On 2009-May-24 16:32:34 +1000, private musings <[email protected]> wrote: >Indeed - the danger is that someone browsing through > >http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Young_women (not a great look for >how wikimedia feels about young women)
To be fair, there's also http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Young_men - though that doesn't include as many scantily clad young men. I'm not sure that the existence of a category of people's photographs suggests that they are sex objects or similar. (Though I agree that some of the young women aren't wearing a great deal). > ends up somewhere like >http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Erotic (or more explicit!) If someone wants to find erotic or pornographic material in Wikipedia, they can just search for any number of words. >and feels that maybe these images shouldn't be available in schools. Trying to draw a fixed line at what is or isn't allowed in schools is impossible. What's suitable for a Yr12 class may not be suitable for a Yr1 class. Likewise, some of the material on sexuality would probably make a suitable resource for a PD class (if a teacher was game enough). You could equally note that someone researching "The Magic Pudding" could wind up reading up on Norman Lindsay and his other artworks - some of which are less suited to young children. It's impossible to stop Wikipedia vandalism without completely changing the Wikipedia model. Stressing "adult oversight" is probably the best approach. -- Peter Jeremy
pgpFw1GkSPLNt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Wikimediaau-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
