[WikiEN-l] Sep 11 (wasL User:LanceMurdoch)

Fri Jan 16 09:34:20 UTC 2004

Daniel Mayer wrote:

>Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
>>It should be taken out because it is both a characterization 
>>and unnecesary for identifying the incident.  
>>
>It should only be taken out if it is deemed unnecessary for identifying the 
>incident. 
>
With that you make it sound as though you are agreeing with me.

>Otherwise we would have to rename [[My Lai Massacre]], [[Boston 
>Massacre]], (many, many other 'massacres'), 
>
Perhaps.

>[[Holocaust]], [[Racism]], and [[Terrorism]] itself.
>
These are articles about the concepts themselves, and do not necessarily 
imply the characterization of a particular act.

>>There are numerous other incidents which might be qualified 
>>as "terrorist", but where that term might be more hotly disputed.  
>>
>Then we dispute those! But please no blacklisting of terms. That is Newspeak 
>and censorship.  
>
There is ample opportunity in the body of an article to discuss whether 
the term is applicable.  That luxury is not available in the title.

>>By completely avoiding the term "terrorist", even when it seems 
>>obvious, we can avoid the need to set boundaries that define 
>>what is and what is not a terrorist act. 
>>
>Self-censorship is the worse kind. 
>
I would call it restraint by avoiding inflammatory titles.  

Ec