Delirium a écrit:
Anthere wrote:
Third solution : we all share a common goal of
non censorship, but we
admit we censor a little bit nevertheless and we admit that these
decisions should be taken locally, by local communities.
Needless to say, I am all for the third one. I think minorities
opinions should always be considered, and the argument that the
english wikipedia community is the bigger so should be the one to
decide for other communities is not valid as far as I am concerned. We
have common goals, we have common big rules, but we have essentially
local applications of these rules.
But this is in itself a majority-rules view, in which minority opinions
in a language are ignored. Languages only correlate weakly with
countries, and so what, for example, people from France say should not
automatically be the deciding factor in what the fr: Wikipedia does.
What French-speaking people from other countries say (and not just
countries that have French as an official language) should also be taken
into account.
This is correct, though I must say that for the greatest part, I do not
know where most french-speaking editors come from. Essentially, the
differences of written french between say canadian, belgium, french,
swiss people is so little that it is very difficult to guess unless they
tell you.
Which is why, generally, I strongly oppose
language-specific policies
that cater towards "local" sentiment, where "local" is defined as
"the
dominant countries that speak the language". This is fortunately
easiest in the en: Wikipedia, because the U.S. and U.K. are quickly
becoming less and less dominant in terms of English-speakers on the
internet, so will no longer be able to consider en: their "local"
Wikipedia, but a *global* one, but is still a major problem in many
other languages...
-Mark
So.... are you saying that you consider that editorial policies should
be taken on a more global basis than it is currently the case ?