[WikiEN-l] Can we think about trying the "show" solution?
the.mangoe at gmail.com
Fri Feb 22 23:27:08 UTC 2008
We have edit wars in the genitalia articles all the time, and they
start when someone puts in a sufficiently graphic image. Often these
are found to have originated from porn sites. As a rule the articles
get brought back to using less provocative images, and things quiet
down. The theory that the illustrations have to include women
suggestively fingering their vulvae may be supported by "not
censored", but except for the gallery of pornography which is "female
masturbation", the notion that less sexualized images are more
encyclopedic generally prevails.
On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 2:39 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > If you add show/hide tags to [[Muhammad]], how long do you think it
> > > will take for the edit war to start on [[Clitoris]]? I'd give it about
> > > 3 hours...
> > Let them, I say. Our editorial quality will not be ruined if articles
> > are structured in such a way that you have to click a button to see a
> > photograph of a clitoris on [[Clitoris]] - nor will it be ruined if
> > you have to click a button to see a photograph of a jackdaw on
> > [[Corvus monedula]], not that I can see anyone caring about that.
> > (Made to look a little sillier, mind you, but then we do plenty of
> > that already!)
> You've completely missed my point. I didn't say "How long will it take
> for someone to add show/hide tags to [[Clitoris]]?" I said "How long
> will it take for the *edit war* to start on [[Clitoris]]?". I'm not
> making a judgement on whether or not the images should be hidden, I'm
> pointing out that without a policy, we're going to get edit wars, and
> those *are* inherently bad.
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
More information about the WikiEN-l