[WikiEN-l] Can we think about trying the "show" solution?
wilydoppelganger at gmail.com
Thu Feb 21 22:05:22 UTC 2008
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 4:51 PM, The Mangoe <the.mangoe at gmail.com> wrote:
> As long as the two sacred principles of "No pictures!" and "Not
> censored!" stand in rigid opposition to each other, the conflict will
> continue. The "show" solution (with an appropriate note) or even
> putting all the images on the "depictions" page (again, with a
> prominent note) seem like reasonable solutions. As far as the
> "depictions" article is concerned, I can't see how that article can
> exist without images.
> If this is a "slippery slope", it's because "not censored!" is often
> interpreted to mean "dare to be offensive". It is taken to be a highly
> POV-pushing statement about how public discourse is to be conducted.
> In the present case it represents a statement of defiance against
> "fundamentalist" Islam; more generally, it can be taken, with some
> justification, as the adoption of a particular liberal, secular,
> Western public morality. This is not the only sign of this: we also
> tolerate POV-dubious advocacy projects such as LBGT and animal rights,
> but I think it would be very hard for there to be a (say) Wikiproject
> Fundamentalism, except as a sort of authorized hatchet workplace. I'm
> not saying that I want to step up to that really huge issue, because I
> simply don't have the stamina for it. I am saying that in the instant
> case, I think we can make a reasonable concession and stick to it.
I had previously believed if a technical solution existed that allowed
us to create a hatnote that said "To hide the images in the article
which may be offensive to some Muslims, click [[here]]" that hid the
images, one could round up a cabal and force it through.
The community response at
convinced me it might simply be unpossible - but the AfD was closed to
early to allow much discussion.
Auto-hidden with "Show" and "Only on a depictions" page have been
discussed to death 1000X over and rejected - while I agree with
Itaqallah and a few others that the current arrangement it at best
"suboptimal", it's simply that case that too many people that
censoring such an important article to present it from a non-neutral
perspective is simply to intolerable to our collective morality as
But uh - feel free to suggest it.
More information about the WikiEN-l