On 3/29/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) <alphasigmax(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Earlier you wrote "Yes, I am leaping to the
conclusion that making
Wikipedia an attractive resource for teachers for use with kids is an
improvement."
Yeah, I still don't get where plaudits come into anything.
Ok, so someone else could fork us and produce a
meta-stable "clean"
version. Wait, doesn't
answers.com do that already?
No comment.
However, "offensive" is most definately a
subjective term - the term
"bugger" can be offensive in certain contexts, as can the infamous
phrase "so where the bloody hell are you"...
It's probably not so much the context as the hearer/reader that
matters. And notice that my example was objective: "naked breasts".
Yours is subjective: "offensive". Kind of logical that a subjective
term is hard to apply objectively.
So, you're willing to tag *all* articles based on
their content?
Are you then willing to tag the list of tags?
I don't really understand your objection here. It's like me saying "we
should fix spelling errors" and you saying "are you personally willing
to fix every spelling error in every article?"
"Warning: this set of articles have been identified of being of a
biologically accurate/theologically dubious/unscientific nature"? (sex,
evolution, and creation respectively)
I feel mocked. Ah well.
Really? So, if they're "invisible to most
users", what's the point of
having them? Why not just leave them out altogether?
Presumably you would make the same argument for removing braille
markings from food products in supermarkets.
Braille on food products is expected by people with impaired vision. Who
is going to which readers do and don't see the warnings? Please stop
trying to build strawmen...
Braille is "invisible" to most sighted people, because it's not useful
to them, and they simply aren't aware of its existence. Of course, a
blind person is very much aware. The same would go for content tags. I
imagine that certain software can find content tags in <META> html
tags, or even <!-- HTML comments-->. The average user would be
blissfully unaware. Anyone with appropriate software would still be
able to make use of them.
Work with me here, eh?
Steve