User:Forrestthealmighty/Wikipedia and freedom

Wikipedia and Freedom
One problem noticed in a Wiki-based community is the lack of freedom. The freedom of Wikipedia, for example, is more virtual than anything. The ability of anyone to actually create reasoning or opinions of their own is very limited on Wikipedia. The Enlightenment tradition of "Sapere aude!" does not apply to Wikipedia. Wikipedia can be in some ways the ultimate in neutral censorship. As Fahrenheit 451, by Ray Bradbury, says, "[d]on't step on the toes of the dog lovers, the cat lovers, doctors, lawyers, merchants, chiefs, Mormons, Baptists, Unitarians, second-generation Chinese, Swedes, Italians, Germans, Texans, Brooklynites, Irishmen, people from Oregon or Mexico." In short, true freedom is lost, or is in the process of being lost, to political correctness. Where are the ideals that have led to intellectual development? How can we realize, for example, Martin Luther's view of every individual being a priest, when those without recognition are cast out from developing their own ideas!?

The pages Articles_for_deletion and deletion_policy highlight the extent of this seeming intolerance. Situations including lack of notability and sources, as well as a lack of neutrality, can contribute to the deletion or heavy editing of an article. Where in the cases of persons or establishment, the notability rules prevent advertising, the deletion policy on biased articles can prevent the actual development of ideas or debate, and lead to the destruction of a concept merely because it was not presented in the most neutral fashion. Additionally, articles, especially when they concern the traits of ethnic or gender groups, have been edited or considered for deletion due to content that is not politically correct, even if it is true and supported by empirical data. Examples include race_and_intelligence and gender_and_intelligence. Articles such as this one, which could cause some to revise their ideas about a subject, are often considered for deletion merely because they are not yet well known.

I'm sure this comment will be deleted, soon enough. It's personal opinion, and not unbiased, and is thus doubleplusungood by some standards. Merely proving, of course, the thesis. An idea running counter to the overall schema!? Unheard of! Send it to the incinerators! We must protect neutrality at all costs! Perhaps the Wikipedia community will prove this prediction wrong, however.