MediaWiki talk:Bad image list/Archive 6
 | This is an archive of past discussions about MediaWiki:Bad image list. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 |
Could someone free up this image to be used in Sex organ? The previous image is a wider shot of a woman's body, not just the genitals which is what the male counterpart image is. Thank you. 72.95.95.102 (talk) 02:16, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
I need to use this image for an article I am constructing in a sandbox that will reside under the LGBT project, called "gay sexual practices" here: User:MishMich/Gay sexual practices. Can I have permission to use it? Mish (talk) 10:01, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- I've added exceptions to allow the image to be used at User:MishMich/Gay sexual practices and Gay sexual practices, so that it will show in your userspace draft and when you move it to the article namespace. If you move it to a different title (in either namespace) you'll need to get an admin to update the exceptions list so I'd recommend noting this on the talk page. 14:49, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
Can this image be de-listed? It was added here back in 2008 because some people were using it for vandalism. The original discussion seems to suggest it would/should be removed after 3 months, but this hasn't happened yet. 123.211.210.83 (talk) 11:28, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
- It was removed early February 2009 after only two months[1], then added back in November 2009 as the vandalism continued[2]. It's probably worth trying again. -- zzuuzz (talk) 11:44, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
See this edit. ~NerdyScienceDude (✉ message • changes) 13:47, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
explicit images similar to those on the list
G'day all - could an admin. over the age of 18, and familiar with the processes herein take a mo. to review this (very much not safe for work) set of images for possible inclusion on this list. There's a list of filenames only here. Thanks, Privatemusings (talk) 08:50, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
- ps - I'm aware that at least one image is already on the list - but not all are, and I feel that currently they probably should be :-) cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 08:51, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
- Are they currently used for vandalism? If not, they shouldn't be on the list. Garion96 (talk) 08:58, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
- they're substantially the same as images currently on the list - does that have any bearing? cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 09:05, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
- Not really. If nobody has used this image disruptively, it shouldn't be on the list. Garion96 (talk) 09:23, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
- they're substantially the same as images currently on the list - does that have any bearing? cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 09:05, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
- Are they currently used for vandalism? If not, they shouldn't be on the list. Garion96 (talk) 08:58, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Could this be added to the Bad image list as well please? WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:simple/complex 20:25, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
- Was it recently used for vandalism? Garion96 (talk) 20:28, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
- Oops, that initial edit really, really needed a preview.
- No, and re-reading the instructions I think I'm on the wrong page...I believe I read a page a while back that stated certain images could be flagged and not displayed; that's what I'm actually looking for. My bad. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:simple/complex 13:05, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Allowance
Can I get File:Manual Stimulation.png allowed on article w:Non-penetrative sex? Much thanks. Max Rebo Band (talk) 00:26, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Done -- zzuuzz (talk) 17:42, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Add
File:Wiki-mam-intcs.png, File:Wiki-sball.png, File:Frottage.svg were just used in vandalism[3]. Do images first have to be used in vandalism before they can be added to the list, or can actual common sense be used here? -Stevertigo (w | t | e) 05:50, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
- Two of those were already on there, and I just added the third. Courcelles (talk) 14:17, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
I've just added File:Pullcondom2.jpg to en:Portal:Sexuality/Featured picture. Please could this be added to the exceptions on the bad image list. The use is not vandalism. --Simon Speed (talk) 11:32, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
- Done[4] -- zzuuzz (talk) 08:18, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
I've now moved File:Pullcondom2.jpg to en:Portal:Sexuality/Featured picture/Archive could this also please be also added to the exceptions list? --Simon Speed (talk) 13:10, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
- Done. -- zzuuzz (talk) 18:52, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
Middle finger salute
File:Middle finger salute.jpg was added to Template:Proposed deletion notify. It's not used in any articles, only some user pages (how delightful). Could this be added to the list? Fences&Windows 20:24, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
- Done. No worries. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 23:22, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
File:Retracted testicles.jpg has been used to vandalize WP:COCK a couple times, can it be added? Thanks. Connormahtalk 22:38, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yep, Done. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 01:22, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Recently used for vandalism in Wikipedia. The nature of the image lends itself to more of the same. Rklawton (talk) 04:09, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
This image is already included in the Gangrene article and is plainly relevant (though not displaying). Please could an admin add an exception. Thanks. 81.132.142.210 (talk) 18:04, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
- Done -- zzuuzz (talk) 18:10, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
I would like to use File:Lynching-of-woman-1911.jpg in Lynching of Laura Nelson and her son. Cheers, SlimVirgin talk|contribs 21:13, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- Done -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:16, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Androgen insensitivity syndrome
Following some discussions on the image policy talk page, a major revision to this article has been committed and has added a number of images which could generally be thought of as appropriate for only a narrow range of articles. I'm on a mobile device right now and cannot easily link to all of them but I will ask the author of the revision to comment here with specific links. Perhaps only 2-4 images need be added to the bad image list but comment from other admins would be helpful. Protonk (talk) 19:19, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Home now. The specific images I am concerned about are:
- File:Grade 4 partial androgen insensitivity syndrome.jpg
- File:Complete androgen insensitivity presenting with inguinal hernia.jpg
- File:Complications from infant genitoplasty.jpg
- File:Grade 3 partial androgen insensitivity syndrome.jpg
- File:Mild androgen insensitivity syndrome.jpg
