Misplaced Pages

:Follow the principle of least astonishment: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 09:01, 7 January 2012 editBulwersator (talk | contribs)17,067 edits removed Category:Wikimedia Foundation Resolution using HotCat← Previous edit Revision as of 16:54, 20 January 2012 edit undoArmbrust (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers325,692 edits rejectedNext edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
{{shortcut|WP:POLA}} {{rejected|WP:POLA}}
The ] passed a ], urging "the community to pay particular attention to curating all kinds of potentially controversial content, including determining whether it has a realistic educational use and applying the principle of least astonishment in categorization and placement."<ref group=nb>See email clarification for scope: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-December/071089.html</ref> The ] passed a ], urging "the community to pay particular attention to curating all kinds of potentially controversial content, including determining whether it has a realistic educational use and applying the principle of least astonishment in categorization and placement."<ref group=nb>See email clarification for scope: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-December/071089.html</ref>


Revision as of 16:54, 20 January 2012

Red crossThis is a failed proposal.
Consensus for its implementation was not established within a reasonable period of time. If you want to revive discussion, please use the talk page or initiate a thread at the village pump.		Shortcut

The Wikimedia Foundation passed a Resolution on controversial content, urging "the community to pay particular attention to curating all kinds of potentially controversial content, including determining whether it has a realistic educational use and applying the principle of least astonishment in categorization and placement."

The resolution emphasizes that controversial content includes "that of a sexual, violent or religious nature" if it "may be offensive to some viewers", for example because they find "such content is disrespectful or inappropriate for themselves, their families or their students", even though others may "find it acceptable" because of differences "in age, background and values".

While the resolution does not provide a definition for the principle of least astonishment, the following pages that were part of the workflow leading to the resolution and design of the personal image filter may be helpful in that respect: m:Image filter referendum/FAQ/en#What is the principle of least astonishment? and m:2010 Wikimedia Study of Controversial Content: Part Two#Explanations 2. (Note that parts of this study were superseded by m:Controversial content/Board report and by the resolution itself.)

Additionally, the Foundation has committed itself to develop a personal image filter, which would take into account the reader's choices when displaying images. Following this WMF Board decision, a referendum was held to assess the importance of various aspects of the feature to the community. The filter is still in the design stage however; for further information see meta:Controversial content and meta:Image filter referendum/Next steps/en.

See also

Notes

  1. See email clarification for scope: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-December/071089.html
Cite error: A list-defined reference named "typical" is not used in the content (see the help page). Category: