- 3,633
- 2,504
I know we're waiting on Fandom's response, but given that I have not yet weighed in on this issue, and there's a possibility they may say yes and reopen debate, I'll make my position known for the record, though I do not plan on arguing.
I don't think it should be on the wiki. It has a unique problem that the other examples don't have (such as South Park), which is that looking into it even slightly outside of the wiki is going to immediately expose people to slurs. To me this is the very simple reason I oppose it.
Now, I have zero problem with edgy content personally, so don't take this as me being PC. I just don't think it's the kind of thing we should be presenting and introducing into conversations that will, without a doubt, at least prompt someone to Google it and see a few slurs instantly as demonstrated in this screenshot. Hiding the original title only makes this problem worse, as people won't think twice about Googling it if we purposefully hide any mention of the alternate title on the page.
The actual slur is simply too heavily ingrained into the verse for it to be presented and not expose people to it.
I don't think it should be on the wiki. It has a unique problem that the other examples don't have (such as South Park), which is that looking into it even slightly outside of the wiki is going to immediately expose people to slurs. To me this is the very simple reason I oppose it.
Now, I have zero problem with edgy content personally, so don't take this as me being PC. I just don't think it's the kind of thing we should be presenting and introducing into conversations that will, without a doubt, at least prompt someone to Google it and see a few slurs instantly as demonstrated in this screenshot. Hiding the original title only makes this problem worse, as people won't think twice about Googling it if we purposefully hide any mention of the alternate title on the page.
The actual slur is simply too heavily ingrained into the verse for it to be presented and not expose people to it.