[WikiEN-l] cancelation of the deletion review of the satanism userbox

Thu Jun 1 10:08:25 UTC 2006

On 6/1/06, Tony Sidaway <f.crdfa at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6/1/06, Peter Ansell <ansell.peter at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > So we can promote things only if they are not divisive and
> > inflammatory in American English Christian culture?
>
> No, this is an encyclopedia.  We do not promote ANYTHING.
>
> However, if we're going to have to debate this issue thousands of
> times (roughly once per five userboxes removed, I suspect) then at
> least we can weed out the obviously absurd reviews.  Such as those
> that should be rejected on other grounds, even if people are prepared
> to pack polls and vote against "What Wikipedia is NOT".

If we dont promote anything, then why are you putting down your bias
towards what you feel is inflammatory and divisive, while ignoring
others pleas that such things are not in any way included in that
criteria.

What wikipedia "is" is more important than what it is not. It is a
neutral point of view area. By putting down your obvious point of view
against satanism, and just making the christian box go to be
consistent, you are showing that you are not infact driven by "what
wikipedia is" (ie. a place where you are neutral and therefore
accepting of others biases in good faith that they will not take them
to articles).

BTW, "packing the polls" may just be a reflection of how many people
are actually trying to show how much support (and hence not
divisiveness) the "keep" side has.

Peter Ansell