[Foundation-l] Censorship: Speedy deletion of porn articles

Mark Williamson node.ue at gmail.com
Fri Mar 9 22:38:53 UTC 2007

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. While cultural sensitivity is important,
it should not keep us from documenting things that are notable.

Incest is a taboo in many cultures, and many people are not willing to
discuss it in English.  That does not mean we do not have articles on
such a notable topic. We have articles on many indecent and disgusting
things on the English Wikipedia. Of course this will bring the
argument that English speakers have low moral standards, but I am sure
OTRS has received more than a few complaints about "indecent" content
on the English Wikipedia.

That you could simply eliminate an article about sex and sexuality
from any Wikipedia is beyond me, regardless of culture. It may be
taboo, but it is the fundamental root of any society. Although we may
pretend in discussions all we want that we were just wished into
existance by our parents, all mentally-able adults are aware on some
level that they are the result of the procreative process.

And even if we do not wish to talk about human sexuality, what about
animals? Animals have children too.

This is similar to the arguments against Blockinblox when s/he said
that articles about Sexuality should simply not exist at some

People may not talk about sex in public in a particular society, but
it is probably still going to the one of the most-searched-for terms
in Wikipedia in almost any culture.

If you don't personally want to write about sex, or make it a priority
to write it or make it a featured article if it is written, but at the
very least, there needs to be a foundation-wide discussion about
whether it would really be acceptable to delete a well-written article
on the topic if it were created.

Also, I'm curious as to what "your culture" is. Is it Cherokee?
Because you seem to claim some degree of proficiency in that language.
Or is it Creek? Because you claim that is your native language.
Perhaps it is Navajo. Or perhaps it is not Navajo, because you very
clearly do not have as deep an understanding of that culture as you
claim (you said my Navajo is incorrect because its word order differs
from English. I studied Navajo in college for three semesters, I think
I know that word order differs greatly from English, even if my Navajo
is not perfect.)

So I am not saying we must have such articles in all Wikipedias, but I
am saying we need to discuss this issue at a foundation level sooner
rather than later.


On 08/03/07, Jeff V. Merkey <jmerkey at wolfmountaingroup.com> wrote:
> Yonatan Horan wrote:
> >Heh, as I said previously, the block was lifted within three days as it was
> >clear to more than one admin that I was erroneously blocked. I wouldn't have
> >brought this issue to foundation-l if attempts to resolve the issue on the
> >Hebrew Wikipedia had succeeded. All of what you're suggesting has already
> >been done and different compromises were already attempted. The other thing
> >is that while you may not be inclined to believe what I'm saying, the
> >community never decided this should be policy, it's just that some admins
> >enforce it as if it were policy.
> >
> >-Yonatan
> >
> >
> >
> Then you need to go make your arguments to the folks on that Wiki or
> fork the Hebrew Wikipedia
> and head off on your own if you cannot make headway. The folks here are
> not going to dictate to
> another group to do something contrary to their culture. It's an open
> internet after all.
> Good luck.
> :-)
> Jeff
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Refije dirije lanmè yo paske nou posede pwòp bato.

More information about the foundation-l mailing list