Jimmy Wales said:
First, whenever possible I think people should try
to see if a "link"
solution is helpful. It does not reduce the educational value of an
article by much if a potentially disturbing image is put behind a link
instead of being shown by default inline.
I think this is a good idea where a photograph is of subsidiary
importance. I think it would have be a poor choice for illustrating
topics where the image and the text are best seen together Nobody has to
download the inline image, but if the Wikipedia editors link the image
instead of inlining there is no easy way for the reader can see both the
image and the text it is supposed to illustrate.
Inlining is *always* more flexible. If you link an image, you are *taking
choice away from the reader.*
It seems to me that allowing a person to click on a link give a lot more
choice to the reader than being forced to see (or not see) an image.
Have I somehow misunderstood the difference between "inlining" and
"linking"? If so, I must make it clear that I support clicking to give
more choice to the reader.
Ec