[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia and "indecent" content

[WJhonson at aol.com]

In a message dated 12/22/2008 6:27:38 PM Pacific Standard Time,  
larsen.thomas.h at gmail.com writes:

I think  we disagree over whether or not including indecent images in
an  encyclopedia constitutes good scholarship. (Yes, I do think the
image is  obscene, but that is irrelevant.)>>


--------------------------------------
I have to say that you thinking the image is "obscene" is quite possibly  the 
sole relevant point.
 
You start from this basis, and proceed forward with it.  We all start  from 
some point-of-view.
If our article on "vagina" shows a "vagina" would that be obscene? or  
educational?
I personally find it highly commendable that WP has taken the high road on  
this issue.
Hopefully the age of book-burning is far behind us, and we can define  
"obscene" the same way the (US) Supreme Court does, i.e. based on the  community.
 
Our community has said that this image is not obscene.
Personally I see nothing obscene in it.
Why do you?
 
 
WIll Johnson
 
 
 
**************One site keeps you connected to all your email: AOL Mail, 
Gmail, and Yahoo Mail. Try it now. 
(http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000025)