User:Richard BB/Work in progress
 | This essay contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. Essays may represent widespread norms or minority viewpoints. Consider these views with discretion. Essays are not Wikipedia policies or guidelines. |
 | This page in a nutshell: Although Wikipedia does not censor, it also does not guarantee freedom of speech, and users reserve the right to remove comments or edits deemed disruptive |
One of the most common complaints in drama-filled debates is that a person has a right to speak because they have freedom of speech. Their complaints might be centred around their comments being deleted for WP:NOTAFORUM, WP:DENY, or WP:BLP reasons, or because their particular view isn't being represented in an article. Although it can often be frustrating to newer users who may be ignorant of some of Wikipedia's rules, this is often for the best. Wikipedia does not have freedom of speech, and this is not necessarily a bad thing.
What is freedom of speech?[edit]
When most people talk about freedom of speech, it's often in reference to the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which prohibits a law abridging a citizen's right to speak, as the majority of the en.Wikipedia editors as well as the Wikipedia servers are based in the United States. However, what many people, editors or not, fail to understand is that the First Amendment is in reference to the government ensuring free speech, not organisations, such as Wikipedia. As Wikipedia makes its own rules, and is under no obligation to allow anyone's comments to remain visible, the First Amendment does not apply.
Why might comments be removed?[edit]
Whenever user comments are deemed disruptive and smack of a WP:NOTHERE attitude, they may be removed in order to minimise the amount of WP:DRAMA that exists. This could be attempts at trolling, casual chat that isn't related to improving the article in question, spam, or biographies of living persons violations.
The same principle can also apply to edits within the article space. Any edits which are poorly sourced, promote a fringe view, or again make controversial claims about living people may be deleted. This is not an attempt to restrict your viewpoints or personal opinions; instead it is intended to ensure that Wikipedia remains as objective and verifiable as possible.
Regardless of this, talk page comments should only be edited for very specific reasons. They should never be edited, removed, or struck out simply because you disagree with them: the only time such things are permitted is when there is a clear attempt to disrupt Wikipedia.
Conflicts with WP:NOTCENSORED[edit]
Despite all of this, however, Wikipedia has firm rules about prohibiting censorship. It's important to note why removing comments or edits aren't attempts at censorship: censorship is restricting a certain view or comment because you disagree with it, are afraid of it, or are offended by it. Removing another person's comments for the reasons listed above are attempts to prevent disruptive behaviour or deny recognition to trolls. Furthermore, the rules of WP:CENSOR are employed in regards to article content, not the comments of users who edit said articles or use talk pages. The golden rule to remember is WP:IAR: if a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it. If there are comments on a talk page which are clearly disruptive, overtly harmful, or deliberately malicious, it is best that they are deleted and, if necessary, reported to WP:OVERSIGHT.