[Wikipedia-l] Censorship and bowdlerization

[Magnus Manske]

Oh, go bother someone else.


Steve Callaway wrote:

>It's much easier just to delete the pages you don't like or which don't suit
>your agenda, though, isn't it Magnus?
>
>Steve Callaway
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Magnus Manske" <magnus.manske at epost.de>
>To: <wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org>; "sifter-l" <sifter-l at nupedia.com>
>Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 5:06 PM
>Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Censorship and bowdlerization
>
>
>  
>
>>Poor, Edmund W wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>I like the idea expressed by Anthere and others of finding a way to
>>>      
>>>
>shield tender eyes from "adult" stuff. A significant minority of users
>believe that young people of a certain age should not be exposed to certain
>materials.
>  
>
>>>This is totally without prejudice to the debate over whether sexuality is
>>>      
>>>
>"sinful", just a reflection of the desire of many parents and educators to
>introduce some subjects step by step, keyed to the maturity level of the
>learner.
>  
>
>>>Someday, we plan to make the Wikipedia available on CD-ROM for schools
>>>      
>>>
>and libraries that don't have T-1 lines (or the patience to tolerate the
>"lag" problem). It would be very useful to allow a parent or educator to
>filter out a few articles such as [[****-piercing]] or [[fisting]] or
>whatever.
>  
>
>>>      
>>>
>>Basically, I agree that articles might (should?) be tagged as "adult",
>>as long as the default access for everyone is "no filter".
>>Likewise, as I have suggested long, long ago, and as has been suggested
>>again several times, articles might also be tagged with "categories"
>>(philosophy, biology, etc.), and by type (biography, city, etc.).
>>But, if I look at our current interface, it is already loaded with links
>>and information *about* the article, not to mention the article itself.
>>
>>Adding filters, categories, and types might be just too much for the
>>average user who passes through our humble site. The "hard core" of
>>users/writers would no doubt manage, though.
>>
>>But, the three options above might be just perfect for the "stable"
>>wikipedia version that Larry proposed. Contents there will be controlled
>>and checked anyway, so a little categorization on the side will be
>>managable to the reviewers. The readers there would see categories and
>>filters, but things like editing, talk, and all the tons of links needed
>>for an "editable" encyclopedia will not be there, so there's plenty of
>>    
>>
>room.
>  
>
>>Beside, we wouldn't want to give a CD-ROM with a current wikipedia dump
>>to a school anyway. The reviewed version would be perfect for that.
>>
>>Magnus
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Wikipedia-l mailing list
>>Wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
>>http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>>
>>    
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Wikipedia-l mailing list
>Wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
>http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>  
>