Am 22.09.2011 23:49, schrieb Andrew Gray: > On 21 September 2011 18:20, Tobias Oelgarte > <tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> 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. > If we've a choice of several different images, we can pick the one > which is most neutral - so if we're writing about a war, we can choose > not to use a photograph of the Glorious Forces of Our Side Marching In > Victory, and instead pick a less loaded one of some soldiers in a > field, or a map with arrows. > > But there's a problem when the issue is whether it's appropriate to > *include an image at all*. If one position says we should include an > image and the other position says we shouldn't, then whichever way we > decide, we've taken sides. We can't really be neutral in a yes-or-no > situation. > Thats the same situation as to include a fact or a quote from a source or not, if the source itself is disputed. Thats not a real difference.
The problem with images has another origin. Images aren't left out because they might not be illustrative or not. They are left out because of sensibilities. Something we should not do. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
