That's not entirely correct Jkelly,
"Images that constitute
original research in any other way are not allowed,
such as a diagram of a hydrogen atom showing extra particles in the nucleus
as theorized by the uploader. All uploaded pictures are subject to
Wikipedia's other policies and guidelines, notably Wikipedia:Verifiability,
and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view."
Therefore image do indeed need to abide by neutral point of view.
-Scott
On 8/24/06, jkelly(a)fas.harvard.edu <jkelly(a)fas.harvard.edu> wrote:
Hi,
Quoting Scott Stevenson <wikinetscott(a)gmail.com>om>:
Got a bit of a dispute going on over on [[New
anti-Semitism]]...
... surrounding an image and neutral point of view.
I don't think that this is a very helpful way to think about this image
usage.
It is true that we've done very little thinking about the way in which
images
might give undue weight to minority or fringe positions. I'd go so far as
to
say that we seem to be comfortable taking a very naive position on what
can be
communicated through photography, and I think it would be interesting to
have a
thoughtful discussion about that.
But this doesn't seem to be your concern. Instead, you're arguing that
the
photograph being used is not an example of what it is supposed to be
identifying. Jayjg is actually referring you to the correct page -- we do
make
an exemption in our No Original Research rule for images. If a Wikipedian
takes
a picture of tree, we don't ask that the assertion that it is a tree first
be
published in a reliable source.
Jkelly
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l