[WikiEN-l] Just to throw this out there...

Thu Jun 12 05:36:05 UTC 2003

--- Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> Jimmy Wales wrote:
> 
> >Toby Bartels wrote:
> >
> >>>Here's a set of flags that I think would work
> well enough for the
> >>>felching article:
> >>>
> >>>sexuality
> >>>mature content
> >>>slang
> >>>
> >>>I don't see how those are very controversial.
> >>>
> >>"mature content" will definitely cause problems.
> >>You imply in the rest of what you write (not only
> in this post)
> >>«what some would consider to be appropriate only
> for the mature»,
> >>but not only does "mature content" not say this
> literally,
> >>but also (as somebody else pointed out) that's
> extremely broad,
> >>and includes [[Christianity]].  So it won't be of
> much use.
> >>
> >
> >Well, I don't agree.  The standards for what we
> mean by mature content
> >can be spelled out in sufficient detail and in an
> NPOV way so that
> >controversy is minimized.
> >
> >But I'm not invested in that particular phrase. 
> Perhaps we could use
> >'explicit sexual content' to distinguish it from
> 'sexuality'.
> >
> >>If I were writing the Wikipedia code, I wouldn't
> spend my time
> >>on writing support for these flags; that's better
> done (if at all)
> >>by another project that operates on top of
> Wikipedia
> >>
> >
> >But this is important for Wikipedia the website,
> not just for
> >others.
> >
> >Some people in this debate have taken a very POV
> position, i.e. that
> >wikipedia should shove this stuff down people's
> throats, and if
> >they're too prudish to deal with it, too bad ha ha.
>  I don't agree.
> >
> To be effective any kind of flagging system must
> avoid subjective 
> determinations.  Words like "explicit" and "mature"
> can lead to some 
> serious disagreements that can't easily be resolved.
>  The following 
> spectrum can be more objectively determined for
> photographs.
>     1. Contains images of sex acts
>     2. Contains close-up images of genitals
>     3. Contains whole-body nudity
>     4. Contains partial nudity
>     5. Shows people in underclothes
>     6. Shows suggestive photos of fully clad people
> 
> There is a gradation here, and that gives a greater
> opportunity to 
> choose how much is acceptable.  Putting these in
> some coding system 
> would allow these to be presented with only a few
> alpha-numeric characters.
> 
> Ec

It that for the piano ankles ? :-)

4. should be more precise, I think in most cultures,
seeing a naked hand is fine, seing a naked face not
always so.
Or naked hair
Or legs
Or tummy (look, it IS very hot these days here :-))

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
http://calendar.yahoo.com