I expected, in fact, a considerably lower figure, perhaps 25%, so it It seems to me that 50% being used is a very high proportion , indicating good selectivity.
A secondary purpose of Commons in for material to be used elsewhere--have we any way for checking that? I'd even say that the true success of Commons is when the material there is used elsewhere, not just in Wikimedia projects.. I interpret your number as a demonstration that there is no serious problem of excess on this particular topic. Perhaps other topics in the field will be lower or higher--my guess is that all or almost will be higher, because I think you have indeed selected the category most likely to be abused,. David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 7:27 PM, Robert Rohde <raro...@gmail.com> wrote: > Many people have generally agreed that there are or have been a large > number of redundant, low-quality penis pics on Commons. > > Towards understanding this better, I wrote a script to traverse > [[:Category:Human genitalia]] and all of it's subcategories (it is > refreshingly finite). > > In this category we have 772 images of male and female genitalia. > Most appear to photographs, though some are illustrations or other > art. > > For each image, I then determined whether it was in use in the main > namespace of any Wikimedia project. Of the 772 genitalia images, 347 > are currently being used to illustrate some page in the main namespace > of some project. (That's still a lot of penis / vulva pics but I'll > assume that the projects are at least somewhat reasonable about their > uses.) > > The remaining 425 images aren't used in the main namespace of any > project. They may still appear in other places, such as discussion > pages or user pages, but are likely to be less valuable. I would > assume it is images like these that are most likely to warrant > exclusion by any policy that aims to address the proliferation of > low-quality and redundant penis pics. Perhaps by looking at this list > one can get an idea of what the issue is and consider the best ways to > address it. > > I've compiled the list at: > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:List_of_genitalia_for_review > > (There are actually only 411 on the list, as I dropped 14 after my > editor mangled the UTF8). > > -Robert Rohde > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l