[Foundation-l] [Commons-l] commons and freely licensed sexual imagery

[Andre Engels]

My opinion on this is clear: Commons should welcome both photographs
and pictures. Whether a project shows a picture or a photograph should
be the project's decision, not that of Commons. Some may prefer one,
others the other. Sexuality is in scope on Wikimedia projects, so its
images are in scope at Commons.

Andre

On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 6:03 AM, private musings <thepmaccount at gmail.com> wrote:
> g'day all,
>
> There's an interesting deletion discussion taking place here;
>
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Sexuality_pearl_necklace_small.png
>
> concerning an image of a woman with sperm on her neck. To my mind it's very
> doubtful that this is in fact a freely licensed image, but regardless of my
> cynicism, the IP who nominated the image for deletion (the 5th time it's
> been nominated, and the 4th time was by me, in December) raised the
> possibility that we (both commons, wikipedia, and perhaps by extension all
> wmf projects) might be better to opt for drawings rather than photographs of
> sexual activity?
>
> I'm sure many are familiar with my view that the foundation is an acutely
> irresponsible host in this area (I'm not a fan, for example, of the pictures
> taken of topless women on beaches without their permission which commons
> currently hosts) - but wonder what the feeling is out there in regard to
> freely licensed images of people having sex - we've currently got quite a
> few on commons, and it's likely to be a growth area. There's a dirty pun in
> there somewhere, but I can't be bothered to make it......
>
> cheers,
>
> Peter
> PM.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> Commons-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>
>




-- 
André Engels, andreengels at gmail.com