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