Connect- 14 Comments
-
Explicit images and Naked Wiki
So here's the problem. How to reconcile the topic of this wiki with Wikia's requirement for no explicit images?
In the past, we have ignored images that show discrete views of nakedness, and deleted images that show close-ups or otherwise explicit genitalia or full-frontal nudity. Recently the latter type of images have become the norm on this wiki.
I'm going to ask that all images that are too explicit are deleted -- but I think the community on this wiki needs to decide whether you can work within those constraints. Is it possible to have a wiki about naturalism but without explicit images? I think it is, but it's something that this community will need to decide.
- Showing 10 most recent
14 comments
-
If a website is nude friendly,why do people want to edit what people are proud to show? If you don't want to look go to a different topic,or start your own site that you can discriminate against.
-
Please see below where I talk about this more. The community of this wiki wants a clothing-optional site, but that may conflict with the Terms of Use that all wikis on Wikia have to stay within. It's not the creators of this site, but the hosts who have those limits - which is why I said below that this topic may not be suitable for Wikia (I'm a representative of Wikia)
If the wiki can be kept within the Terms, that's great. But if that compromises the goal of the site then Wikia may not be the right place for this group.
-
Could you please add the following photo to the India page.
I didn't know how to do it.
-
That's an example of an image that is against Wikia's Terms of Use. Please see the blog post above for more. Thanks
-
The Naked Wiki is not the sole repository of all things nude. There isn't a calling for this wiki to be the archive of photographic proof that we get nude. After reviewing the current photos (June 7th) there are clearly the images that are informative about the activities, locations, and supporting documentation for nude recreation. Then there are images that don't seem to provide the viewer with any information or benefit. I would recommend removing them with no prejudice implied, other then this is not a photo forum.
Since a Wiki has incredibly strong linking capability, perhaps having non-wiki photo albums or other visual web examples that seem pertinent to the theme being discussed, as links within the posts. For example, Flickr has a virtual historical catalog of the popular themes used for the painted nude bicyclists. We don't' need to store the images here... in fact the huge number of photos makes it unfeasible to even attempt it.
If this naked wiki is going to be the tool for education and promotion of body acceptance, then communicating the ideas among the communities that share this cause should be take precedence.
Sannse and Wikia have been extraordinary accommodating to our theme. We need to use the this tool as the communication hub it was designed to be and not a photo sharing site.
-
Photos can tell alot about a person's true interests. The nudist idea is not to hide OR to emphasize genitalia. Therefore photos of just genitalia, or of aroused genitalia have no place here, or on any true nudist forum. If people want to look for sex, there are a million other places to do that. There is no reason to mix those interests in here, and many reasons not to. You wouldn't walk into a model railroad club and try to turn it into a knitting club. So let's not defeat our own mission of promoting nudism/naturism, which are by definition non-sexual.
-
So how can you justify a website about nudity, the belief that our bodies are natural, are not shameful, that in fact body shame is a hatred and a bigotry that is taught, that body shame is the highest form of self-hatred, and censor full frontal nudity? I feel that sounds disingenuous at best.
-
That's exactly why I asked in my original post whether it's possible to have this topic and keep to Wikia's Terms of Use.
To me, what it comes down to is time, place and tone... In general, however proud we are of our bodies, it's probably not appropriate to strip off in a busy high street unless there is a specific nudity-welcome event at that time. And even if there is such an event, then it may still not be appropriate if you are stripping in a sexually provocative way, rather than simply undressing.
I understand the position that one way to adjust society's views of nakedness is by making it common, visible, and so unremarkable - but Wikia has policies and guidelines that apply to all wikis hosted here.
-
"events and activities with naked people" is that a page somewhere? Can we moderate images?
-
It describes a few articles, like the NPR Seattle page
You can see new images via Special:WikiActivity or the more complex but complete page at Special:RecentChanges. You can also see all images at Special:NewFiles - click the image and then the "details" icon below it to see the file page and a list of pages the photo is used on.
-
I've just gone though and deleted some more images. My criteria were that they were full frontal photos that were not used in any article. There could possibly be more removed, but I think it's a good start to a clean-up.
-
I think the best way to moderate them is to set good guidelines -- and to have enough active admins to enforce them. A quick check on a regular basis should keep the images under control, and keeping the bad images off discourages people from adding more.
The guideline we go by generally at Wikia is "no sexualised nakedness, and no full frontal nudity". I think the original images of "events and activities with naked people" are close to stepping over that line, but the images seem chosen carefully to be non-sexualised. Hopefully that can continue to be the type used on the wiki.
-
Hi Sannse,
I had the same reaction when i visited the SLUGS page and found the pictures that you are talking about. I reviewed most if not all the pictures associated with the Naked Wiki. In the beginning, they were images of public events and activities with naked people. I think they were on target for the message of "nude is not lewd" but the later images seem to be individuals with a more exhibitionist attitude. I contacted Dlj to request the erotic pictures be removed and they are gone. However, I agree that more could be done to manage the photos, so that any pictures contribute to the value of the wiki and are not just another dumping ground for nude photos that could be found on flickr.
To answer your question, Is it possible to have a wiki about naturalism but without explicit images? Yes, it is NECESSARY because the values of Naturism are defined by non-sexual nudity. Explicit photos are, by definition, not Naturist photos. They really taint the efforts by the supporters of naturism.
I believe we can moderate the photos and build a better community on this wiki. I know the users of naked wiki appreciate the support and tolerance of Wikia.
-
I've delete some images that were off topic, I think these are the ones you were speaking of. What is the best way to moderate image posting?
Explicit label I'm not sure is well defined. I have a sense though of when images are more sexualized that not. People will probably disagree but I think if we had a community of people discussing and moderating we could have less of a problem with bad images and maybe we could even dump some of the more boring and mundane ones as well.
Dlj 02:41, January 16, 2011 (UTC)
