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

Reply via email to