Andreas Kolbe wrote:
The English Wikipedia community, like any other, has always contained a wide spectrum of opinion on such matters.
Of course. But consensus != unanimity.
Your interpretation of the English Wikipedia's neutrality policy contradicts that under which the site operates.
The New York Times (recipient of more Pulitzer Prizes than any other news organization) uses "Stuff My Dad Says." So does the Los Angeles Times, which states that the subject's actual name is "unsuitable for a family publication."
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/23/books/review/InsideList-t.html http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2009/09/mydadsays-twitter.html
You might dismiss those sources as the "popular press," but they're the most reputable ones available on the subject. Should we deem their censorship sacrosanct and adopt it as our own?
No. :)
Please elaborate. Why shouldn't we follow the example set by the most reliable sources?
David Levy