There is a legitimate question about how much human nudity should
be shown in Wikipedia.
On the one hand, anyone who types /wiki/penis at the end of
http://www.wikipedia.org has no one to blame but himself if he
finds an article there about a human penis. And if he or she is
offended that the article goes beyond its excretory role to
describe its role in reproduction or *shudder* "getting it on",
tough luck. It's like visiting Las Vegas and being shocked to
discover that gambling goes on there.
On the other hand, many of us hope that the Wikipedia could
produce a version suitable for distribution to schools. And we
all know how prissy (or protective) some schools are about giving
access to 'obscene' information or images. The general rule is,
the lower the age group, the more "protection" they should get.
Note that this is from the POV of the "protectors"; others say
that if the kids aren't old enough to be interested, they'll just
turn the page.
For acceptance, however, those of us with a "no holds barred"
attitude might do well to consider the feelings of the "guardians
of youth". This means, either leave stuff out of Wikipedia
(unthinkable!) or somehow creating an expurgated (or bowdlerized)
edition.
This might not be so traumatic as you'd think. Many school
subjects are graded, with math probably having the finest
gradations. "Age-appropriate" materials are common in U.S. public
schools, and, presumably elsewhere as well.
But the first "print" or "plastic" (DVD) edition of Wikipedia
probably ought to be un-censored. Its target would be adults.
Perhaps if enough people get their hands on a physical copy of
Wikipedia, one of them will decide to make a "school edition". I
don't think we (the content providers) have to worry about that
right now.
Ed Poor, aka Uncle Ed