Just a note to say a huge thanks to Andreas, DracoEssentialis, John Vandenberg, and others for working to remove the image that was on [[Donkey Punch]].
And to DracoE for bringing it to Sue Gardner's attention on her talk page. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sue_Gardner&curid=13...
That page has had 29,000 hits so far this month, and had 381,705 in January (while an animated cartoon of a woman being beaten while anally penetrated was still on it). http://stats.grok.se/en/201201/Donkey%20punch
It would be wonderful if we could find some kind of project-wide solution to this kind of thing.
Sarah
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Andreas K. jayen466@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 5:38 PM, Steven Walling swalling@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Andreas K. jayen466@gmail.com wrote:
My wife pointed me to this animation a couple of days ago:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:%22Donkey_punch%22_(animated).gif
It is/was included (there is currently edit-warring about it) in the Donkey punch article in the English Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donkey_punch
This has been one of the most viewed articles in Wikipedia of late, with nearly 400,000 page views this last month.
http://stats.grok.se/en/latest30/Donkey_punch
Views?
Speaking purely as an editor...
I don't care if we had a majority of female editors. That image is just awful as an encyclopedia illustration -- it's the kind of thing you see on Tumblr or 4chan.
Practically speaking, I doubt Commons will delete it, but I think people who feel strongly should just comment on the Wikipedia talk page.
There is a discussion on the article talk page, as well as Jimbo's talk page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Seriously.3F
The problem, Steven, is that established editors rarely show up on pages about topics like pornography or sexual slang -- perhaps because they don't want to have such article titles in their edit history -- and a small group of NOTCENSORED advocates is enough to keep these articles in a 4chan state. On both sides, it is always pretty much the same dozen editors or so who meet for another NOTCENSORED war. And usually the NOTCENSORED crowd win, unless Jimbo comes riding in on his white horse, as he did in the Pregnancy article. That's not a good system.
Established and responsible editors beaver away on learned articles that get 30 views a day, which is all very well, but this article received 129,000 views in just one day last month. These articles are our calling cards, and our recruitment posters. For better or worse, they tell potential new editors out there what we are about.
Andreas
Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap