Jesse W wrote:
On Jun 1, 2006, at 2:22 PM, Raphael Wegmann wrote:
Matt Brown wrote:
On 6/1/06, Raphael Wegmann raphael@psi.co.at wrote:
I'd reckon the cartoons displayed on the Islamophobia article not to be an affront, because it would be clear, that "Wikipedia" considers the cartoons to be a sign for hatred towards Muslims.
And there, concisely, is how you're arguing that Wikipedia abandon its core principles.
Which one?
WP:NPOV. Specifically, (paraphrase) "Wikipedia does not *consider* anything to be anything. Wikipedia reports that other people consider things to be other things, and tries to take as few positions as possible."
That's a noble goal, but experience shows, that sometimes "Wikipedia" *has to* take a position. IMHO both to publicate as well as to refrain from publication of information sometimes means to define one's position. If it's not obvious on the JP article, think about AfDs on [[Religion of Peace]], [[Israeli apartheid]], [[Movement to impeach George W. Bush]], ...