On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 9:53 AM, geni <[email protected]> wrote: > 2009/1/30 Andrew Whitworth <[email protected]>: > > I'm certainly anti-censorship, so I don't advocate deleting all or any > > nude photographs. However, asking uploaders a few basic questions > > about their uploaded nudes (is the depicted model above the age of > > consent? is the depicted model aware that this photograph was taken? > > Is the depicted model aware that this photo is being uploaded here?) > > could help a lot of people avoid a lot of problems. Remember, it's not > > just the WMF who risks potential problems (and admittedly as an ISP > > the WMF's risk is probably very low), it's the people who are being > > depicted abusively that are going to have the biggest problems with > > these images. > > > > --Andrew Whitworth > > I would probably view it as an issue of image quality. We have had > Template:Nopenis for some time which among other things focuses on > quality. > > The providence of an image is a quality issue. Since we have no > shortage of pics of women in various states of undress (see > Category:Nude women and Category:Female genitalia) some of which have > fairly clear providence (see Category:SuicideGirls for example) I see > no reason why we should accept further images of questionable > providence and quality. > > I've already created Template:Nobreasts and it would probably useful > if someone put together Template:Novulva > > Wouldn't a generic solution be more adequate? Certainly better than going through all of the human anatomy.
-Chad _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
