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_Vulva2.jpg#File:Korean_Vulva2.jpg_3