On Feb 18, 2008 7:38 PM, Wily D wilydoppelganger@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 18, 2008 5:15 PM, Sam Blacketer sam.blacketer@googlemail.com wrote:
On Feb 18, 2008 10:05 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 18/02/2008, Raphael Wegmann wegmann@psi.co.at wrote:
Did you ever read headlines like "Minister warns of 'inbred'
Christians"?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3342040.ece You seem to have a lot of sensationalist journalism in the UK. Do they all lie?
Yes, they all lie. Well done. You've certainly advanced the discussion here.
Oh I don't know, I see Raphael's statement as an encouraging one that not every nation's press is as bad as ours.
Seriously on the images of Mohammed issue, I think we should take all reasonable steps to remove barriers to people using Wikipedia within our policies, which include that Wikipedia is not censored. If users want to read Wikipedia without seeing certain images, then we should take reasonable steps to help them. That goes whether they are doing so for religious reasons or otherwise.
-- Sam Blacketer
At Talk:Muhammad, instructions on how to disable images are linked to for all the technical solutions we know of. If you know of more, or can write MediaWiki patches and convince the devs to include them, please feel invited to participate.
WilyD
I probably should've included that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:How_to_set_your_browser_to_not_see_im... this page details instructions on how not to view images, for anyone who finds any image objection. I'm unaware of any solution for those who find text objectionable.
WilyD