[WikiEN-l] Verifiability

[Steve Bennett]

On 4/10/06, John Lee <johnleemk at gawab.com> wrote:
> Just a sidenote, but I would have closed that as a delete. Most of the
> keep "votes" came from anons or new editors, so that combined with the
> fact that none of them cited policy as a reason to keep (while the
> deleters did) should have been enough to discount their votes (assuming
> we are pretending WP:IS a democracy). The article as it stands right now
> *really* tempts me to speedy it right away, but fortunately I've learnt
> not to meddle with the community's will, which apparently choose and
> picks policy as it likes (incidentally, so do admins -- so we're all
> guilty here). Yeah. Just rambling here. :p

Eep, I feel dirty. I was thinking of mischievously redirecting the
article to some presumed list on disputed sexual acts, but all the
acts actually have "articles" on them. The standard of them is
appalling though, with moral judgments, slang terms, lack of
referencing and perhaps original research rife. And some of them are
just plain wrong...Most of the examples in [[Ménage à trois]] are love
triangles, for instance.

It really is a problem that people with good taste and common sense
stay away from these articles.

Steve