Great, thank you :) On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Toby Hudson <tob...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Sarah, > > The principle of least surprise is roughly the following: > People who go to a category/gallery/encyclopedia-article expecting > something (shoes) should not be surprised by something they may find > offensive (naked women wearing shoes). > > > One way to ensure this is to make clearly labelled subcategories for the > potentially offensive material. In this case, I made a subcategory: > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Women_wearing_high-heeled_shoes > and within that > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Nude_women_wearing_high-heeled_shoes > > so everyone who visits that category knows exactly what they're going to > see in advance. > > > Regarding your Flickr question: Whether the account is deleted or not > doesn't usually change whether or not the picture is in scope. But deleted > accounts do make the copyright status more questionable. At the time of > upload, the bot would check that the license is correct, but that doesn't > eliminate the possibility that the Flickr user is uploading copyright > violations to their Flickr account ("Flickrwashing"). If there are other > likely signs of copyright violation, I would nominate for deletion (as I did > for the other image mentioned in this thread > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Young_girl_with_see-through_tops_and_shorts.jpg). > When the account is still active, you can also check the rest of the Flickr > user's contributions to get a good sense of whether they are really the > author of the photos they're uploading. > > Snapshots aren't necessarily out of scope just because they're snapshots, > they're sometimes realistically useful for an educational purpose. > > Toby > > > > On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 10:55 PM, Sarah Stierch <sarah.stie...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Hi Toby - >> >> Sorry to be a n00b but, can you explain what you mean by "refactoring this >> category according to the principle of least surprise?" >> >> For anyone else - if you find an image that has been uploaded by a Flickr >> bot, and the Flickr account has been deleted what do you do? I notice a >> large portion of images like this are often snapshot uneducational photos >> (here is an example: >> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Labace_%2824%29.jpg) I was going >> to nominate it for just being out of scope because Commons is not a >> repository for snapshots. >> >> ;) >> >> Asking questions like this on Commons-L isn't very pleasant, so thanks for >> helping! >> >> Thanks, >> >> Sarah >> >> >> On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 6:48 AM, Toby Hudson <tob...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I've made a start on refactoring this category according to the principle >>> of least surprise. Feel free to do this whenever you notice a "surprising" >>> image in a mundane category. >>> >>> Regarding consent, if any of the identifiable women are in private >>> locations, >>> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/COM:PEOPLE<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:High-heeled_shoes>applies, >>> and the uploader should state that permission was obtained to take >>> & publish the image. If this has not been done, please either contact the >>> uploader or propose deletion. >>> >>> Toby Hudson / 99of9 >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 8:05 AM, Sydney Poore <sydney.po...@gmail.com>wrote: >>> >>>> Category:High-heeled shoes is an excellent example of the current >>>> problem WMF projects are having with creating and disseminating content >>>> that >>>> is unbiased. >>>> >>>> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:High-heeled_shoes >>>> >>>> This category is different that most all the other categories about >>>> footwear because it contains many images that are not primarily examples of >>>> high-heeled shoes. Most other categories about footwear contain mostly >>>> images of shoes or the lower leg(s) with a shoe or shoes. >>>> >>>> The number of images in Category:High-heeled shoes is higher than most >>>> categories about footwear. Approximately one- third of the images are of >>>> full body shots of attractive females who are wearing high heeled shoes, >>>> and >>>> a significant number of them are nude or posed in sexually provocative >>>> positions. >>>> >>>> There are random women who are wearing shoes and are mixed in with the >>>> porn-stars and strip-tease dancers. These women are being objectified and >>>> sexualized without their consent because of the way the the images are >>>> displayed in the category. See Wikipedia article on Sexualization >>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexualization for a description of the >>>> term. >>>> >>>> In each language that has Wikipedia articles about high-heeled shoes, >>>> the content is about a type of footwear, so the links in the articles that >>>> lead to commons are directing people to nudity or sexual content that they >>>> would not anticipate. There are other problems with some of the images, >>>> including unclear consent for the image to be uploaded by the subject of >>>> the >>>> image. >>>> >>>> I see this category as a concrete example of systemic bias coming from >>>> having a male dominated editing community. >>>> >>>> Leather boots is only other category that I found that also has a large >>>> number of images of people. It also contain a disproportionate number of >>>> images of women who are nude or in sexually provocative poses. >>>> >>>> I think that it is important to continue to talk about these issues in >>>> the hope that more people with became educated about the problems with with >>>> our current methods to collect, categorize, and disseminate content. >>>> >>>> Sydney Poore >>>> User:FloNight >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Gendergap mailing list >>>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gendergap mailing list >>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for the Wikimedia >> Foundation<http://www.glamwiki.org> >> Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American >> Art<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch> >> and >> Sarah Stierch Consulting >> *Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising.* >> ------------------------------------------------------ >> http://www.sarahstierch.com/ >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gendergap mailing list >> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Gendergap mailing list > Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap > > -- GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for the Wikimedia Foundation<http://www.glamwiki.org> Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Art<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch> and Sarah Stierch Consulting *Historical, cultural & artistic research & advising.* ------------------------------------------------------ http://www.sarahstierch.com/
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap