[Foundation-l] Sexual Imagery on Commons: where the discussion is happening

[Anthony]

On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 3:34 PM, Mike Godwin <mnemonic at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I just had a thought -- what if it were possible for a user to
> categorically
> > block views of any images that are not linked to in any project's article
> > pages?  Presumably, those Commons images that are found in articles are
> > relevant and appropriately encyclopedic (speaking generally -- I also
> assume
> > there are some exceptions).
>
> A good number of the deleted images were in use... so I don't quite
> know about that, but lets assume it to be true.
>

What is the issue that you're trying to solve?  I thought the issue was with
images which aren't (or, at least, shouldn't be) used on any project.  Yes,
Jimbo confused the issue by deleting some images which were (and/or should
be) used in Wikipedia, but I thought we were pretty much all in agreement
that this was a mistake.

> Images that were just "dumped" to Commons
> > without being associated with any particular article would still be
> > available to those who were looking for them -- perhaps to complement a
> > particular article that needs illustration -- but the umpteenth
> superfluous
> > porn shot (or unconnected Muhammed image) would be invisible to those who
> > chose this option.
> >
> > Obviously, this notion is too cute to actually be helpful, but I thought
> I'd
> > share it.
>
> It has an enormously cute strawman answer:  If you don't want to see
> images which aren't used inline in another wiki, don't look at commons
> at all!   By definition any image in use in a Wikipedia is available
> outside of commons. :)
>

Well, yeah, exactly.  How the issue got moved from non-educational porn to
educational yet offensive images, I really don't know.