On 4/16/07, Jossi Fresco jossifresco@mac.com wrote:
On Apr 16, 2007, at 11:32 AM, Jeff Raymond wrote:
We're not in the market of making "good" or "bad" judgement - we're in the market of building a comprehensive encyclopedia.
I just read the article. Removing all unsourced material, and how- to's (as per [[WP:NOT]], can leave the article informative without being a user manual for suicide.
I agree with Jossi - the article isn't really a how-to guide at the moment (eg "if you're planning on hanging yourself, make sure you measure the floor to ceiling height and choose a room that's taller than you and the rope").
Possibly suicidal people who read this may be slightly encouraged but this is unavoidable; the subject is encyclopaedic on a medical and sociological basis. Also, reading the biographies of people in [[Category:Suicides]] and subcategories may encourage people, but it would be unacceptable to go removing sourced information merely because of a speculated effect on the reader. That might be the thin end of the wedge.
The suicidal have plenty of websites to go to which *do* provide a how-to guide - disturbingly many, in fact. It's unlikely they will come to Wikipedia.