On 10/15/07, fredbaud@waterwiki.info fredbaud@waterwiki.info wrote:
We could have a policy about that. When threatened or harassed we could conform the article to the demands made, but place a notice on it regarding the changes made.
I'm not sure if this is meant as satire. This kind of policy may have a place in Wikinfo, which doesn't have an NPOV policy. It doesn't belong in Wikipedia.
Mind you, commitment to _neutral educational content_ is actually part of the core mission of the Foundation as determined by the Board of WMF: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Mission_and_Vision_statement
It's a cross-project, cross-language commitment.
That doesn't mean of course that we won't ever alter article in response to demands. But certainly it would be utterly wrong to give in to threats, harassment and demands by default.
Switching back to personal opinion:
I've refrained from commenting much in the whole BADSITES debate. For the record, I think the policy idea is understandable but ultimately deeply misguided. It's behavior that needs to be regulated, not the flow of hyperlinks. Ask not what you can do about hyperlinks that could lead to bad sites, ask what you can do about people who distract from our purpose of creating a useful knowledge resource.