On 5/15/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
[[Piss_Christ]] [[Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy]] [[Proof that 0.999... equals 1]] [[Wikipedia:Lamest edit wars]] has a tendancy to be inflammatory
[[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User conduct]] is a case where being inflammatory appears to have been built into policy (RFC on articles ok RFC on people.. less so)
People seem to find our copyright policies inflammatory.
[[Alan S. Chartock]] is either heading in the dirrection of WP:OFFICE or in the dirrection of being inflammatory posebly both (see some of the history to understand why).
-- geni
I hate that people keep bringing examples such as these up. There is a HUGE difference between NPOV articles being inflammatory to religions or people (such as [[Piss Christ]] and the cartoons thing), and posting inflammatory statements on your userpage! I can't even begin to understand how people can compare putting "I think GWB is an asshat" on your userpage with including one of the most notable cartoons in history in the encyclopedia.
Look, if an article is needlessly POV-style inflammatory, then ofcourse that should be fixed. But if an article presents just the facts in an NPOV fashion, then it's a good article, no matter how many people it offends.
So stop using the cartoons controversy to justify behaving like asses! It's not the same thing!
--Oskar