Am 21.09.2011 19:10, schrieb Thomas Dalton: > On 21 September 2011 14:06, Milos Rancic<mill...@gmail.com> wrote: >> You didn't understand me well. It's not about fork(s), it's about >> wrappers, shells around the existing projects. >> >> * en.safe.wikipedia.org/wiki/<whatever> would point to >> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/<whatever> >> * When you click on "edit" from en.safe, you would get the same text >> as on en.wp. >> * When you click on "save" from en.safe, you would save the text on >> en.wp, as well. >> * The only difference is that images in wikitext won't be shown like >> [[File:<something sensible>.jpg]], but as >> [[File:fd37dae713526ee2da82f5a6cf6431de.jpg]]. >> * safe.wikimedia.org won't be Commons fork, but area for image >> categorization to those who want to work on it. It is not the job of >> Commons community to work on personal wishes of American >> right-wingers. >> >> (Note: "safe" is not good option for name, as it has four characters >> and it could be used for language editions of Wikipedia; maybe >> safe.en.wikipedia.org could be better option.) > What is the advantage of that compared with the feature as it was > originally proposed? All you've done is made the URL more complicated. > You'll still need to use user preferences to determine which images > are getting hidden, so why can't you just have an "on/off" user > preference as well rather than determining whether the filter should > be on or off based on the URL? I would encourage to extend this filter. Add the additional option to hide all text, since the words might be offensive.
I still can't the a rational difference between images included in articles by the will of the community and text passages included by the will of the community. But hiding selected text seems to be a totally different issue inside the WMF argumentation (it is called censorship). Truthfully, i see not different approach to include images and text passages. Both are added, discussed, removed, re-added the same way as text is. Now i heard some say that text is written by multiple authors and images are only created by one. Then i must wonder that we are able to decide to include one source and it's arguments written by one author, while it seams to be a problem to include the image of one photographer/artist. There really is no difference in overall progress. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
