Uh-oh. Isn't there some sort of rule against mentioning that website?
Ever, at all?
Mark
On 18/05/2008, Anthony <wikimail(a)inbox.org> wrote:
On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 4:34 PM, Jimmy Wales
<jwales(a)wikia.com> wrote:
David Goodman wrote:
Libelous content is one thing; but as for
"vile" -- there are a lot
of vile things and people in the world, and we need to cover them
objectively. Is it being seriously suggested the foundation intends to
remove sourced negative content depicting evil aspects fairly and
frankly when appropriate to an article? Or articles about people
that when written fairly inherently contain sourced strongly negative
content?
I know of no one who has proposed any such thing.
Rereading what I wrote I apparently forgot to add "and libelous" to
one of my instances of vile. I realized as I was writing this that
someone might misunderstand what I was saying in exactly this way.
But to clarify, I was talking about Encyclopedia Dramatica type stuff,
not neutrally and objectively covered unpleasant material.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l