On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 7:13 AM, Thomas Dalton
<thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
2009/5/14 Fred Bauder
<fredbaud(a)fairpoint.net>et>:
I suggest that Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not
include Wikipedia is not a
manual of sexual practices. It could be phrased Wikipedia is not the
Karma Sutra.
What about pictures of Muhammad? Descriptions of Chinese human rights
violations? Articles about evolution? etc. etc. etc.
The reason that Wikipedia is not censored is because we cannot censor
one thing and maintain neutrality without censoring everything else
that might offend somebody and we would end up without anything left.
Though technically challenging, I've long believed that the best
answer is to develop some system similar to Categories that could be
used to flag content that is potentially objectionable on various
grounds and then provide the tools to create filtered streams that
remove that content.
That would good. We can't choose what should and should not be seen by
our readers without violating neutrality but there is nothing stopping
them choosing for themselves.