nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW
26,487
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 225:
Line 225: + +
no edit summary
However, I've already unintentionally run afoul of the CP commandments regarding a reference to pornography, and am not sure how to handle this idea without getting it reverted. My idea was basically a sentence or two explaining how it's proved dangerous, with a short list of those affected. Does that run afoul of the "family-friendly" commandment? I feel like omitting names makes it very unencyclopedic. Feedback please! [[User:EMorris|EMorris]] 01:23, 17 February 2010 (EST)
However, I've already unintentionally run afoul of the CP commandments regarding a reference to pornography, and am not sure how to handle this idea without getting it reverted. My idea was basically a sentence or two explaining how it's proved dangerous, with a short list of those affected. Does that run afoul of the "family-friendly" commandment? I feel like omitting names makes it very unencyclopedic. Feedback please! [[User:EMorris|EMorris]] 01:23, 17 February 2010 (EST)
:I made some very minor changes, and would ask that you make sure all the links are as family-friendly as the subject matter can be. If you have any questions about content, please ask before adding anything questionable. You might also want to look at the draft linked to at the very top of this page. --<big>[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]</big><sub>/Admin</sub><sup>[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]</sup> 02:25, 17 February 2010 (EST)