[Foundation-l] Censorship: Speedy deletion of porn articles
saintonge at telus.net
Fri Mar 9 19:16:14 UTC 2007
luke brandt wrote:
>Yonatan Horan wrote:
>>that a rule has been passed but many admins disagree with this. The "vote"
>>was passed about two years ago and had 10-20 participants. In addition to
>>this, the vote came at a time when the Hebrew Wikipedia was repeatedly
>>vandalized by a certain user and many of the voters supposedly for the
>>banning of porn articles referred only to this specific case (this is
>>supported by their comments on the page).
>>By the way, just so nobody corrects me, on the Hebrew Wikipedia *there are
>>votes* since consensus is hardly ever reached and the total needed to pass a
>>vote is a ridiculous 55%. Anyway, despite all the above, a few admins have
>Why not try and organize another vote on the issue to gauge local
>opinion without the vandalism issue to affect the voting. Perhaps your
>views will now prevail? - Best, luke
This seems to be closer to the real issue. NPOV doesn't really enter
into this unless there is some doubt that the person is really a
"star". There seems to be no doubt that the person in fact did make movies.
I've consistently upheld the importance of project autonomy, even if it
results in articles with very different language versions. When another
language is involved it's difficult or impossible for any non-speakers
to evaluate the content. Discussions that led to acceptance on enwp
could have had a parallel discussion in another language with exactly
the opposite result. Anything else would allow the larger project to
dominate the smaller.
What worries me is this tendency to treat votes as final. A 55% passing
vote may be quite valid, but then so too should a 55% negative vote a
month later. The circumstances when the broader community intervenes in
the internal afairs of a project need to be extremely limited; most
issues relating to which articles should be allowed and what the
articles should contain must be left to the project itself. The
takeover of a project by a small group intent on driving a project in a
particular direction over the wishes of that community may be valid
grounds for intervention, but I am not in a position to state that this
is or is not now happening in hewp.
More information about the foundation-l