On 11 May 2010 16:44, Gregory Maxwell gmaxwell@gmail.com wrote:
There are other resources which address these subject areas in a manner which religious conservatives may find more acceptable, such as conservapedia.
Actually, Conservapedia has almost no readers or editors. (Its activity rate is marginally higher than Citizendium.) Even the American Christian right-wing conservatives have no use for it.
I'd like to address an idea that underlies a lot of this discussion which I think is patently ridiculous: That our inability to please _everyone_ on _all_ articles is actually something to worry about. It's not something that can actually be done, all we can hope to choose is decide who we'll please, and by our core principles it appears that we've chosen to error towards the libertarians. In terms of overall popularity we would have better off not to, but then again I doubt we could have built something so useful another way. There is no existence proof yet, at least.
By the way, there appears to be an assumption - on the part of board members, the WMF and some contributors to this thread - that Commons has been somehow indiscriminate in what it accepts. This is *entirely false*. Else this wonderful template would not exist:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Nopenis
See every other teplate starting "no" in http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Message_templates .
(And yes, someone already did a version of the icon for [[m:DICK]].)
- d.