Misplaced Pages

:WikiProject Misplaced Pagesns for encyclopedic merit - 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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 64.12.116.66 (talk) at 18:57, 28 August 2005 (Rv v! WP:POINT remove trollish comments). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 18:57, 28 August 2005 by 64.12.116.66 (talk) (Rv v! WP:POINT remove trollish comments)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Wikiproject Wikipedians for encyclopedic merit was started on August 15th, 2005 to coordinate and promote standards of encyclopedic merit for inclusion on Misplaced Pages. This project is intended to coordinate efforts to bring articles to appropriate standards of quality control, as defined by Misplaced Pages policy, and Misplaced Pages guidelines to ensure Misplaced Pages continues to be regarded as the finest source of web based reference material available. See also Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages as an academic source.

One aspect of encyclopedic merit relates to sexually explicit imagery and language. Specifically if some item of Misplaced Pages content appeals to only prurient interest as opposed to having encyclopedic value, it is generally preferred to substitute content that has encyclopedic value. The Miller test is illustrative in defining obscene material as that which taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest and lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. (SLAPS). A quasi-Miller SLAPS test is likely to closely match Misplaced Pages's meaning of "encyclopedic value."

However, the mission statement is primarily based on understanding that the purpose of this project has nothing to do with censorship. It is merely an attempt to help Misplaced Pages establish a level or baseline of merit and what constitutes encyclopedic merit. A review of this statement by Jimbo Wales helps us to establish what that baseline should be:

We could show full-blown mainstream pornography on the main page of Misplaced Pages 24 hours a day and not be in violation of any laws in the United States

He further stated:

We don't show full-blown mainstream pornography on the front page of wikipedia as a matter of editorial taste and judgment, not out of concern with censorship law

And lastly,

I do think that this law may have some applicability, but it does *not* apply to models who are merely nude. It applies, and I would have to look it up again to get the exact language, to models engaging in specific explicit activity—I don't think we have any images of this, but this law could be used to argue that we can't host photographs on autofellatio unless I'm willing to keep documentation on file from the models (and I'm not). But this does not apply to drawings, which is what we have there now, for better or worse.

However, inasmuch as Wikpedia is viewed in many countries, it is noteworthy that:

In some countries textual material describing sexual activities involving children is legally classified as child pornography. (from Child pornography)

Anyone who is interested in contributing, please sign up below and post any ideas and suggestions on the Talk page. Also, feel free to edit this page and add any articles that need serious work or that you feel require attention below in the Open Tasks sections. The notice board below is to inform members of the project of votes or other current Misplaced Pages events which warrant their attention with regards to this project.

This project has been renamed from a contentious initial name (Wikipedians for decency). Members who have joined, but made ironic comments indicating their distaste for a project under the old title may wish to revise the descriptions accompanying their listing. Likewise, editors who have refrained from joining because of the prior title and mission statement may wish to reevaluate whether this WikiProject is of interest to them.

