-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Child porn features images of people who are unquestionably underage in sexual situations. The montage picture (haven't seen it, being from Scotland I have the same legal problems with viewing these as Sam Korn) of a rack of hentai magazines would more than likely not do that, and would therefore be legal (or, at least, [remembering I'm not a lawyer] less illegal than the 'teddy bear' image)
Cynical
Death Phoenix wrote:
Yes, but if I were to look at a hentai picture, I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between it and a lolicon picture. I don't want to go up to a police officer with either picture and see if I get arrested to find out which is which.
On 4/3/06, David Alexander Russell webmaster@davidarussell.co.uk wrote: Pictures of hentai magazines are not illegal in every country from which people contribute to Wikipedia, depictions of child pornography are.
Cynical
Death Phoenix wrote:
Looks to be potential edit warring arguing for the free image's removal because some of the magazines appear to be hentai instead of lolicon.
Being
a fan of neither, I have no idea what the difference is between the two,
but
some of the editors seem to be quite knowledgeable (and opinionated)
about
this matter.
On 4/3/06, David Alexander Russell webmaster@davidarussell.co.uk
wrote:
Let me repeat one thing - deleting this would NOT be outside policy or out-of-process. If the image is replaced with the free image (the japanese comic montage multiple people have mentioned) - which it SHOULD be, since the free image is more informative - then it can be deleted under existing Images/Media speedy deletion criterion #5 'Unused copyrighted images. Images that are not under a free license or in the public domain that are not used in any article'.
Entirely in-process, entirely within policy, and this coming from a self-confessed 'process wonk'.
Cynical
Mikkerpikker wrote:
> I'll repeat what I said at WP:AN/I, well done Sam. Brave move, and
you
> have my support. > > On 4/3/06, Ryan Delaney ryan.delaney@gmail.com wrote: >> On 4/3/06, Sam Korn smoddy@gmail.com wrote: >>> The image deletion process has shown itself incapable of removing
this
>>> image. The process is demonstrably broken when there is a hint of >>> controversy. I don't take stepping outside accepted policy and >>> process lightly. Here, however, it is absolutely right and
absolutely
>>> necessary. >> Agreed. Let the accusations of cabalism begin. >> >> Ryan >> _______________________________________________ >> WikiEN-l mailing list >> WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: >> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l >> > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > > >
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l