[WikiEN-l] Neutrality enforcement: a proposal

[KillerChihuahua]

SlimVirgin wrote:
> On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 2:02 PM, SlimVirgin <slimvirgin at gmail.com
> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l>> wrote:
>
>   
>> * That's exactly right. All this group would be looking for are good-faith
>>     
> *>* efforts to edit in accordance with the NPOV policy. It's not an attempt to
> *>* control content, but behaviour. Perhaps we should change the title to
> *>* reflect that.
> *
>
> *stevertigo* wrote:
>
>   
>> You lost me. If you say its all about the content, I'd be on board. You say
>> its about "behaviour[-alism]," and I go now elsewhere to let you rethink the
>> idea entirely.
>>     
>
>
> Controlling content = "this article should or should not say X"
>
> Controlling behaviour = "this editor should or should not do X"
>
> In that sense, this proposal is about behaviour, because it is about
> good-faith editing (behaviour) and not the result of it (content).
>
> However, the whole content v. behaviour thing is something of a false
> distinction. ArbCom prides itself on not controlling content,
> but it does it all the time indirectly by controlling who can edit,
> ruling on what counts as a reliable source, etc.
>
> This is a proposal to enforce behaviour that upholds our own core
> content policy, and there's no problem with that tension.
> In fact, it's quite strange that none of our core content policies are
> currently enforced, except for BLPs.
>
> Sarah
Oh, I wouldn't count on BLPs being enforced.