[Foundation-l] Possible solution for image filter - magical flying unicorn pony that s***s rainbows

[Tobias Oelgarte]

Am 21.09.2011 21:28, schrieb Sue Gardner:
> On 21 September 2011 11:10, Tobias Oelgarte
> <tobias.oelgarte at googlemail.com>  wrote:
>> Am 21.09.2011 19:36, schrieb Kanzlei:
>>> Am 21.09.2011 um 19:04 schrieb Tobias Oelgarte<tobias.oelgarte at googlemail.com>:
>>>
>>>> Don't you think that we would have thousands of complaints a day if your
>>>> words would be true at all? Just have a look at the article [[hentai]]
>>>> and look at the illustration. How many complaints about this image do we
>>>> get a day? None, because it is less then one complain in a month, while
>>>> the article itself is viewed about 8.000 times a day.[1] That would make
>>>> up one complainer in 240.000 (0,0004%). Now we could argue that only
>>>> some of them would comment on the issue. Lets assume 1 of 100 or even 1
>>>> of 1000. Then it are still only 0,04% or 0,4%. That is the big mass of
>>>> users we want to support get more contributers?
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://stats.grok.se/en/201109/hentai
>>> Your assumtion is wrong. The 8.000 daily are neither neutral nor representative for all users. Put the picture on the main page and You get representative results. We had that in Germany.
>> Yes we put the "vulva" on the main page and it got quite some attention.
>> We wanted it this way to test out the reaction of the readers and to
>> start a discussion about it. The result was as expected. Complains that
>> it is offensive together with Praises to show what neutrality really is.
>> After the discussion settled, we opened a Meinungsbild (Poll) to
>> question if any article/image would be suitable for the main page
>> (Actually it asked to not allow any topic). The result was very clear.
>> 13 supported the approach to leave out some content from the main page.
>> 233 (95%) were against the approach to hide some subjects from the main
>> page.
>
> Can you point me towards that poll?
>
> Thanks,
> Sue
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
Gladly. You will find it under: "Restrictions of topics for article of 
the day"
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meinungsbilder/Beschr%C3%A4nkung_der_Themen_f%C3%BCr_den_Artikel_des_Tages

It started some time after the "vulva" was presented at the main page. 
After the poll we even presented a topics like Futanari [1] on the main 
page at November 10th 2010 [2]. The reaction can be described with "no 
reaction at all". It was just as if it was any other article. Some left 
some praise at the discussion, some others made some corrections and so 
on. There simply wasn't such a thing as an uproar or any complaints. Now 
the article had 3k views a day and not one comment on removing images or 
something else since that date. Thats one of the reasons why I'm 
wondering if the "offensive image problem" is even exists, for the 
German Wikipedia. But if i look at the discussion pages at EN it's 
basically the same. There are more complaints, but also at least the 
triple amount of viewers per day.

[1] http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Futanari
[2] 
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Hauptseite/Artikel_des_Tages/Zeittafel#November_2010

Tobias