On Jul 15, 2006, at 6:07 AM, Delirium wrote:
Jimmy Wales wrote:
I am curious to know whether very many people agree with me that "human dignity" is a valid reason for a "delete" vote in a case like this.
Not in the slightest. That's a POV, which I may or may not agree with, but which has no place shaping the contents of the encyclopedia. Either the subject is not notable, in which case there should be no article, or he/she is, in which case there should be. Obviously we don't delete notable articles because of concerns about "human dignity", as basically everyone has agreed in several obvious examples like [[Joseph Merrick]].
If we're going to start bringing in other content-based guidelines, then why is "human dignity" the first or only one? How about, "delete -- inflames ethnic conflict"?
-Mark
That we tend to inflame political conflict is certainly the reason the Chinese have blocked us. Zeq has been working on me regarding inflaming ethnic conflict. Human dignity I like and support, both for reasons of being kind and as a legal prophylactic. I just don't think we should act mean. With great power comes great responsibility.
Fred