All of these are appropriate for the articles they are currently used in (and have specific FURs for each use), but could obviously be misused by image vandals. Protonk (talk) 20:31, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Added all five files. — ξxplicit 20:46, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks, everyone, for staying on top of this. I wouldn't mind seeing the following images added to the list as well:
Though I wonder if anyone would even know what the last image is, without the context. Jonathan.Marcus (talk) 06:50, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm currently splitting the AIS page into subpages, and need to be able to use these images. Specifically:
- Complete androgen insensitivity syndrome needs access to:
- Partial androgen insensitivity syndrome needs access to:
- Mild androgen insensitivity syndrome needs access to:
Thanks. Jonathan.Marcus (talk) 05:19, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
- Since they were never used for vandalism, I just removed them from the list. Garion96 (talk) 10:56, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
“Controversial” Images within WMF Projects study
Figured I'd post this link here for interested readers who watch this page. In case these 'recommendations' may have any sort of significant effect on things related to this list and its images it'd be important to be aware of it. -- Ϫ 02:00, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
Why the bad images are used for vandalism
Just this one general question: Why would anyone use the images in this bad image list for vandalism, anyway? Jim856796 (talk) 03:16, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
- Shock images. Imagine if you replaced the infobox image of Dora the explorer with a penis or vagina. Also, before the edit filter existed, shock image vandalism was much harder to detect and revert than the much more common "lol this page sucks" style of vandalism, and the simplest path to stopping that vandalism is to literally restrict the use of certain images to specific pages. Protonk (talk) 21:51, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Abu Ghraib images
Any reason we shouldn't add everything in Commons:Category:Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse? Also, is there a way to do reg-ex's or categories rather than single images at a time? Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:28, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
I've added the worst of the Abu Ghraib images; I've seen at least one used for vandalism. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:09, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
- I reject the adding of almost all Abu Graib images to this list. One case of vandalism is not enough to restrict the use of an entire group of images and put them onto the list of almost all pornographic images. Please provide a link to the case of vandalism that you have seen and please provide a good reason why we should restrict the use of almost all Abu Graib prison abuse images? Thank you. IQinn (talk) 23:33, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
You didn't object for the two weeks I had the request up. And the vandalism was here: [5]. We don't need to wait for oodles of examples to add to the list. If you have a serious request to add it somewhere, we can certainly do so; just add {{editprotected}}. The non-use of these images is no worse than the non-use of the offensive images above. Also note I didn't add every image; only the ones with nudity that could be potentially offensive to the wrong audience in the wrong situation (e.g., Ms. 3rd grade teacher bringing up US Armed forces to her class on Veterans Day, having inspected it earlier, only to see a pile of naked men). Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:19, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
{{editprotected}}
File:Abu Ghraib 58.jpg should have been grandfathered into Nudity. Hipocrite (talk) 02:07, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Done. See related ANi discussion here. Sandstein 08:14, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
File:BearApplePoop.JPG
I feel that File:BearApplePoop.JPG should be added to Bad image list (while the image would be allowed on Feces and American Black Bear). The reason for my suggestion is due to the fact that any disgusting pictures including pictures of feces are likely to be used by vandals. What do you think? NHRHS2010 | Talk to me 05:53, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
- Done. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:49, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
- Was the image used for vandalism or are you only afraid it might be used for that? If the latter, it should not be on this list. This list is not meant to put every image in which could possibly be used for vandalism. Garion96 (talk) 20:52, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
- Alright; well remove it if you'd like. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:09, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Penis in a BLP
File:UnLabelled flaccid penis.jpg see its lovely use in a BLP Please place on bad image list The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 01:25, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- Done. -- zzuuzz (talk) 08:44, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Please place File:Cut Rat.jpg on the list. Thank you. --Tryptofish (talk) 16:23, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
- Has it been used for vandalism, or do you just find it gross? -- zzuuzz (talk) 20:01, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
- Well, strictly speaking, I think that my thought processes were more adult than "finding it gross". No, I'm not aware of vandalism, but I became aware of it through a civil discussion about content, and it looked to me like exactly the kind of thing that would appeal to vandals. If policy is that it actually has to have been used for vandalism, then please accept my apologies and know that I've just learned something new about the way things work. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:11, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
- You didn't give much to go on. Usually it's just the shock factor of penises that vandals go for; there's a couple of picturea of rather horrible diseases that have been used, but the dissected animals aren't really that big with the vandals. It's only really images that get used for vandalism that get added here, otherwise it's only likely to prevent legitimate uses. -- zzuuzz (talk) 20:19, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
- OK, please file this under "never mind"! Best wishes, --Tryptofish (talk) 20:24, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
- You didn't give much to go on. Usually it's just the shock factor of penises that vandals go for; there's a couple of picturea of rather horrible diseases that have been used, but the dissected animals aren't really that big with the vandals. It's only really images that get used for vandalism that get added here, otherwise it's only likely to prevent legitimate uses. -- zzuuzz (talk) 20:19, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
- Well, strictly speaking, I think that my thought processes were more adult than "finding it gross". No, I'm not aware of vandalism, but I became aware of it through a civil discussion about content, and it looked to me like exactly the kind of thing that would appeal to vandals. If policy is that it actually has to have been used for vandalism, then please accept my apologies and know that I've just learned something new about the way things work. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:11, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
Can this be added to the bad image list, please? This commons image is unused in the encyclopedia and was used for shock value in an unblock request here (note, it has since been revdeled). Thanks. — Gavia immer ( talk) 00:11, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you. Also, thanks for fixing my mangled section header. — Gavia immer (talk) 00:21, 29 November 2010 (UTC)