Commons:Nudity

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

[edit] Related ideas

Existing policies and ideas relating to this:

• Commons is not censored: a depiction of human nudity is not in itself a reason for deletion
• Commons is not a free host, blog or webspace provider
• Quality controls
• Vandalism
• The Commons is not for exercising your voyeuristic or exhibitionistic jollies
• The Wikimedia projects have, above all else, an educational aim

[edit] Rationale

It is felt that a policy is needed because at the moment there are no guidelines or policies to guide administrators as to what the acceptable bounds of content here should be. Images depicting male nudity are regularly nominated for deletion on Commons:Deletion requests and are almost always kept, with the Wikipedia is not censored policy being cited. However it must be asked if allowing any content whatsoever (within the bounds of the law) is really serving Wikimedia projects' aims. This policy aims to provide a reasonable bound for administrators and other users to use as a guide in deciding what should be kept and what may be deleted.

[edit] Vandalism

• Any image that appears to be uploaded solely for the purpose of vandalism may be speedy deleted. (unwritten guideline) It is obvious when this is happening because the user will be very new with perhaps only their image uploads as edits, and users from local projects will come to the Commons to request the image's deletion.
• Any image can be used to vandalise pages, although ones with nudity have more shock value. Therefore no image shall be deleted solely for this reason, subject to the above point and the Commons:Licensing requirements.

[edit] New uploads

Category:Male_reproductive_system and Penis show that the Commons has an ample supply of images of men's groins and penises erect and flaccid, circumcised and uncircumcised, in various skin colours and with varying degrees of pubic hair. These images are frequently low resolution with little source information other than "self made" or "an erect human penis", for example the user is told nothing useful about the background of the individual such as age. Such images are of little value as they depict something we already have an image of with no additional information, and we are left to conclude that they exist only for titillation.

Therefore images in these cases may be nominated for deletion (not speedy deleted).

If an image depicts some phenomenon or circumstance which we do not already have a representation of (for example, diseases or body modifications) then it should be kept, as it adds to the educational content of the Commons. Wikimedia Commons should have photos of human anatomy in all its variety or diversity. However, the difference in question needs to be put into words.

If a new image depicts something we already have an image of, but in a better way, the older image may be nominated for deletion.

• Prefer higher resolution images over lower resolution images
• Prefer focused images over unfocused and blurry images
• Prefer images showing context (for example, the full male body) over images only showing a "groin shot"
• Prefer images that give background information about the person depicted over 'anonymous' images with no context
• Prefer non-confrontational framings (e.g. side-on) over "shocking" close-up shots (such images are more likely to be used in vandalism attacks for this reason)

These preferences should help the Commons build a higher quality database that adheres more closely to its educational aims rather than pandering to exhibitionists and voyeurs who are not part of the Wikimedia community.

[edit] Women

To date, women have not shown the same tendency to upload photographs of their genitals (see Category:Female genitalia). Such images are also rarely (if ever) used in vandalism attacks. If this changes, this policy will apply to these images as well.