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