Anthere wrote:
We censor pictures of clitoris on the english wikipedia.
I don't agree that our handling of 'clitoris' can reasonably be called 'censorship'. The picture(s) are right there for anyone to click on and see.
On the other hand, I'm inclined to agree that the current handling is perhaps not optimal.
Could we perhaps handle these pictures in the same way? That is, make them accessible in the same way, but not randomly plastered all over the article?
Part of the issue here is that these pictures are of _extreme_ current importance. Many people visiting that page will be interested in seeing the pictures, and rightfully so.
The article in its present state needs a lot of work, of course. As an example, there is a series of quotes from George W. Bush about war crimes *committed by the Iraqis* with the droll suggestion that "These statements may or may not represent the positions that his administration will take regarding the Abu Ghraib prison situation."
That statement seems designed to be a swipe against the Bush administration rather than a neutral assessment of the probabilities. The reader is invited to imagine Bush plausibly saying "These are war crimes, but we should excuse them." It's just editorial.
--Jimbo