On 2009-May-24 16:32:34 +1000, private musings <thepmacco...@gmail.com> 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

Attachment: pgpFw1GkSPLNt.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Wikimediaau-l mailing list
Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l

Reply via email to