On 7/14/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 13/07/07, Steven Walling steven.walling@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/13/07, Bogdan Giusca liste@dapyx.com wrote:
The Turkish Wikipedia has no article on Armenian Genocide. However, unlike all the other 38 Wikipedias which have articles on the "Armenian Genocide", it has an article on "Claims of an Armenian Genocide".
Because it would "insult Turkishness."
Urgh. Is there any of this sort of idiocy on en:wp?
That's a silly question. *How much* of this sort of idiocy is there on en:wp?
Well one cogent example is the article on Martin Luther. The German and Danish articles feel quite laid back about mentioning that he had a potty mouth but at the very least for a long time, the en:wp article (presumably affected by more puritan-influenced American Lutherans), was a remarkable piece of portraying the man as a saint, without blemish of any kind, or even simple human failings. Which, if you leave aside his letters and table talk spewing
vitriol and scatological language, for all that, he was definitely of flesh with all that comes with it. Even Melancthon said it after his death, that Luther was (paraphrasing here) certainly remarkably potent medicine for the time but that the times ills were potent too.
I haven't been to the [[Martin Luther]] article lately, as it appeared to be [[WP:OWN]]ed by those few who kept it closely bowdlerised and spit and polished.
-- Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]