opinions like this that seem to encourage this type of content to remain
from Robert Horning
The problems with such an article is more likely to be in its effect on the copycats and other unprofessional idiots. Calling on Jimbo to decide on something is a cop-out. It's a sad admission that the community isn't strong enough to settle its own problems.
from Ray Saintonge
Which is precisely why I suggested having a constitution of some description.
If you don't want this type of content on wikibooks then you have to give up neutrality. And you're going to have to be very specific. I am working on a wiki project that educates how to start businesses.
I would hate for someone later on to declare that "capitalism is theft" and then go on to use that as a reason to remove my project.
NPOV may be adequately defined. A textbook on how alarm systems work, how they're installed and how they may be disabled is not advocacy to break into homes, but it can be used that way.
There are two ways of defining rules: everything is allowed unless specifically forbidden; everything is forbidden unless specifically allowed. You may wish to adopt the former.
How about a growing list that starts with the following: - No book may describe how to perform any of the following actions: i) torture ii) murder iii) all forms of violence from either public or private sources iv) cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment v) xenophobia or discrimination based on gender, age, sex, pregnancy, race, marital status, ethnic or social origin, colour, sexual orientation, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, language or birth
You can discuss torture in an entirely neutral way (how to use a battery, water and jumper leads to cause pain, for instance), but the discussion of torture (as above) can be banned outright. I would suggest that the list itself needs to be maintained by someone with an international legal background (no good having laws specific to any country) to offer guidance and a small team to act as "constitutional court" to decide on changes to these rules. And don't defer to the Human Rights Commission, you may find that Libya is in charge of it again.
The above - by the by - is paraphrased from the South African constitution.
--- Gavin