-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 10/05/2010 05:51, Andre Engels wrote:
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 2:23 AM, Kim Bruning kim@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote:
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 12:23:28AM +0200, Andre Engels wrote:
Being educational should be just another word for being in scope, and in scope are, in my opinion, in the first place those files that are usable for the projects. That is the first thing that we should be judging things by.
I've already emphasized that a bit already on the page, but more from the WARNING angle.
That only says that pictures that are _used_ should not be deleted indiscriminately. Used and usable are not the same.
Could you edit or comment on the page in a way that reflects what you just stated? :-)
Hardly. The page as it is now seems to go from the point of view that we should not host any pornography, then restricts itself by trying to get a narrow definition of 'pornography'. For me, whether or not something is pornographic is at best a secondary issue.
Then would the http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Censorship page be more appropriate?