[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia:News suppression (was: News agencies are not RSs)

[David Goodman]

1/
when people should be "protected", is  not self-explanatory.  Some may
feel that
people are best protected by knowing the full truth in all cases.

2/
"doing right" is even more ambiguous of a concept than "improving the
encyclopedia";
the reason we have actual rules is that people will not always agree
about such generalities

Some of us may think "doing right" is publishing everything known to
be verified; others, only those that
lead to desirable social consequences. What constitute desirable
social consequences is also not a
uniform concept, or there would be no political differences.

The  present government of China would completely agree with these
principles for the flow of information,
and the leaders there undoubtedly think they apply them in practice.
Probably the Taliban would also.  So would
anyone who thinks that only those doing right ought to be permitted to
communicate--this is the basic characteristic
of repressive governments. .




David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG



On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 12:13 PM, Ken Arromdee<arromdee at rahul.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jun 2009, Durova wrote:
>> With respect and appreciation extended toward Apoc2400, it's dubious that
> there would be a need for a separate policy to cover this rare situation.
> At most, a line or two in existing policy would articulate the matter.
>
> How about this as a start:
>
> -- Modify WP:NOTCENSORED to say that Wikipedia is censored in rare cases in
> order to protect people.
>
> -- Modify WP:IAR to say that rules can be violated if they prevent doing
> what's right, rather than only if they prevent improving the encyclopedia.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>