The continued march of wiki porn Options

[Peter Damian]

Just noticed this thread. Thanks PM.

[Somey]

"Sarah Palin seated" tops the others? Unless that image also belongs to the categories that follow it, I think this is a troubling sign...

[Trick cyclist]

For those who haven't seen the link http://www.flickr.com/photos/38547171@N02/3577786838/

There seems to be a network of alert admins on Flickr. The first comment on that picture is "Hi, I'm an admin for a group called amateur-sex, and we'd love to have this added to the group!" I havent seen whats in the amateur-sex group.

Does anyone know if anyone at Flickr checks if pictures are obscene and need this over-18 protection or indeed if they check whether people in the photos are over 18?

[thekohser]

Greg, I love it when you troll Yahoo Answers. That place is such a mess

Thank you, Eric. I do my best -- it's like my civic duty.

well, with thanks to 'Leonardo' - apparently the 'page views' tool shows that the most viewed pages on commons are sexually explicit.... I think this could get interesting.....

Can't we get the Grok machine to re-run this, so the data is not from August 2008?

And, why the intense interest in "detallesanmateos.jpg"?

[CharlotteWebb]

well, with thanks to 'Leonardo' - apparently the 'page views' tool shows that the most viewed pages on commons are sexually explicit.... I think this could get interesting.....

Can't we get the Grok machine to re-run this, so the data is not from August 2008?

And, why the intense interest in "detallesanmateos.jpg"?

Indeed, what the hell is "commons.m"? When you start at this url all the page links will point to an unresolvable domain name, but if you remove the ".m", navigation works fine but the traffic statistics are much different, and lower.

[Krimpet]

"Sarah Palin seated" tops the others? Unless that image also belongs to the categories that follow it, I think this is a troubling sign...

I suspect that in late August '08, when Palin was still virtually a nobody and Alaska was still a fabled land from a storybook, that image was one of the top Google hits for her name, so on 8/29/08 when you had a flood of people suddenly wondering "who the hell is Sarah Palin?," they all landed on that page from Google. Hence why that image had 35,600 hits on that day.

Why this picture of "The Wiggles" is #26 - just beating out "Oral sex" - is a bit more befuddling, though.

[White Knight]

I'm seriously considering sending a letter to my representative conveying my concerns about how Wikipedia doesn't keep sufficient records of the age of the people in the nude photos there, and also my concerns about how easy it is for children to accidentally access pornography on Wikipedia. Although the Wikipedia admins may scream "WP:NOTCENSORED!" I have a feeling that King Jimbo would quickly cave in if the federal government actually started looking into Wikipedia's compliance with the law. As far as I'm aware, Wikipedia hasn't faced any significant legal or governmental challenges as yet.

I need your help though. I don't know enough about the inner workings of Wikipedia to write an intelligent letter, so if you guys could help me figure out what evidence I should include, and some good points to make in the letter, it would be very beneficial. Not to mention that if you feel motivated to write a letter to your senator or representative, we could all use the same one.

Awaiting your responses,
WK

[wikademia.org]

I'm seriously considering sending a letter to my representative conveying my concerns about how Wikipedia doesn't keep sufficient records of the age of the people in the nude photos there, and also my concerns about how easy it is for children to accidentally access pornography on Wikipedia. Although the Wikipedia admins may scream "WP:NOTCENSORED!" I have a feeling that King Jimbo would quickly cave in if the federal government actually started looking into Wikipedia's compliance with the law. As far as I'm aware, Wikipedia hasn't faced any significant legal or governmental challenges as yet.

I need your help though. I don't know enough about the inner workings of Wikipedia to write an intelligent letter, so if you guys could help me figure out what evidence I should include, and some good points to make in the letter, it would be very beneficial. Not to mention that if you feel motivated to write a letter to your senator or representative, we could all use the same one.

Awaiting your responses,
WK

it seems something like that will have to happen eventually... also maybe the appropriate gov entity will start to examine the early connections between Wikia and Wikipedia.. especially if Wikia has continued "success"

[thekohser]

I need your help though. I don't know enough about the inner workings of Wikipedia to write an intelligent letter, so if you guys could help me figure out what evidence I should include, and some good points to make in the letter, it would be very beneficial. Not to mention that if you feel motivated to write a letter to your senator or representative, we could all use the same one.

Whitey, it sounds like a job that a collaborative wiki could help facilitate. Why don't you get a coat-rack skeleton of a letter started on Encyc, Wikidemia, Wikipedia Review, or Google Knol, then point us to it, and perhaps we could whip up something really snazzy. You know me, I like the idea of letters to Congress.

[privatemusings]

re : the letter writing - I tend to agree, although I'm an absolutely incurable optimist, so would also support raising this directly with the foundation at the same time.

The legal stuff I mentioned obliquely in my post before relates to both 'section 2257' stuff and legal issues around facilitating free access to rather a lot of very explicit material - the high page view stat.s for explicit material on commons is rather an important part of this jigsaw, I reckon.

Quick word on that too - I noticed the 'm' in the page view tool too, and wondered if it relates to 'mobile' or something? Further, if you go to the frontpage of the stat.s tool, it allows you to select 'commons' and then go month by month on individual categories / images etc. - it's the 'top' button which seems to refer back to August 08 figures no matter what.

