On Mon, 16 May 2011, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
It seems to me you are obsessed with the breasts in that image. If someone argues
against an image with breasts, it is censorship.
If someone argues against hosting some Wikimedian's technically semi-competent,
but undistinguished Thomas Kinkade pastiche in Commons, would you also shout
censorship? Probably not, I guess, because the censorship argument requires
that there be breasts in the image.
Censorship does not require there be breasts or "fuck" or anything else.
It's just the only arguments I've seen about why this image should not be
on the main page are that it contains breasts.
If you want to complain that it should not be on the main page because
it's a poor pastiche then that's a very different issue that is not
censorship related, but not one that I've seen made and so not one I've
made any comments about. To be honest though that would seem more like an
argument that it should not be featured rather than it should not be on
the main page. My view is that if it is featured it should be eligible to
be on the main page, if it isn't featured then it shouldn't be on the main
page. Whether it should be featured on not I don't hold a strong opinion
on, and not a discussion for this thread (imho), other than the fact that
the image contains breasts should be entirely irrelevant.
If the image contained blood and gore and people were saying that it
shouldn't be on the main page because of that, then I would be equally
against such censorship, even though I personally think that image would
be far less suitable for children than one containing bare breasts. The
image does not contain blood or gore and so nobody is saying it shouldn't
be on the main page for that reason, hence I'm not making any points about
There does seem to have been a bit of comment along the lines of "manga
cannot have artistic value", but that isn't why they think it should not
be on the main page (at least the way I've read the emails containing
those comments) and so they aren't proposing to censor it for that reason.
The same goes for any reaosn that is proposed for censoring content, e.g.
I don't think we should refrain from showing a featured map of Azerbijan
just because it might offend the Armenians.
Again, if I get a garage band to upload a few tracks, does the singer have to say
"fuck" in the lyrics to have your support? That would work too: "Y'all
to delete this great track in the style of ... from Commons because the singer
says 'fuck'. But that's what singers in this genre of music say all the time,
therefore it's educational. Commons is not censored!"
Not at all. If a garage band upload a few songs that you propose to be
featured, then I would determine my view based on the whole content,
quality, description, potential for educational use and any other relevant
factors (I don't work in the area of featured sounds, so I don't know what
the criteria are). The presence or abscence of one word should be
irrelevant to the decision in most cases, the exception being if that word
was the basis of the educational use of the work, for example I wouldn't vote to
feature a clip of the Sex Pistols on television show where they said
"Fuck" if it didn't contain them saying "Fuck" if that was the
the educational use of the clip. If the clip though does show them
performing on television, then that would potentially be a reason for the
educational use (obviously this would not be Free content though, but I
couldn't think of a better example of the top of my head).
So ... following this line of thought, the way to prove educational usefulness in
Commons seems to be to make sure that there are either breasts or "fuck" in
piece of art, or music. Because without that, it's just a so-so painting by an
amateur artist, or a so-so track by an amateur band, and the censorship argument
Not at all. My argument that this should be on the main page is that this
is a featured image. If it wasn't a featured image then I wouldn't want it
on the main page. As I said above, whether it should be a featured image
or not is a different discussion.
The whole point is that this image has neither superb artistic merit nor superb
illustrative value. Artistically, the perspective and textures are poor, as was
pointed out at FPC, and educationally, the fantasy setting is too specific to be
illustrative of a generic style.
Then you are missing the point that I am making. While you have valid
arguments for this not being a featured image, while it is a featured
image they are irrelevant to it being or not being on the main page.
The essential things in life are seen not with the eyes,
but with the heart
Antoine de Saint Exupery