[Foundation-l] Discussion Questions forPotentially-Objectionable Content

[David Gerard]

On 23 July 2010 00:06, Ryan Kaldari <rkaldari at wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Actually I think there is one issue that has still not been well
> discussed, and which I think it should be possible to build consensus
> around (but maybe I'm naive): The issue of context for controversial
> images. For example, although it may be perfectly fine to include an
> image of nude bondage in the "BDSM" article, you probably wouldn't want
> it included in the "Rope" article, and almost certainly not in the "Play
> (activity)" article. Similarly, you probably wouldn't want to feature an
> image of Osama Bin Laden on the en.wiki Main Page on 9/11. Right now, we
> rely solely on the discretion of our editors to make sure images are
> used in appropriate contexts.


And so far, it's worked. Your words appear to presume people have
somehow failed to actually think about this stuff over the past ten
years.


> It would be useful if we actually had a
> policy we could point to if an editor happened to have a catastrophic
> loss of discretion. Something simple like: "Potentially objectionable
> images should only be used in contexts for which they are directly
> relevant and appropriate. In addition, the use of potentially
> objectionable images in contexts such as Picture of the Day, Random
> Picture of the Day, Today's featured picture, etc. should be avoided as
> these uses generally do not provide adequate context for such images."


Rules saying "don't be stupid" don't work and encourage less
cluefulness, not more cluefulness.


- d.