I'll probably send a letter in my own name, to the Australian authorities by April / May if we just can't get any traction for progress from the foundation end, and would be up for synchronising / making a combined effort. For what it's worth also, I believe there's a good chance of some media coverage on this one too.....

[Cock-up-over-conspiracy]

re : the letter writing - I tend to agree, although I'm an absolutely incurable optimist, so would also support raising this directly with the foundation at the same time.

I'll probably send a letter in my own name, to the Australian authorities by April / May if we just can't get any traction for progress from the foundation end, and would be up for synchronising / making a combined effort.

For what it's worth also, I believe there's a good chance of some media coverage on this one too.....

I forked this topic with my own thoughts and a nice new eye catching title ... How to knock $1,000,000 holes in ....

The documentation of the porn is a dirty job for 'someones' to do but it will very much help those of us who feel strongly enough to take action on this.

Again, I think this is where collating archives of the Pee-dia over months are going to be helpful in establishing trends and players.

It would be futile on the scale of the Sorcerer Apprentice's just to "clean up" the Wiki, rather than aim for reform, because we know the same shit from the same arseholes - or individuals going through the arsehole phase - will merely return later ... unless serious reform is enabled.

Why should the rest of society ... the rest of "the community" ... the next generation of kids being enculted into Uncle Jimbo's Plaything ... pay for that?

[White Knight]

I'll probably send a letter in my own name, to the Australian authorities by April / May if we just can't get any traction for progress from the foundation end, and would be up for synchronising / making a combined effort. For what it's worth also, I believe there's a good chance of some media coverage on this one too.....

Sounds good. Rudd already banned half of the internet. What's one more website to the Great Firewall of Australia?

[Milton Roe]

I'll probably send a letter in my own name, to the Australian authorities by April / May if we just can't get any traction for progress from the foundation end, and would be up for synchronising / making a combined effort. For what it's worth also, I believe there's a good chance of some media coverage on this one too.....

Sounds good. Rudd already banned half of the internet. What's one more website to the Great Firewall of Australia?

How is it that the great country of giant knives and crocodiles, built by former criminals and surrounded by wild bush frontiers--- seems presently to be run entirely by maiden-aunts?

Got to be a story, there. Perhaps some juice is Oz plants that makes the testicles shrink?

[privatemusings]

* ps. - links below are very much 'not safe for work' *

so, partly inspired by previous work by gallant wikipedia reviewers, I thought it might be interesting to make a short video - sort of the equivalent of my essay.

My plan (ok, not really a plan, but my 'I scratched my head for 20 seconds and came up with this thing....) is to try and get a bit of feedback, probably write and record a better script, and then try and solicit some reactions / feedback from a bit of a wider field.

It's a work in progress, and I have a few other ideas, about which more anon.....





This post has been edited by privatemusings: Wed 13th January 2010, 4:44am

[Somey]

It's a work in progress, and I have a few other ideas, about which more anon.....

Eeek. Well, the first thing I would suggest (though it's a bit more work) would be to float the URL of each image directly in front, to make the point that you're not just showing porn imagery from, like, wherever.

Your script is fine, though it might help to have some recorded statements by other people spliced in, just for good measure. (Maybe I could even record one - I got a new microphone recently, and it sounds much better! )

[privatemusings]

...float the URL of each image directly in front, to make the point that you're not just showing porn imagery from, like, wherever.

that's a good idea - and I don't think it's very hard? (I'm just using 'picasa' to make the video) - for the extra stupid, I'll probably add a 'these are actual images from wikimedia projects' caption too?

.. it might help to have some recorded statements by other people spliced in, just for good measure. (Maybe I could even record one - I got a new microphone recently, and it sounds much better! )

sounds great :-) - one other idea I've had is to make 5 or 6 short vid.s and then release them once every couple of weeks - things like some screen grab.s of previous discussions (there's been some spectacular point-missing on noticeboards in the past!) - and maybe quotes from jimmy etc. - there's probably also some audio from the wikivoices chat that can be used too?

If you're up for making a 30 sec. statement (or hey, go the full castro, and we'll extend to a couple of hours, right?!) that'd be great - same goes for anyone else reading this - reply to this thread to indicate interest, if that's cool...

[privatemusings]

I posted to foundation-l about this, and flicked jimmy a note too - just for the record.

This post has been edited by privatemusings: Wed 13th January 2010, 6:10am

[Cock-up-over-conspiracy]

Take some pageshots of the Wikipedia images before they are removed

http://www.webcitation.org/

[dogbiscuit]

Excellent video, though it put me off me cornflakes.

Very nice, low key voiceover. Put in the references to Wikipedia and then get people to forward to their senators???

[thekohser]

My key recommendations would be to point out the "most visited pages" list, to demonstrate that Wikipedia is, in a way, primarily acting as a sex- and porn-related web portal. And then to remind the viewer that Wikipedia's governing foundation captured over $7 million in 2009, mostly tax-advantaged contributions. Thus, American taxpayers can catch a break on their personal income tax return by subsidizing an Internet porn portal.

That should get more than a few Republicans fired up.