[Foundation-l] Wikipedia is not the Karma Sutra, was Re: commons and freely licensed sexual imagery

[Fred Bauder]

> This is not a photograph of sexual activity , but the after-effects of
> sexual activity.  A photograph is clearer about the nature of it than
> any drawing could be.
>
>
> David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG

The image is an excellent illustration of its subject. However I would
prefer a policy which excluded both it and the article in which it is
used as an illustration. I'm not sure how the policy should be elaborated
in our policy pages, but essentially this sort of material is
incompatible with our core mission, to provide an accessible compendium
of knowledge to the world.

I was discussing Wikipedia with a Mohs surgeon the other day, he happened
to be a Mormon. Other than the articles on dermatology and Mohs surgery,
we talked about his 13 year old daughter who had been discouraged by her
school from using Wikipedia. An article such as Pearl necklace
(sexuality) adds little to a girl's knowledge base in comparison to the
barrier it raises to her use of the encyclopedia.

I suggest that Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not include Wikipedia is not a
manual of sexual practices. It could be phrased Wikipedia is not the
Karma Sutra.

Fred Bauder