Hi Audrey,
What you are describing sounds like a gallery on Wikimedia Commons.
See the following
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Galleries
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:When_to_create_a_gallery
The Wikipedia article can link to one or more of the galleries on
Wikimedia Commons...
.. and then the Wikipedia article should have a few of the best and
most relevant images, carefully selected by consensus to balance the
need to be informative (and sometimes a bit confronting) without
resorting to including soft porn in an encyclopedia gratuitously.
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 12:09 AM, Audrey Cormier <cormier.home(a)yahoo.ca> wrote:
I'm wondering what the thinking is among list
members concerning photos
depicting more militant feminist protest activity.
I've been searching for images on Flickr that relate to feminism worldwide,
and selecting some to copy to Commons. I've come across a few that are
definitely in the radical end of the spectrum. The photos themselves range
from "could be offensive to some people" (e.g. topless demonstrators) to
"fully intended to be offensive to some/many people" (e.g. anti-male
graffiti, posters dealing with menstruation).
Now, it's one thing to discuss militancy in an article, it's another to see
photos. They have documentary value, and I'm of the mind to go ahead and add
them to the Radical feminism article. Since they were intended to shock,
though, I do hesitate to do it.
Would they serve an article well, or detract? Opinions?
Audrey
(aka OttawaAC)
_______________________________________________
Gendergap mailing list
Gendergap(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
--
John Vandenberg