Someone I know did not recognise a venereal disease and as a consequence she became barren. It is because of this that I asked a Dutch organisation for illustrations of how venereal diseases visually manifest themselves. The images I got show sexual organs, show ulcers and other things that are quite horrid. The only way I know that gives people a fighting chance is by educating them, by providing information. That is in our mission. Our mission does not say we will give you information, "sanitised" information, information that will not help you because it is incomplete.
When you argue that there is no need for "arty" nude pictures, I agree. That is a completely different subject then hiding essential information that we need in our articles. Our articles require the highest quality illustrations because in this way we are true to our mission to inform. Thanks, GerardM
I believe in this part of the discussion nobody argues that the images like you mention should be removed, it is just a question whether they should be tagged (named, categorized) appropriately so that communities may decide to include them as hidden for instance.
This is under understanding the whole issue is not covered by BLP policy (I assume if a vagina is shown but the face is not this is not a BLP issue).
Cheers Yaroslav