[WikiEN-l] WikiProject Decency

[Jimmy Wales]

Theresa Knott wrote:
> Well I'm making a big assumption here. But I'm going to assume that
> Florida is a reasonable state with reasonable laws on obscenity. If
> that is the case then we simple shouldn't have any images that are
> obscene.

It is a reasonable state on these matters, and in any event the
controlling law in this sort of matter is generally the U.S.
constitution (First Amendment).

> Wikipedia is an encylopedia not a pornshop. 

I agree completely.

> For example. I do not believe that the picture of an erect penis on
> the penis article is obscene. It it encylopedic and entirely
> appropriate for minors, and I cannot believe that the state of Florida
> would think otherwise. _If_ we have any pornographic pictures, and we
> do have a lot of pics of pornstars, I haven't checked them all but
> it's certainly possible that someone might upload a pornographic image
> of one of them we should simplr delete them as innapropriate for an
> encylopedia.

I think this is very well put.

In many cases the distinction between an appropriate illustration and
inappropriate pornography is a matter of style, of editorial taste and
judgment.  This may sound like a useless non-answer, but it's the exact
same answer we routinely employ in our process of determining what
articles should say.  We think about it, discuss it, try to get
consensus, try to find the best way to *get it right*.

--Jimbo