Rick wrote:
Avoiding these images, or having a Preferences key to prevent their display, is NOT censorship. It is part of achieving the goal of Wikipedia, as I have argued above. It is also not a violation of NPOV, as an image is not a POV. It is being plain sensible, sensitive and broad-minded.
I love how those who are trying to censor Wikipeida are calling THEMSELVES broad-minded.
No. Censorship is imposed from the outside. You may wish to call it self-censorship. Indeed I believe it is broad-minded to be considerate of those who are looking for high-quality information yet do not want to be confronted with nudity. I find links to porn sites, especially with a clear disclaimer, much less troublesome than images that pop up without warning.
I am pleased Catholic Arkady does not object. That does not actually demolish my argument at all. It just influences the numbers by 1 :-) But seriously, the South American issue has already been mentioned.
JFW
____________________________________________________________
This e-mail has been scanned by the StreamShield Protector antivirus system.
Free education for all doctors. The simple, fast way to prove you are keeping up to date. http://www.doctors.net.uk/freelearning ____________________________________________________________
No. Censorship is imposed from the outside.
Could we drop this really very silly fig-leaf? What we do on Wikipedia is censorhip--it's unavoidable, part and parcel of what we do in producing an encyclopedia. When we decide what should and should not belong to Wikipedia, we're censoring Wikipedia. It's censorship, and there's no big deal about it. Why this huge, tiresome monstrous effort to find another name for it?