| Revision as of 23:49, 1 July 2005 editCommodore Sloat (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users13,928 edits Israeli Censorship?← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:43, 3 July 2005 edit undoJayjg (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators134,922 edits →Israeli Censorship?: POV pushingNext edit → | ||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
| Why is Israeli censorship considered "POV pushing" when censorship by other governments is fair game in this article? I didn't write the deleted line but I don't agree with its deletion. What do others think? ( is the edit I mean) | Why is Israeli censorship considered "POV pushing" when censorship by other governments is fair game in this article? I didn't write the deleted line but I don't agree with its deletion. What do others think? ( is the edit I mean) | ||
| --] 1 July 2005 23:49 (UTC) | --] 1 July 2005 23:49 (UTC) | ||
| :The article mentions almost no other countries, the entry was unsourced and not representative of the true situation of freedom in Israel, and the editor in question is obsessed with finding negative to say about Jews and Israel, and has attempted to do so in close to a dozen articles now - that's POV pushing. ]<sup><font color="DarkGreen">]</font></sup> 3 July 2005 02:43 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 02:43, 3 July 2005
I think that the article “censor” should redirect to this censorship article. When most people use the word “censor,” they're using it as a verb, to describe the act of censorship. Such links should go directly to this article. The article about censors in ancient Rome should be renamed “Censor_Ancient_Rome” or whatever, with links provided for the small minority of people who are actually looking for that discussion when they type in or link to “censor.” -Blackcats 7 Feb, 2005, 04:30 GMT
- /Archive 1 - May 10 2004 and earlier
That's why you don't look up verbs.
Quotation
I don't understand the quotation and it doesn't seem relevant to the article (although it is an interesting logical fallacy). I'm removing it. Ambush Commander 04:39, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)
Next
Question, is the edit policy of wikipedia a form of cenorship?
History needed
This article currently covers censorship as it exists at the moment, but is lacking in any sense of history -- and this is a subject with a large history, in which current positions and actions are much influenced by that history. (Some UK content is also needed.) DES 07:51, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Censorship on wikipedia?
An admin is abusing her position to block content at feces. Check it out at talk:feces.
Israeli Censorship?
Why is Israeli censorship considered "POV pushing" when censorship by other governments is fair game in this article? I didn't write the deleted line but I don't agree with its deletion. What do others think? (this is the edit I mean) --csloat 1 July 2005 23:49 (UTC)
- The article mentions almost no other countries, the entry was unsourced and not representative of the true situation of freedom in Israel, and the editor in question is obsessed with finding negative to say about Jews and Israel, and has attempted to do so in close to a dozen articles now - that's POV pushing. Jayjg 3 July 2005 02:43 (UTC)