Bryan Derksen said:
At 08:29 AM 2/14/2005 -0800, Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales
wrote:
Tony Sidaway wrote:
The site in question has an age disclaimer. Are
we trying to build
an encyclopedia, or an electronic playpen into whch people can dump
their kids without supervision?
But, consider this restatement: Are we trying to build an
encyclopedia, or an electronic playpen where annoying trolls can dump
their porn photos without supervision?
I don't see how putting a photo of someone performing autofellatio onto
the autofellatio article is trolling. That's just about the only
article I can think of where it would actually fit in.
If it's a copyvio or if there are _better_ images to replace it with,
that's a separate issue that's already covered pretty clearly by
existing policy.
Indeed, whether or not the existing picture is appropriate can be decided
by consensus. Before Jimbo's intervention there were very, very few
people seriously arguing that the picture was inappropriate, and I still
do not understand that argument. The question was whether to link. Even
now there is no consensus to link, though it seems to be heading in that
direction.
In short, though a lot of people decry the chaos of the discussion, it
showed Wikipedia's normal decision making processes working very
effectively. There was a very brief edit war at one point but nothing
that couldn't be handled capably by administrators doing their normal job.