David Gerard wrote: > 2008/12/23 Thomas Larsen <[email protected]>: > >> I think we disagree over whether or not including indecent images in >> an encyclopedia constitutes good scholarship. (Yes, I do think the >> image is obscene, but that is irrelevant.) I argue no; you seem to >> argue yes; and we'll just have to agree to disagree. > > > "indecent" is also a matter of opinion. And equally orthogonal to > whether we should write about it, illustrating what on earth we're > talking about as we do pretty much every other encyclopedically > noteworthy image we talk about. > > That it's stupid, crass and distasteful does not mean it isn't of > encyclopedic noteworthiness - it's in far too many "worst album covers > of all time" lists for that. > > Encyclopedic noteworthiness has no relation, positive or negative, to > the concerns you're raising, so you're coming across as missing the > point.
I, too, lament the shocking lack of illustrative material in our article on [[shock site]]s. -Mark _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
