[WikiEN-l] Kils sysop status temporarily revoked

[Erik Moeller]

Jimmy-
> That's a long list, and so let me list some examples of what I am
> personally comfortable with.  But let me stress that I'm NOT making
> any policy here, I'm just arguing as an ordinary wikipedian, trying to
> help explore these issues thoughtfully.

> Some of the terms there are scientific terms, others are sociological,
> but some are slang terms, generally used primarily for shock value.

Hmhm. My take on this:

1) Slang terms - more appropriate for Wiktionary. Redirects can make  
searching easier, though, and should IMHO be left in place if the terms  
are not made up. In the list of sexology topics they look a little out of  
place; perhaps they should be separated from the other article titles  
under the heading "Slang terms".

2) Unusual sexual behavior - definitely encyclopedia material. If a  
substantial number of people practice it, it should be described in as  
much detail as possible. But stuff like "snowballing" may be better  
discussed in the context of a larger article, because it seems fairly  
uncommon (?).

In general, I think that the "things should not look out of place" notion  
is preferable to an arbitary moral standard. Do you expect to read the  
word "blowjob" when you read about Bill Clinton in an encyclopedia? Do you  
expect it when you browse the articles in the category "sexual behavior  
and related jargon"?

Regards,

Erik