[WikiEN-l] Re: Filtering, etc.

[Daniel Ehrenberg]

--- Geoffrey Thomas <geoffreyerffoeg at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Yes. I said, "except for historical articles on the
> religion[, such]
> as one might find in a history textbook". This is
> just for basic
> content. But even though we _may_ mention religion,
> do we _need_ to?
> I'm thinking on the lines of a
> science-and-math-topics 'pedia -
> religious articles, despite their legality, wouldn't
> be relevant.

No, I think all subjects should be covered, unless
there is considerable resistance to their subject
matter. Why only cover science and math when we can
cover almost everything and still get it to schools?

> A split portal system. I wrote my message before I
> saw that possibility.
> It's much superior to a complete article fork.
> 
> Just, can we have a few articles forked, e.g.,
> [[Anagram]] which contains
> some questionable examples?
> 
> -[[User:Geoffrey]] Thomas

I agree, it would be a good idea to fork some
articles. For example, articles such as
[[homosexuality]] should be written about, but not
with as much, uh, detail.
--LDan

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com