--- On Thu, 26/5/11, Andreas Kolbe <jayen...@yahoo.com> wrote: > From: Andreas Kolbe <jayen...@yahoo.com> > > > From: George Herbert <george.herb...@gmail.com>
> > I don't agree with either statement. > > > > The event (Savage coming up with the term, the effects > on > > Santorum) is > > notable. It's covered in reliable sources. The > > word itself would be > > a Wiktionary entry, but the incident overall is > Wikipedia. > > > > We're reporting on the damage to Santorum, not > causing > > it. Our > > reporting is not making it better, but neither is it > making > > it worse. > > The damage was done by Savage and others and was > widespread > > long > > before the article here. > > > > We do not censor topics that are damaging to > individuals > > just because > > they are damaging. They have to be notable and > > covered in a NPOV way > > for us to cover them, but this passes both tests. > > > You may be forgetting that we have an article on [[Santorum > controversy > regarding homosexuality]]. That's notable. The term, > linguistically, is not. > It's in one slang dictionary, and one book on neologisms. As a matter of fact, it would help Wikipedia if the article were retitled, [[Dan Savage Google-bomb campaign against Rick Santorum]]. 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
