Dear Derk-jan,
As for 1), I think youtube can be compared in populairity and size with
wikipedia, and in videos surpasses commons.
Youtube enables its visitors to tag videos as adult.
see for example:
kind regards,
Teun Spaans
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 3:24 PM, Derk-Jan Hartman <d.j.hartman(a)gmail.com>wrote;wrote:
This message is CC'ed to other people who might
wish to comment on this
potential approach
---
Dear reader at FOSI,
As a member of the Wikipedia community and the community that develops the
software on which Wikipedia runs, I come to you with a few questions.
Over the past years Wikipedia has become more and more popular and
omnipresent. This has led to enormous problems, because for the first time,
a largely uncensored system has to work in the boundaries of a world that is
largely censored. For libraries and schools this means that they want to
provide Wikipedia and its related projects to their readers, but are
presented with the problem of what some people might consider, information
that is not "child-safe". They have several options in that case, either
blocking completely or using context aware filtering software that may make
mistakes, that can cost some of these institutions their funding.
Similar problems are starting to present themselves in countries around the
world, differing views about sexuality between northern and southern europe
for instance. Add to that the censoring of images of Muhammad, Tiananman
square, the Nazi Swastika, and a host of other problems. Recently there has
been concern that all this all-out-censoring of content by parties around
the world is damaging the education mission of the Wikipedia related
projects because so many people are not able to access large portions of our
content due to a small (think 0.01% ) part of our other content.
This has led some people to infer that perhaps it is time to rate the
content of Wikipedia ourselves, in order to facilitate external censoring of
material, hopefully making the rest of our content more accessible.
According to statements around the web ICRA ratings are probably the most
widely supported rating by filtering systems. Thus we were thinking of
adding autogenerated ICRA RDF tags to each individual page describing the
rating of the page and the images contained within them. I have a few
questions however, both general and technical.
1: If I am correctly informed, Wikipedia would be the first website of this
size to label their content with ratings, is this correct?
2: How many content filters understand the RDF tags
3: How many of those understand multiple labels and path specific labeling.
This means: if we rate the path of images included on the page different
from the page itself, do filters block the entire content, or just the
images ? (Consider the Virgin Killer album cover on the Virgin Killer
article, if you are aware of that controversial image
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Killer)
4: Do filters understand per page labeling ? Or do they cache the first RDF
file they encounter on a website and use that for all other pages of the
website ?
5: Is there any chance the vocabulary of ICRA can be expanded with new
ratings for non-Western world sensitive issues ?
6: Is there a possibility of creating a separate "namespace" that we could
potentially use for our own labels ?
I hope that you can help me answer these questions, so that we may continue
our community debate with more informed viewpoints about the possibilities
of content rating. If you have additional suggestions for systems or
problems that this web-property should account for, I would more than
welcome those suggestions as well.
Derk-Jan Hartman
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l