charles matthews wrote:
"Raphael Wegmann" wrote
. WP:NOT censored states: "Wikipedia cannot guarantee that articles or images are tasteful to all users or adhere to specific social or religious norms or requirements." It doesn't state: "It is Wikipedias mission to publish tasteless articles or images and breaking social or religious norms or requirements."
WP:Profanity is more specific in that matter. It states: "Including information about offensive material is part of Wikipedia's encyclopedic mission; being offensive is not."
So, Wikipedia editors need not self-censor, while engaged in writing the encyclopedia articles. As decent people, they will self-censor in talk page discussion. Self-censorship is of course a basic social requirement.
So decency in article pages is forbidden, even if you can be decent without loosing any informational content? The problem with this approach is, that you will loose a lot of readers and editors that way. Some of you will even be happy about that, but NPOV is in severe danger, if you are offending editors, who are members of a cultural resp. religious minority. In the end you will have an American/British/Christian encyclopedia. If this is what you're aiming at, I would not be interested. You'd waste a big chance for intercultural exchange and a true neutral point of view.
This is comparable to the common understanding about academic freedom: you can say anything, independent of the popularity of the opinion.
That's not true for Wikipedia. For example you cannot write a half-decent article about a controversy concerning Islam. Decency is blasphemy for some members of the free speech cult.