Erik Moeller a écrit:
Anthere-
We censor pictures of clitoris on the english
wikipedia.
It was not censored, it was moved away. I had repeatedly argued against
that, but the outcome of the vote was:
9 people in favor of embedding a photo in the article
8 people in favor of using a drawing in the article and linking to a photo
1 person in favor uf using neither a drawing nor a photo
Of the 9 people in favor of keeping a photo in the article, 2 didn't want
to use the *particular* photo that we have, which they argued looks like
retouched pornography (and indeed it does, if you look at earlier versions
of the image). So that makes "embed drawing, link to photo" the strongest
position.
No such vote was held on the Abu Ghraib article.
I agree with you that our policies should be consistent. My suggestion
would be:
* picture that is universally considered offensive -> link
* picture that is considered offensive by some, not by others -> embed
One should never err on the side of censorship. I consider the acts that
were committed in Abu Ghraib offensive, but not the photos of these acts.
Regards,
Erik
Voting on the clitoris page was an error, because it was voting for a
particular case, rather than trying to fix a general situation.
Okay. So, let us set a consistent policy on this.
I totally approved
* picture that is universally considered offensive
-> link
* picture that is considered offensive by some, not by others -> embed
Fortunately, I fixed the clitoris page, otherwise, we had
-> clitoris -> link -> universally considered offensive
-> torture -> embedded -> considered offensive by some, not by others
Which I do not think is consistent with reality.