Estoy totalmente en contra de la eliminación de la sección «Cartoons» del artículo de Ariel Sharon. Calificar esas viñetas de racistas es tergiversar. ¿Acaso no se se puede criticar a un político israelí? ¿Si en vez de Sharon fuera Sarkozy, Zapatero o Bush alguien hablaría de racismo?
Lo sucedido en este caso es simplemente una censura absolutamente contraria al NPOV.
Este cambio http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ariel_Sharon&diff=8840593... parece muy desafortunado
La versión http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ariel_Sharon&oldid=884058... recuperarse
Sanbec
2007/12/5, Daniel Kinzler daniel@brightbyte.de:
David Gerard wrote:
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Yoni Weiden yonidebest@gmail.com
[...]
I seems like Commons does not have a NPOV policy and thus the pictures will be there until they manage to
create
one.
NPOV is not easily applicable to images - a requirement to host only "neutral" images would be very harmful, we would for example no longer be able to host example of propaganda: this would all have to go http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Propaganda. And a lot more, I suppose.
So, I do not think we can or should require individual images to be NPOV - but commons as a whole, and also pages on commons, should be - if POV/offensive/derogatory material is shown, it should be commented, and it could be moved to a sub-page. Categories are a problem though, since there, all images appear unsorted and uncommented. This is a technical limitation.
I do not agree that such pictures be presented in Ariel Sharon's page and I think you should interfere (as commons community clearly don't
have
the policies to deal with this case) and correct this serious offence
before
it is released to the press in Israel.
I do believe that if *relevant* (and free) propaganda or satire against/about someone or something exist, it should be available (and findable!) on commons - but, as I sad, presented in a neutral, educational fashion.
After a quick brainstorming on IRC, relevance/notability seems to be a decent criterion for the inclusion of POV/offensive/derogatory material: *documenting* such things *is* in the scope of commons, while *pedaling* it is certainly not.
So, lets try to apply some taste and common sense in the face of hate and stupidity. Should commons tolerate racism? no. Should we document racism? yes. Is racist material necessary to do so? yes.
Regards, Daniel
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l