[Foundation-l] Jimbo's Sexual Image Deletions

[Tomasz Ganicz]

2010/5/8 David Levy <lifeisunfair at gmail.com>:
> Samuel Klein wrote:
>
>> I don't think this is a technical issue at all.   Considering how
>> flexible and reversible wiki-actions are, it seems eminently
>> appropriate to me for the project founder to have 'unlimited
>> technical power' on the projects -- just as you and all of our
>> developers do, at a much higher level.
>
> Deletions are easily reversible.  Multi-wiki image transclusion
> removals, distrust in the Wikimedia Commons and resignations from
> Wikimedia projects?  Less so.

Well.. maybe... but bear in mind that it is really hard to discuss the
pictures you can't see, and commons-delinker bot actions are really
difficuilt to revert. On any other project if you delete something it
is just a local issue. But deleting a picture on Commons which was
used on many other project for years is really hiting all those
projects, not only Commons. The side effect of Jimbo action might be a
general move toward keeping pictures on local projects instead of
using Commons... Maybe we should have common-prolinker bot to work in
opposite way, after undeleting pictures?

The another idea is to keep on Commons only those pictures which are
non-controversial and suggest local project to keep their
controversial pictures local? For example en Wikipedia keeps fair use
pictures locally and it is OK. If for example nudity pictures is not a
problem for Danish or French or Svedish Wikipedias - they can keep
them locally... and the en-Wikipedia which is driven by anglo-saxon
taboo of nudity can get rid of them...


-- 
Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
http://www.ptchem.lodz.pl/en/TomaszGanicz.html