Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikipedians against censorship: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:25, 24 February 2015

This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Wikipedians against censorship and anything related to its purposes and tasks.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3: 3 months

This miscellaneous page was nominated for deletion on 12 March 2006. The result of the discussion was keep. An archived record of this discussion can be found here.

Proposed change of Image for the user box

Not quite sure how to do this, but I would like to suggest the substitution of L'Origine du monde for the blue ribbon as I think that expresses better the fight against censorship, and is relevant. Such a change would hopefully have the effect of reactivating this dormant group. While some might argue that this would be offensive, the size at which the image is displayed means this should not be a problem.♥ L'Origine du monde ♥ ^{(♥ Talk♥ )} 06:23, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

{{User Gustave Courbet}} makes a good point I think.♥ L'Origine du monde ♥ ^{(♥ Talk♥ )} 23:57, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of book by Koenraad Elst from Further reading section

An RFC has been started because an user was insisting of removing a book by Koenraad Elst ("BJP vis-a-vis Hindu resurgence) from the Further reading section of the BJP article.

The RFC ended with 3 votes in favor of keep and 2 votes for removal.

Now an admin has closed the RFC as "delete".

The only user in the discussion who was impartial (no history of editing in this topic area) voted for keep. All others, including the admin, have edited the topic area previously. Therefore I'm looking for the opinion of an impartial editor. Because the discussions are scattered over several pages, it is likely that the closing admin has not read all the arguments. The discussions are at:

1. talk page,

2. RFC This talk page

3. External_links/Noticeboard

4. Koenraad_Elst_in_further_reading

5. RFC_Closure_at_Bharatiya_Janata_Party

6. Discussion

7. Talk:Bharatiya_Janata_Party/Archive_2#Koenraad_Elst_and_LK_Advani_book

--Calypsomusic (talk) 09:45, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like we are discussing this edit at Bharatiya Janata Party. That added a book to "further reading". The book has been removed by the consensus of editors on the article talk page (and an RfC). The removal is good, and arguing about it is disruptive. The removal is nothing to do with censorship. Johnuniq (talk) 11:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, I accept that. Since the removal was disputed also by other editors, all that was needed was a second opinion. Although I am not convinced that the consensus was for "delete" when the majority of votes was keep. This book would be notable, adds value because the pov is missing now in the section and is by an expert on the topic. Thanks again for looking at this. That the removal of a book by a controversial author has nothing to do with censorship is bound to be subjective. --Calypsomusic (talk) 12:27, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I should have mentioned that it is not the single case of censorship which is worrying, if it would just be this isolated case I would not have worried and perhaps even agreed with it, but the fact that there is a pattern where Hindu or pro-Hindu views are censored on wikipedia. Here is an example of this pattern on wikipedia (taken from a wiki talkpage):

Survey

I am conducting a survey to understand if Koenraad Elst could be cited as a valid non biased source for the 2002 Gujarat violence,Babri Masjid and Ram Janmabhoomi articles.My personal opinion is that he represents Hindutva ideology and hence quotes from him will creep in bias in these articles.Since it is a Socio-religious issue.I will appreciate views from users of all religious - non religious followings.
Can we include Koenraad Elst's comments as a valid NPOV factual/news source?
Please highlight with your comments on why we should and why we should not? Concise and responding to these questions.I will only allow the first para of your responses hare.

Answer here. ~~~~
Big..No..No ..He is not a first hand information source for Gujarat..while Aid Agencies,News agencies,HR organisations,Police,Government comments will have weight

--Calypsomusic (talk) 11:34, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:58, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

New Notice: Art+Feminism Wikiproject

Reviving this notice board to premept some potential censorship problems. Wikipedia:Meetup/ArtAndFeminism is running an edit-a-thon over the weekend of March 7 and 8, 2015. It would be helpful to have some folks from Wikiedians against Censorship around to help avoid any unnecessarily aggressive deletions during the edit-a-thon (lots of new users, lots of potential for unconstructive, politically motivated actions against the articles). Hopefully, some of us are still around and available to help out. MisterB777 (talk) 02:17, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 |archive = Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikipedians against censorship/Archive %(counter)d
 }}
-== Censorship is still an issue ==
-If anything it has got worse. Search for [[Penis]] for example, and you will find an article with pictures of whale penises in jars- images of human penises are only to be displayed on the [[Human penis]] page to limit the offence a photograph of a penis might cause to someone looking for [[penis]]. I have been banned for 3 weeks, in part for displaying the 1866 painting [[L'Origine du monde]] in my userspace, and that image has been added to the banned list. The discussion on removing it from that list is [[MediaWiki_talk:Bad_image_list#Remove_File:Origin-of-the-World.jpg_from_the_Bad_image_list]] - please contribute.<span style="font-family:Edwardian Script ITC;font-size:20px"><b><font color="#B6316C">[[User:L'Origine du monde|♥ L'Origine du monde ♥]]</font></b></span> <sup>(<font color="#99BADD">♥ [[User talk:L'Origine du monde|Talk]]♥ </font>)</sup> 05:19, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
-Here is a description of censorship in action from an ANI i was involved in last year. I don't know where this idea of images only in main articles came from, but it is ridiculous.
-<blockquote> I too have concerns about this IP's edits and fascination with dicks, erections, ejaculation, vulvas, pissing, etc.. (Having such fascinations in one's private life is one thing, but bringing it here becomes disruptive.) They seem to be pressing the limits of NOTCENSORED by seeking the inclusion of sensitive images in unnecessary places. They want explicit images of erect penises, ejaculating penises, peeing men and women, vulvas, etc., in lots of places where such images are unnecessary. In article sections we usually use wikilinks and links to "main" articles. That's where the uncensored images are used, not just everywhere. I tried to explain, but IP93 just doesn't seem to get the hint. Here's something I wrote to illustrate:
-"Images are used where necessary, but images that may be offensive to many are used more sparingly, IOW on the articles where they are most relevant. Instead of plastering/spamming (and that's what you seem to be doing) every tree in the forest with pictures of penises, we just put signs that say "penis", and an arrow. When one arrives at the penis tree, there will be a nice picture of a penis on THAT tree, because THAT is where it's relevant. It's not relevant on every other tree in the forest."
-Will someone explain to them that wikilinks are sufficient (and don't have to be accompanied by an image), and that by using appropriate (and often very graphic) images on the final target articles, we are keeping Wikipedia uncensored, and that by refusing to plaster/spam such images all over the place, we are not violating NOTCENSORED? They need to stop this behavior. -- [[Brangifer]] (talk) 16:03, 21 July 2012 (UTC)</blockquote>
-<span style="font-family:Edwardian Script ITC;font-size:20px"><b><font color="#B6316C">[[User:L'Origine du monde|♥ L'Origine du monde ♥]]</font></b></span> <sup>(<font color="#99BADD">♥ [[User talk:L'Origine du monde|Talk]]♥ </font>)</sup> 05:41, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
 == Proposed change of Image for the user box ==