Sounds like KQ has blown his cover. Now we all know he's a scriptwriter
for "Saturday Night Live". :-)
Ec
koyaanis qatsi wrote:
Nonetheless, for the sake of argument, let's
assume
that applying categories to our articles for the sake
of filtering them from the innocent eyes of children
can be handled without controversy, in spite of the
general controversy already stirred up on the mailing
list. Let us assume also that it can be done without
running afoul of NPOV, and that this wikipedia decree
of what is and is not Safe and Good and Morally Just
for children to know will be accepted and endorsed by
wikipedians in general. So, let's set about
categorizing articles.
Given that a category scheme with, say, 3million
categories would be worse than useless for the purpose
of filtering content, we'll set a few categories. One
of them, as Jimbo has indicated, will be Crime. What
articles are relevant to crime? Koyanis Qatsi
nominates [[George W. Bush]] for his cocaine habit,
but Powaqqatsi says "wait, wait, that's hearsay; we
can't include that." Ok, a fair point. Two paths
diverged in a POV debate, and which does wikipedia
take? Let's say wikipedia decides that the metadata
crime can be added to any article with a mention of a
crime, whether it's been proven or not. So mav writes
an article on the well-known layabout gadfly KQ,
because he has it on good faith from a friend that KQ
has once been convicted of jaywalking; and then he
adds the metadata:crime to the article. KQ
"retaliates" and adds crime to the articles on Bromide
and Arsenic, because they've been used in some crimes
he knows about, and children shouldn't have such
notions of poisoning put into their heads. Well,
AxelBoldt worked 812 hours apiece on those articles,
and he won't have his work censored, so he adds
metadata:crime to [[Sid Davis]] because, hell, it does
mention molestation. Oh, this is going great.
Anthere adds metadata:crime to [[O.J. Simpson]]; Bryan
Derksen removes it because he was found innocent in
criminal court; Brion Vibber restores it because he
was found guilty in civil court. [[24]] steps in and
says "why should crime in the U.S. be the deciding
factor? What about crime in the U.K., or Bhutan, or
the Apache nation?" So Henry Kissinger gets
metadata:Crime because Chile wants him extradited to
stand trial for war crimes. Jimbo steps in and adds
crime to the Clintons for their -gate and for Bill's
tendency to keep his zipper down, and Ed Poor adds the
metadata to the articles on lead pipes, knives,
swords, Sherman tanks, and letter openers (a mystery
crime favorite).
It's a ridiculous situation. Wikipedia comes to its
senses and says "wait, the only articles that will get
the metadata:crime will be articles on *people* who
have been tried for and convicted of a crime." A
better path. (though, I might add, still one that is
provably illogical, given that courts reviewing the
same evidence as other courts often overturn verdicts,
and so even facts of a crime are open to
interpretation). Anyway, so metadata:crime is
inserted into articles on [[Randal Dale Adams]], later
tried again and proven innocent, and [[Jesus
Christ]]--no appeal for him--and [[Nelson Mandela]],
that agitator and limerock miner. Nice look, the
squint. Pizza Puzzle adds it to [[Adolf Hitler]] but
Notheruser says "wait, wait, he was never tried and
convicted; he committed suicide and didn't have a
chance to defend himself." So the label is removed,
and is removed from [[Richard Nixon]] and [[Lee Harvey
Oswald]], and [[Jack the Ripper]]. Hey, this works
great.
sarcastically, bitterly, but still with a point.