User talk:Awilley/What WP:NOTCENSORED is not

NOTNOT
alanyst 15:00, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
 * For the nutshell I'd suggest "NOTCENSORED is not itself a sufficient argument for the inclusion of content" instead of "is not a valid argument".
 * Some formulation would be good regarding content that is gratuitously provocative, i.e. where an equally informational and relevant but less offensive representation is possible. Of course, what is "gratuitous" may be in the eye of the beholder, so disputes on that point should be resolved by seeking consensus and outside opinions.
 * Thanks!
 * I think you're talking about WP:GRATUITOUS?
 * I hit "save" last night in the middle of a sentence. You're welcome to edit it yourself as well, in fact, I'd appreciate as much outside input as I can get. It's an idea I've been thinking about on and off since a big messy RfC a couple years ago at Pregnancy (whether the Lead image should be nude or not). If I remember right, there was a group that used WP:NOTCENSORED quite a bit, and actually won the RfC until they were overridden by Jimbo's super powers. ~Adjwilley (talk) 16:51, 5 March 2014 (UTC)