this information should be in wikipedia. And as Ec
put it "racialism" is a theory, and must be
differenciated from "racism" which add the notion of
superiority of one race over the other. It is wrong to
qualify racism every theory that talk about race, and
as such to remove it from wikipedia, and it is wrong
to qualify as a racist every person who support this
type of theory.
I'm not agasint speak about those theory, I'm agaisnt those who claim there
are right.
As for all the below sentences, I have no worry. With
about 10 people jumping on any edits to immediately
remove them - just in case it might be offensive (and
before checking if it really is), there is very little
chance it will damage any reputation.
Meanwhile, we have a bunch of slightly better
articles, no ?
Except you, all wikipedians seem to agree the fact Philippe don't write
articles to halp wikipedia, but onlu to bug us.
Aoineko