On 4/7/06, BJörn Lindqvist bjourne@gmail.com wrote:
Would you please mind telling a curious reader how this image either is harmful to Wikipedia or has the potential to harm Wikipedia?
In that it provides an easy way for detractors to rubbish Wikipedia, in that it has the potential to make Wikipedia harder to access for some people (particularly children with parental control programs) and in that including child pornography is not part of our goal to build a free encyclopaedia.
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.
This seem to indicate that people disagree with you, why do they do that?
As far as I can tell, a good number (*not* all) of the people discussing the matter on IfD were POV-pushing trolls. IfD has long shown itself incapable of deleting anything where there is a vague controversy and where groups of POV-pushers are manifesting themselves.
I apologise to any who see my actions as outrageously rogue-ish. I wish there were an alternative, less radical way.
No. When you take the "my way or the highway" approach, people naturally tend to get irritated.
I don't quite understand your point. I knew people would get irritated. What is your point?
-- Sam