Christiaan Briggs said:
Bummer, thought it sounded too easy.
But following this theme, as long as we get down to the task of tagging
images then targeted filtering, whether it be site-based or browser
based, is always going to be an option. One day web browsers may well
support some kind of image/content filter system, in which case all
we'd need to do is hook our tagging system into it, at which point we
could dispense with a site-based preference option.
I suggest that you (and all those suggesting site-based filtering) look at
the votes on that page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Graphic_and_potentially_disturbing_i…
particularly the summary.
You may notice that the only proposals that got a consensus were:
1. "Do nothing now, as there's not really a problem now. Revist this if it
ever becomes a widespread problem that can't adequately be handled on a
case by case basis on individual article talk pages as it is now. Policy
should only ever be developed on an as needed basis, as excessive policy
is both wasteful and harmful." -Shane King, 33 ayes, 5 nays2. "1) checkbox for
hiding all text from articles. 2) checkbox for hiding
all images from articles, and replacing them with links."-Chmod007, 10
ayes, 4 nays3. "Users should also be provided the option to hide all sections except
for lead sections"-Eequor, 2 ayes 1 nay
The Shane King option to "do nothing now, [handle] on a case by case basis
as it is now" attracted the most support and the least opposition, and
also achieved a clear consensus, over 85%.