> From: David Levy <[email protected]>

> It most certainly is a matter of interpretation.  If the English
> Wikipedia community shared yours, we wouldn't be having this
> discussion.

> In this context, you view images as entities independent from the
> people and things depicted therein 



I view images as *content*, subject to the same fundamental policies and 
principles as any other content.


> (and believe that our use of
> illustrations not included in other publications constitutes undue
> weight).



For the avoidance of doubt, I am not saying that we should use the *very same* 
illustrations that reliable sources use – we can't, for obvious copyright 
reasons, and there is no need to follow sources that slavishly anyway. 

But as we are writing an encyclopedia, it would be good to strive for images 
equivalent to those found in educational standard works. We could also look at 
good educational websites (bearing in mind that some specialist scholarly works 
do without colour images to keep printing costs low). 

So I view it as important, before we use an illustration, to consider whether 
reliable sources in the field use the same kind of illustration. For example, 
the German vulva image that has been discussed several times conforms in style 
to the illustrations used in scholarly (e.g. medical) works, and even 
educational works for minors (at least in Germany). So, good image. The anal 
fisting image included in the English Wikipedia I would not have used, because 
I don't think it's the type of image we would find in a reputably published 
illustrated source, even an uncensored one, on sexology (which would be the 
model to follow in this topic area). It just looks too amateurish and 
home-made, and home-made + sexually explicit is a poor combination. (The image 
in the frotting article is another example.)

I agree by the way that we should never write F*** or s***. Some newspapers do 
that, but it is not a practice that the best and most reliable sources 
(scholarly, educational sources as opposed to popular press) use. We should be 
guided by the best, most encyclopedic sources. YMMV.

Cheers,
Andreas
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Reply via email to