With all due respect, Fred, I believe the article either complied or came very close to complying with WP policy when this discussion started here.
Your opinion that it did not has been communicated, but you do not have consensus that there is in fact a problem requiring being solved here.
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen466@yahoo.com wrote:
I've dropped Cirt a note and link to this thread, in case they weren't aware of it.
As mentioned before, what is at the root of this is a wider problem though: to what extent we as a project are happy to act as participants, rather than neutral observers and reporters, in the political process.
I'd say that neutrality is our best bet here, as anything else is likely to come back to us eventually. We should not make *undue* efforts to promote political or social campaigns.
There is little in present policy to address this. WP:Activist is an essay.
Andreas
I completely disagree with the direction of this thread that this was some sort of hit piece by Cirt on Santorum.
When this started I re-read the article and found it neutral and presenting Santorum's reaction to the situation in a reasonable and thoughtful manner.
Dan Savage is certainly playing activist here - the claim that Cirt was is not supported, and not in good faith.
-- -george william herbert george.herbert@gmail.com
The matter can be resolved by editing which conforms the article to Wikipedia policies.
Fred
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l