From: David Friedland <david(a)nohat.net>
How would you feel if the linked images had a
disclaimer saying
something to this effect:
The following images have been placed on a separate
page because they
MAY be consiered disturbing and/or offensive. It is Wikipedia policy not
to take a position on whether the following images are in fact
disturbing or offensive or not (See [[Wikipedia:Neutral Point of
View]]). However, to avoid disturbing or offending those users to whom
the images are disturbing or offensive, they have been placed on a
separate page.
It would be nice to find a much shorter way of expressing this, but I think
this is a very accurate and nicely put expression of what I, personally, feel
needs to be expressed. And I think it's a good policy, while recognizing that
no disclaimer can change the fact that placing the link does amount to
catering to somebody's point of view.
I've been brooding about this issue of "making it a link caters to a point of
view." I've asked myself how I would feel if I went to an article about
someone I admire--say, Margaret Sanger--and found that the text had been
completely replaced with a link and a disclaimer, saying "It is Wikipedia
policy not to take an position on whether the life and opinions of Margaret
Sanger are, in fact, offensive. However, to avoid disturbing or offending
those users to whom this material is offensive, we have placed it on a
separate page." My conclusion is that I _would_ find this irritating but I
would find it tolerable. (Just barely).
Linking to photographs which ought to be seen _does_ affect the _balance_ of
point of view on the page, but does not amount to _censorship_ or
_suppression_ of any point of view.