[Foundation-l] Letter to the community on Controversial Content

[David Levy]

Andreas Kolbe wrote:

> The English Wikipedia community, like any other, has always contained a
> wide spectrum of opinion on such matters.

Of course.  But consensus != unanimity.

Your interpretation of the English Wikipedia's neutrality policy
contradicts that under which the site operates.

> > The New York Times (recipient of more Pulitzer Prizes than any other
> > news organization) uses "Stuff My Dad Says."  So does the Los Angeles
> > Times, which states that the subject's actual name is "unsuitable for
> > a family publication."
> >
> > http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/23/books/review/InsideList-t.html
> > http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2009/09/mydadsays-twitter.html
> >
> > You might dismiss those sources as the "popular press," but they're
> > the most reputable ones available on the subject.  Should we deem
> > their censorship sacrosanct and adopt it as our own?

> No. :)

Please elaborate.  Why shouldn't we follow the example set by the most
reliable sources?

David Levy