This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
A fact from Political Justice appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 25 April 2008, and was viewed approximately 1018 times (disclaimer)(check views). The text of the entry was as follows: "Did you know
...that William Godwin's philosophical work Political Justice (1793) argues that the existence of governments indicates that people are not yet ready to rely on their reason to regulate their conduct?"
"Piracy," as applied to unauthorized copying of creative works, means just that: "unauthorized copying of creative works." But its use in this sense is controversial because, for one thing, it equates unauthorized copying with robbery at sea. Thus, for an encyclopedia to use "piracy" in place of "unauthorized copying" when the latter is in fact what is meant, is for that encyclopedia to take the controversial position that such unauthorized copying is in fact on par with robbery at sea. Since there is no imperative for an encyclopedia to take such a position, nor any good reason for it to do so, and since an encyclopedia ought to avoid such unnecessary controversy, it ought to say what it means. In this case, what was said is "pirated versions," while what was meant is "unauthorized copies." I made an edit to this effect, with an explanatory summary, which was reverted by User:Ottava_Rima with the summary "nope." I've reverted the reversion and invite the reverter to provide a better explanation here, or else leave my good-faith and (I hope) well-reasoned edit intact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 05:36, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
You have nothing reliable to verify what you claim. However, I work in the field and all of the reliable sources I say is that there are pirated copies, not "unauthorized copies". The document is cited to sources. The sources say pirated, not unauthorized. Thus, you are changing the language to contradict the sources, which is vandalism. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:10, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Verify what? That the term is used as I described? If you believe otherwise, then please explain.
Your occupation is irrelevant, although it may serve to expose your bias.
McCann's preference for the controversial term is also irrelevant. The article is about Godwin's work, not McCann's ideological opinions on the unauthorized copying of that work. When McCann says "pirated" he means "unauthorized"; this is the language we should prefer, for the reasons stated above.
My changes were thoroughly explained; they are not "vandalism." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 19:42, 26 May 2009 (UTC)