On 6/1/06, Jesse W jessw@netwood.net wrote:
On Jun 1, 2006, at 12:22 AM, Peter Ansell wrote:
So we can promote things
Could you expand on this? AFAIK, the topic under discussion was a template, intended to be placed on user pages, containing the text: "This user is a Satanist" (IIRC). Is this intended to promote something? Is this intended to promote the improvement of some article in Wikipedia? Generally, most things in the non-article space parts of Wikipedia are designed to assist in writing the encyclopedia, or reflect on such writing. Unless I am mistaken, very few if any things on Wikipedia are designed to promote anything, except possibly Wikipedia itself. I look forward to you expanding on what you mean by this.
<major sniping>
Wikipedia should allow editors no matter what background they come from.
And (baring the Islamic issue discussed here ad nausaum), what evidence do you have that Wikipedia does not? Deleting a template is not blocking anyone from editing the encyclopedia, unless I am seriously out of touch here...
<further major sniping>
Jesse Weinstein
You make it seem like the issue about templates and articles are two totally different issues. I was pointing out that by putting forward the "lets not offend" anyone argument just because a template is bad while editors are encouraged to edit the article on the topic is not consistent. The inflammatory argument is simply put down as someones point of view. Calling my post major sniping seems very premature when you didn't understand that. I wasn't talking about articles, I was emphasising the irony between delete satanist templates and justifying the deletion using NPOV, when they are infact not neutral themselves.
Peter Ansell