Stan is being sarcastic, but how would that article be handled?
Fred
From: Stan Shebs shebs@apple.com Reply-To: wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 10:59:22 -0700 To: wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] wikipedia in China
Christopher Mahan wrote:
--- Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net wrote:
All the things you suggest are good and no problem for the government. I have absolutely no problem with writing about all those good things. But the focus of the government is going to be on things like that BBS that got shut down. Should there be no article? A syncopathic article explaining why it was necessary to shut it down from the government viewpoint? Or an article from a Neutral point of view?
No article at all. It is truly insignificant, if you think about it. When there are 350,000 articles in Chinese about Chinese history, politics, culture and religions, then, a small blurb about efforts by the central govt to curb radicalism that impacted a small number of computer users (anything less than 10 million is small in china.) would be called for.
Let's not focus on the twisted twig while standing in a large forest.
And ditto for the Tiananmen square articles, since only a couple thousand people died, after all - hardly any at all, percentagewise!
While we're at it, I think there are a bunch of other governments who would like us to remove certain articles. We could surpass "neutral point of view" by being "completely neutered"...
Stan
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@Wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l