[WikiEN-l] List of articles censored in Saudi Arabia
Hello, Saudi Arabian authorities censor certain articles on the English and Arabic editions of Wikipedia. A Saudi volunteer did a great job making a list of these articles. On the English Wikipedia, all currently-known articles are related to sex education, but notability on the Arabic Wikipedia, the article about evolution is censored! Here is the list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_articles_censored_in_Saudi_Arabia --Osama Khalid ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] List of articles censored in Saudi Arabia
Are these articles still blocked when using https or the old secure gateway? On Mar 28, 2012 4:11 AM, Osama Khalid osa...@gnu.org wrote: Hello, Saudi Arabian authorities censor certain articles on the English and Arabic editions of Wikipedia. A Saudi volunteer did a great job making a list of these articles. On the English Wikipedia, all currently-known articles are related to sex education, but notability on the Arabic Wikipedia, the article about evolution is censored! Here is the list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_articles_censored_in_Saudi_Arabia --Osama Khalid ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] List of articles censored in Saudi Arabia
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 06:24:09AM -0400, John Du Hart wrote: Are these articles still blocked when using https or the old secure gateway? No they aren't, and they cannot be. --Osama Khalid. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] More stringent notability requirements for biographical articles
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 6:00 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 27 March 2012 17:20, Charles Matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote: So you have been arguing that without the BLP policy, and without the noticeboard set up to help compliance with the policy, just the same close investigations of the actual reliability of sources that nominally fall within RS would be going on? I don't agree, and I wonder if anyone else does. I'm not the biggest fan of noticeboards, qua unchartered processes; but in this case it seems to be working, and having WP:BLP there fairly clearly has something to do with it. The key point to remember about BLPs is: no eventualism. If an article about someone dead 200 years says something nasty and wrong, that's not great, but it's not urgent. If an article about a living person says something nasty and wrong, that is urgent, and we can't just assume the wiki process will on balance fix it in the fullness of time. It's the simplest possible way of doing it and it's a vast improvement over the previous situation. It's not perfection, but calling it a failure is hyperbolic. No eventualism is one principle that I would like to see spelled out in BLP policy, in the Writing style section. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Writing_style People do tend to treat biographies like a research pad for all the things that an author might justifiably want to include in a five-volume, 2,000-page biography. The problem is, the other 1,999 pages never turn up, leaving something – often something trivial, titillating, or unflattering – that might be worthy of mention on page 1,547 as the biography's main point. Andreas ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] More stringent notability requirements for biographical articles
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 6:07 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: No eventualism is one principle that I would like to see spelled out in BLP policy, in the Writing style section. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Writing_style People do tend to treat biographies like a research pad for all the things that an author might justifiably want to include in a five-volume, 2,000-page biography. The problem is, the other 1,999 pages never turn up, leaving something – often something trivial, titillating, or unflattering – that might be worthy of mention on page 1,547 as the biography's main point. That's a good point. I recently edited a BLP to help clean it up, and was struck by two points: 1) It was difficult to know where to start and when to stop, as there is a need to not leave a BLP in a half-finished state, even if you are stubbing it down and slowly expanding, as even slow expansion can still leave it somewhat skewed and looking 'unfinished' (even if better than before). Those making subsequent additions need to bear that in mind as well. 2) If no-one else has written substantially about that person, it is a very uncomfortable feeling that you might be the first person to be doing that, and you start to wonder what right *anyone* has to write about a living person without working with that person to make sure it is accurate. This veers into the realm of discussing authorised and unauthorised biographies. Doing an unauthorised biography of a famous person and getting it published can make the author money, and most publishing firms will only publish if it is accurate and non-libellous. But doing short pages on non-notable or borderline notable people is something entirely different, and the motivations are often entirely different. Motivation is something that should be looked at as well. In my case, the articles are people working in science and that interests me. But is that enough of a reason? What about someone who wants to write about the leader of some small obscure country on the other side of the world? (And then you have the classic case of the motivation being to do a hatchet job on someone). Sure, the mantra is to use reliable sources and be faithful to the sources, but it is still very different (and difficult) writing about a living person who can (in theory) turn up and object to what has been written. Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