Descendant WikiProjects

Members

  • I am a member, I will work to make this project what it should be Wikipedians for NPOV Gibadabmoob 23:00, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Agriculture 22:06, 14 August 2005 (UTC) - emeritus, no longer affiliated.
  • Noitall 05:15, August 16, 2005 (UTC) )- I was one of the originators because I believed in contributing to Wiki, especially in recognizing that File:Autofellatio 2.jpg, which I put up for deletion, was not consistent with Jimbo's vision for Wiki or any other person who cares about encyclopedic content. But this page is full of vandals, some of whom may be Admins, who wish for the page and concept to die. To totally disagree with the entire concept of this page while attempting to cause its destruction and inhibit those who a truly attempting to accomplish something productive is called being a vandal. The page is now useless and the vandals have won. It is only Wiki that is harmed.--Noitall 22:51, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
  • MONGO 06:54, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
  • Readding my membership which MONGO had no business removing. Zoe 05:05, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
  • Banes 12:00, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Visorstuff 18:31, 16 August 2005 (UTC) (watching and helping as appropriate/available)
  • FCYTravis 06:39, 17 August 2005 (UTC) - I am highly interested in developing a standard which says there shall be no new standards or censorship imposed on Misplaced Pages, as the entire concept of "decency" is POV on its face. I shall be glad to assist reaching such a goal.
  • Ngb 07:44, 17 August 2005 (UTC) - as an observer to any attempt to impose arbitrary standards of 'obscenity' and 'decency' on Misplaced Pages in opposition to WP:NPOV.
  • Sdedeo. I think the best way I can contribute is by pretending to be a lawyer and spreading FUD about Misplaced Pages being shut down by various government organizations. As the goals of this project have shifted and threats about wikipedia's Floridian shutdown have stopped, it appears I am no longer useful. Best of luck.
  • Johntex 22:51, 17 August 2005 (UTC). I'm interested in helping us stay within the law. I'm also interested in making this the best encyclopedia possible for the largest possible number of people. That will require compromises and consensus-building about what is appropriate for an individual situation, and not a blind knee-jerk reaction like "all nudity is bad" or "don't ever let the prudes remove any nudity".
  • Coqsportif 11:41, 18 August 2005 (UTC)Can never have enough decency.
  • Hipocrite 15:51, 18 August 2005 (UTC) Nothing more important than merit!
AC/1887
  • Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 00:38, 2005 August 28 (UTC) I would like to help WP create a set of voluntary annotations which avoid comstockery.
  • SWD316 (talk to me) Why not I'll join.
  • ~~ N (t/c) 22:29, 23 August 2005 (UTC) Why not, can't hurt. New name is acceptable.
  • Cathytreks-Talk I too shall be glad to assist in helping to develop a standard of thoughful concensus building which shall not impose new censorship standards on the Misplaced Pages, save those self imposed ones that lay within ourselves. While the concept of "decency" may be POV on its face still, there should be some basic standard of decency that a community should strive to abide by, lest we suffer that result, which would undoubtedly be ...total anarchy.
  • Gorgonzilla 19:28, 24 August 2005 (UTC) Did I mention I worked on the architecture of PICS?
  • Mysidia 01:35, 25 August 2005 (UTC) Encyclopedic merit of Misplaced Pages's choices for articles and media for inclusion is an excellent goal.
  • brenneman 07:45, 25 August 2005 (UTC) Can we start with a merit system for WikiProjects?
  • Audiovideo 00:12, 28 August 2005 (UTC) I believe that every edit which removes bad or damaging content from Misplaced Pages is a good thing even though it is censorship. I also believe that the large number of editors who have an knee-jerk reaction against censorship are exposing their POV, and that they are helping the few editors who are turning Misplaced Pages into a pornography gallery rather than something which will be useful at work and school.

Open Tasks

Working standard for encyclopedic merit of images

  • Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Wikipedians for encyclopedic merit/Working standard for encyclopedic merit of images - a place in the WikiProject namespace for a working standard on the encyclopedic merit of images.
  • Develop proposals for Misplaced Pages style guidelines about when images that might be offensive or disturbing to some readers should be included by indirect reference rather than within the main flow of an article (or otherwise masked). It may be appropriate for some articles discussing sexually explicit, violent, or otherwise potentially uncomfortable content to contain links along the lines of "Click for an image of X" rather than directly inline versions of those images.

Suggest constructive ways to modify the statement of policy

Current policies:

Consider Possible Application of PICS

The mechanism designed to support 'content labelling' on the Web is PICS. This is feasible from a technical point of view, PICS is supported in IE and other browsers and is technically viable. Implementation in Misplaced Pages might require some code updates but this could probably be made painless by creating a special type of category linked to a PICS header.

Deployment of PICS would in a good faith world allow for labelling of potentially disturbing content in such a manner that would make it easier for wikipedia to be used in schools. It would also allow for automated detection of certain types of vandalism, an attempt to add a pornographic image to a random article could be flagged.

The problem with PICS is that it is likely to be abused. PICS is a censorship scheme (no matter what the promoters claimed). I think it is reasonable to control content that might be used in a classroom. I don't think it is reasonable, sensible or even desirable to attempt to control what teenagers view at home. Furthermore, the tagging of images would likely be seen as POV and warred over for many borderline cases.

Analyze legal liabilities Misplaced Pages may be exposed to

In the USA material with "serious, literary, artistic or scientific purpose" is generally free of exposure to obscenity prosecution. Recent legislation in the USA has reintroduced the concept of "indecency", often in relation to material provided to minors. While Misplaced Pages is not (and should not be) created or maintained to meet the latest laws of some particular jurisdiction, we would like to understand the areas where legal restrictions and encyclopedic merit intersect.

Develop understanding of "blue law" exposure

  • Find actual legal opinion about any obscenity/decency prosecution that Misplaced Pages might plausibly face due to the physical location of its servers (in Florida).
    • According to BDAbramson, a Florida attorney, Misplaced Pages is not threatened by Florida laws.
  • Determine where Misplaced Pages is, in fact, hosted from a legal perpective. Expanded co-hosting by Google, Yahoo, or by mirror sites in various places may affect judicability and standing in case of potential suit against Misplaced Pages.
  • Determine whether a change in location of physical servers would avoid legal liabilities, should such be determined to exist with current hosting.

Related discussions