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.