On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 10:52 PM, Andrew Garrett <agarr...@wikimedia.org> wrote: >.. > Yes, I'm being rhetorical. Surely you understand what I'm trying to > say and that "90%" is not intended to be interpreted literally. > > Just in case, I'll recap without using statistics for rhetorical > purposes: My point is about quick wins. We can attack a large portion > (that may or may not be exactly 90%) of the problem by offering > readers the opportunity to hide a small number of categories that > people commonly don't want to see.
This is the first _productive_ post in a while. We know the hot button images. We even have an FAQ page which tells readers how to hide pictures of Muhammad http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Muhammad/FAQ How many other images on Wikipedia are widely viewed as problematic and yet there is consensus to keep them in the article? I think we should develop the finite list of 'real' problems, to feed into a defined scope of said problem, and find minimalistic solutions. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Controversial_content/Problems -- John Vandenberg _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
