[WikiEN-l] Editorial decisions are not the same as censorship

Tue Mar 29 16:59:50 UTC 2005

On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 07:42:32AM -0800, Robert wrote:
> Let me give an example: The English Wikipedia has an article on
> fertilization of an egg, pregnancy and giving birth.  But we do *not*
> have photographs of men having sex with women, impregnating them!
> That is an editorial decision, made for very good reasons.  The
> decision not to publish any given sex photograph is in no way, shape
> or form censorship.

I agree with you that this is not censorship.  However, your description
implies that we don't have such pictures at all.

The articles on [[fertilization]], [[pregnancy]], and so forth all link
to [[Sexual intercourse]].  That article, as it so happens, starts out
with a photograph of two lions engaging in sexual intercourse, and goes
on to include line-drawings (but not lion-drawings) of people doing the
same.

So no, we do not editorially exclude images of sexual conduct.  We -do-
place them on articles whose focus is sexual conduct, for instance
[[Sexual intercourse]], rather than on articles whose focus is the cell
biology of reproduction or the course of pregnancy.

-- 
Karl A. Krueger <kkrueger at whoi.edu>