There is a long thread on the Commons and Gendergap lists about today's featured image on Commons:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/commons-l/2011-May/ http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/2011-May/
It's an original piece of art by a Wikimedian, "in the style of" erotic manga:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:On_the_edge_-_free_world_version.jpg
The picture was removed from the main page by a WMF staff member, acting as an ordinary editor, and then restored a few hours later by a Commons admin.
Aspects of the image that have been discussed include the fact that
* it has no noteworthy artistic value
* it is used to showcase a Wikimedian's artwork on the project main page
* it lacks educational value, being the work of a non-notable Wikimedian
* it makes the Foundation look puerile
* it might turn off serious educators
* it might turn off older people
* it might turn off schools
* it might turn off women
* it might turn off institutions owning valuable content from donating to the Foundation
* it is the victim of cultural fascism directed against manga/anime
* it is the victim of prudery
* it is the victim of censorship
* not showing the image on the mian page would undermine the Foundation's mission
etc. etc.
This is really a Foundation topic though. Are projects' main pages there to showcase Wikimedians' fine art? If yes, then why do we not have songs by unsigned garage bands "in the style of ..." as featured media of the day?
Should the Foundation establish guidelines on what type of content to feature on project main pages?
Crossposted to Foundation-l, Commons-l and Gendergap.
Andreas
On 5/16/11 5:40 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
This is really a Foundation topic though. Are projects' main pages there to showcase Wikimedians' fine art?
No. This is a non-issue.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Project_scope#Must_be_realisticall...
"Examples of files that are not realistically useful for an educational purpose: [...] * Self-created artwork without obvious educational use."
QED.
Someone else cross-post this to Foundation-L... I have assiduously avoided subscribing there and don't plan to now.
Incidentally, that little piece of original art is also the picture of the day on several Wikipedias' main pages; among them the Russian and Bulgarian Wikipedias.
The image itself has been nominated for deletion in Commons by User:AndreasPraefcke, as out of scope.
A.
--- On Mon, 16/5/11, Andreas Kolbe [email protected] wrote:
From: Andreas Kolbe [email protected] Subject: [Foundation-l] Commons as an art gallery? To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" [email protected], "Wikimedia Commons Discussion List" [email protected], "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" [email protected] Date: Monday, 16 May, 2011, 16:40 There is a long thread on the Commons and Gendergap lists about today's featured image on Commons:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/commons-l/2011-May/ http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/gendergap/2011-May/
It's an original piece of art by a Wikimedian, "in the style of" erotic manga:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:On_the_edge_-_free_world_version.jpg
The picture was removed from the main page by a WMF staff member, acting as an ordinary editor, and then restored a few hours later by a Commons admin.
Aspects of the image that have been discussed include the fact that
it has no noteworthy artistic value
it is used to showcase a Wikimedian's artwork on the
project main page
- it lacks educational value, being the work of a
non-notable Wikimedian
it makes the Foundation look puerile
it might turn off serious educators
it might turn off older people
it might turn off schools
it might turn off women
it might turn off institutions owning valuable content
from donating to the Foundation
- it is the victim of cultural fascism directed against
manga/anime
it is the victim of prudery
it is the victim of censorship
not showing the image on the mian page would undermine
the Foundation's mission
etc. etc.
This is really a Foundation topic though. Are projects' main pages there to showcase Wikimedians' fine art? If yes, then why do we not have songs by unsigned garage bands "in the style of ..." as featured media of the day?
Should the Foundation establish guidelines on what type of content to feature on project main pages?
Crossposted to Foundation-l, Commons-l and Gendergap.
Andreas
foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--- On Mon, 16/5/11, Andreas Kolbe [email protected] wrote:
From: Andreas Kolbe [email protected] Subject: Re: [Commons-l] [Foundation-l] Commons as an art gallery? To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" [email protected], "Wikimedia Commons Discussion List" [email protected], "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" [email protected] Date: Monday, 16 May, 2011, 19:03 Incidentally, that little piece of original art is also the picture of the day on several Wikipedias' main pages; among them the Russian and Bulgarian Wikipedias.
It's also on the Bengali Wikipedia's main page (serving Bangladesh and parts of India).
http://bn.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%A6%AA%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%B0%E0%A6%A7%E0%A6%BE%E...
Andreas
Pete Forsyth made what I think is an interesting point on the Gendergap list.
Reproduced below, with his permission.
--- On Mon, 16/5/11, Pete Forsyth [email protected] wrote:
From: Pete Forsyth [email protected] Subject: Re: [Gendergap] [Commons-l] Fwd: Photo of the Day on Wikimedia Commons To: "Increasing female participation in Wikimedia projects" [email protected] Date: Monday, 16 May, 2011, 16:49
In my opinion there's a large and pervasive problem behind today's controversy: in striking contrast to our core value of openness, it is very difficult to even *perceive* how important decisions like this are made. Both the technical and the editorial processes are pretty opaque to the average main page visitor.
I suspect there are ways the Commons pages relating to Picture of the Day could be improved to make it clearer to the reader how decisions are made, and how to meaningfully participate in those processes.
For instance, main page content could have a link named something like "how did this get here?" that would permit the reader to view the discussion that led to its inclusion on the main page. (This is just an off-the-cuff idea, to illustrate the general kind of usability changes I would like to explore.)
To put it another way, the issue behind today's controversy that interests me most is access. Increasing the ability of a large and diverse group to participate in important decisions (like what gets featured on the main Commons page) is something that would both honor the basic values of our project, and (I believe) support better content decisions in the future.
Anybody interested in tackling this issue? -Pete
On 2011-05-16 22:27, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
--- On Mon, 16/5/11, Andreas Kolbe[email protected] wrote:
From: Andreas Kolbe[email protected] Date: Monday, 16 May, 2011, 19:03 Incidentally, that little piece of original art is also the picture of the day on several Wikipedias' main pages; among them the Russian and Bulgarian Wikipedias.
Discussion in the Russian Wikipedia: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D0%B1%D1%81%D1%83%D0%B6%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%B...
The Bulgarian Wikipedia's Main page includes a link to Commons ([[commons:Commons:Featured_pictures]]), and the linked description page is called [[Шаблон:Картинка_на_деня_в_Общомедия/Заглавия]] ([[Template:Picture of the Day at Commons/Title]]).
It's also on the Bengali Wikipedia's main page (serving Bangladesh and parts of India). http://bn.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E0%A6%AA%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%B0%E0%A6%A7%E0%A6%BE%E...
(That also includes links to Commons.)