On 12/09/2011 12:18, Sydney Poore wrote:
If you look at the full body of his work, this admin
truly is trying
to follow policy and the customs of Commons and WMF projects in general.
Well I might have been too quick in judging him, and besides idiocy or
perversion the reason of his behaviour might have been a complete lack
of attention. To the point that he didn't even have a look at the photo,
because if he did and still protected the photo, then I am back at the
idiocy or perversity hypothesis.
Because, quite frankly, voluntary or not, exceptional or not, what he
has done here is an insult to plain common sense, and a clear direct
deterioration of WP content.
From the scientific point of view it is below the required level to
even begin a discussion.
Imagine the page for Finger, should we even take time to discuss the
propriety of a photo showing the forearm without the fingers ? What
would we think of an admin who would protect a photo of the forearm
without the fingers on the Finger page, after having been duly pointed
to the obvious mistake by a user ? Don't you think the user with a
normal self-respect would be right to no bother to come any longer on
Wikipedia ?
If you add the Asian-erotic content to that, you realize that the photo
was totally inappropriate on so many levels that the problem doesn't lie
in the photo anymore but on the admin.
IMO, the policies need to be tweaked so that admins
like him will have
better policy to work with. And we need a broader group of people
commenting in all deletion discussions so that we get a more globally
representative view of what is appropriate for Commons to have on site.
Yes but as Sarah Stierch wrote today :
One thing Wikimedia as a whole /suffers/ from is no
"solidity" when it
comes to policy and rules. Everything seems that it can be adapted,
broken, changed, manipulated..etc. I think that's a problem.
Adding rules or adding policies or adding commentators doesn't work if
the admins don't show the adequate level of literacy, or use their
position to manipulate the rules at their convenience.
In his Discussion lock comment Yann says "Person is not recognizable".
That is typical of illiteracy and bad faith. You add a right detail to
justify an otherwise totally wrong and very obviously wrong decision.
That is totally twisting the rules.
As a result we now have a scientifically totally irrelevant and plainly
domestic-erotic photo on WP, which is explicitly protected by WP. The
mistake is so obvious that no further rules will work if admins don't
show a normal intention to respect the rules.
Re-read the discussion page. Is it normal that Sarah Stierch (Missvain)
had to take time to write the obvious in detail, and that she was not
followed eventually ? This is not fair, no grown-up literate person
should be treated like that. Even if it is involuntary, Yann's decision
is so wrong and so rude it should seriously put in doubt his position as
an admin.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Korean_Vul…