If I had known we were going to be hairsplitting, I would have dressed for the occassion.
Let me rephrase for those determined to argue about this: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia where adherents of such a hateful and absurd dogma as Nazi-ism should have no place.
I believe in NPOV just as much as the next admin, but I'm not going to turn it into a religion. NPOV applies to article content, of course, but in my discussions of policy and human interactions, I will rely on what happens in the real world. You may try to drag NPOV to an absurd extension to say that perhaps some Nazi somehwhere may be a good, neutral contributor, but real life experience says that Nazis are disruptive assholes with an agenda that is incompatible with our goals.
Gamaliel
Haukur Þorgeirsson haukurth at hi.is:
It is an encyclopedia where such a hateful and absurd dogma as Nazi-ism has no place.
Go and VfD [[Nazism]], then. However absurd it may be, it is an historically important dogma which needs a careful, detailed and *neutral* treatment in a serious encyclopedia.
Stan Shebs shebs at apple.com:
Yellow card! :-) Officially WP has no position on whether Nazi dogma is hateful or absurd - that is just another POV.
__________________________________ Yahoo! Mail Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour: http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html
On 8/23/05, Rob gamaliel8@yahoo.com wrote:
If I had known we were going to be hairsplitting, I would have dressed for the occassion.
Let me rephrase for those determined to argue about this: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia where adherents of such a hateful and absurd dogma as Nazi-ism should have no place.
Let's play "fill in the blank".
Let me rephrase for those determined to argue about this: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia where adherents of such a hateful and absurd dogma as _________ should have no place.
What word can you put in there that is universally applicable, and will <u>always</u> make Wikipedia a better place?
I choose to fill in the blank with "prejudice".
"Nazi-ism" doesn't fit. As much as we dislike their views, it is likely that Nazis and neo-Nazis will give us better insight into their own views, and improve the articles related to those viewpoints.
The solution to POV edits is more people reviewing them, not pre-banning those we suspect will make them.
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Michael Turley wrote:
On 8/23/05, Rob gamaliel8@yahoo.com wrote:
If I had known we were going to be hairsplitting, I would have dressed for the occassion.
Let me rephrase for those determined to argue about this: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia where adherents of such a hateful and absurd dogma as Nazi-ism should have no place.
Let's play "fill in the blank".
Let me rephrase for those determined to argue about this: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia where adherents of such a hateful and absurd dogma as _________ should have no place.
What word can you put in there that is universally applicable, and will <u>always</u> make Wikipedia a better place?
I choose to fill in the blank with "prejudice".
Well put, Michael. (For whatever my opinion is worth.)
"Nazi-ism" doesn't fit. As much as we dislike their views, it is likely that Nazis and neo-Nazis will give us better insight into their own views, and improve the articles related to those viewpoints.
Question: when groups like the Southern Poverty Law Center wants to learn more about Neo-Nazi groups, whom do you think they ask for information?
The solution to POV edits is more people reviewing them, not pre-banning those we suspect will make them.
Some more questions: if we don't ban an admitted Neo-Nazi, what's the worse that will happen? Would it be really any different than what might happen if we allow just anybody to create an account on Wikipedia -- as we do now?
Our current process has managed to cope with Scientologists, LaRouchies, & the odd wingnut (for example, Lir & CheeseDreams). Are we afraid that it can't handle Neo-Nazis?
What's the best that can happen? Maybe this Neo-Nazi isn't as firm in his beliefs as he might think -- or simply has never been exposed to other people different from him -- & his experience on Wikipedia convinces him to abandon these beliefs.
Or maybe no one reading this has ever changed their convictions because of an exchange of opinions with another person.
Geoff