Forum:SH:Conflicting policies

Forums > Senate Hall archive > SH:Conflicting policies
This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments or questions on this topic should be made in a new Senate Hall page rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record. Advanced Jedi Training Droid 6 (Talk to my master) 03:42, June 16, 2014 (UTC)

I've been meaning to bring this up for a while now (since around April Fool's Day, actually). It occurred to me while reviewing Wookieepedia:User page and profile policy and Wookieepedia:User image policy (I want to refactor my user page), that those policies have rules that are (IMO) in conflict with "Wookieepedia is not censored":

User page policy Rule #4: User pages and images within must be "safe for work": no content which is unsuitable for a family audience or would be likely to disturb or offend other users. Any illegal or inappropriate content or links to such material is forbidden.
User image policy Rule #6: Images must be "safe for work": no nudity, excessive gore, or other content which is unsuitable for a family audience, or would be likely to disturb or offend other users.

Specifically, it's the "safe for work" clause that (in my view) contradicts the "no censorship" policy. As an example, I'm sure most of you are aware of an infamous image in Wookieepedia's library (I don't want to link to it here, but hint: it was displayed on the Main Page on April Fool's Day). That image is NSFW, therefore it cannot be displayed on User pages, per policy. Yet, as evidence shows, it can be displayed anywhere else on the wiki. Why are User pages a special case here?

I think this is something that should go to CT, but I wanted to bring it up here and try and get an idea of what the community thinks of this situation. Which policy wins out? Should the "safe for work" clause be removed from the User page/image policies, or (much less likely) should the "no censorship" policy be amended? I open the floor for discussion. - Esjs(Talk) 23:52, May 9, 2014 (UTC)

  • Frankly, I don't see an issue. You're talking about user images. Not anything in the main content namespace. We're not about to let people upload garbage for their userpages. Honestly, I'd rather eliminate userpages entirely. You're trying to create controversy for the sake of controversy, and nobody appreciates it. Please take it elsewhere. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 00:21, May 10, 2014 (UTC)
    • In addition, as per Wikia's Terms of Use, we mustn't "Post or transmit any content that is obscene, pornographic, abusive, offensive, profane, or otherwise violates any law or right of any third party, or content that contains homophobia, ethnic slurs, religious intolerance, or encourages criminal conduct", so any sort of nudity and porn is already banned by default. The Aayla image is just an exception granted by Wikia. 1358 (Talk) 09:15, May 10, 2014 (UTC)
    • An exception granted by Wikia to avoid a protracted fight with us, the kind of fight we're NOT going to give them just so you can have porn on your userpage. Because as it says at the top of WP:USER, "Your user page is not your primary contribution to this wiki." I think you'll find, if you analyze the policies carefully, that many of our rules are meant to discourage excessive focus on userpages. However, if you're really determined to post porn somewhere, you can find somewhere other than Wookieepedia to do so. -- Darth Culator (Talk) 18:17, May 10, 2014 (UTC)
      • You seem to be making the wrong assumptions about my intentions. I don't appreciate being accused of "...trying to create controversy for the sake of controversy..." when my intention is just get some clarification on some policies. If I'm confused about them, I may not be the only one. Also, I don't know if you were using the word "you" in a general sense or if you were specifically talking to me, but when you say "...just so you can have porn on your userpage..." you are again making an egregiously wrong assumption about my intentions. Now, regarding what Xd said about Wikia's ToU and the exception granted, that is information that I was unaware of. I know I would have appreciated seeing that kind of information pointed out under Wookieepedia is not censored. Thank you for reminding me that that intent of the User page/image policies is keep people from making Wookieepedia their own "web host." My point is simply that User pages and Main content pages are equally accessible from the view of the Internet, so maybe there should be consistency on what kind of material is disallowed (especially under Wikia's ToU). And maybe everybody takes that passage Wikia's ToU for granted. But I'd feel better if it were explicitly pointed out under "Wookieepedia is not censored" (along with mention of exceptions, such as the Aayla image). By the way, just out of curiosity (I'm not trying to make an argument out of this question): Is the Aayla image considered a User image or not? Hopefully responses will be respectful and about my questions on the policies - I don't like having to defend myself against attacks against my character. - Esjs(Talk) 18:36, May 13, 2014 (UTC)
        • Holding Mainspace and User pages to the same standards is something we've never done, and frankly makes no sense; they simply serve vastly different purposes. Mainspace pages are meant to be a complete informational record of a given topic, while user pages are (naturally) more user-defined as to content and purpose. To serve our mandate, our mainspace pages aren't censored - if information exists, the mere fact that some might be offended by it is not enough to make it take priority over our goal of making all Star Wars-related information available to our readers. But user pages aren't a part of that mandate, and as such, they can - and should - be restricted in ways that uphold the site's professionalism and enhance our image in the internet community. In other words, if we offend someone with our Breast article, that is of course unfortunate, but maintaining that information is a part of our core purpose. But if User:CamelFellator offends someone with their userpage, they are alienating our readership and disrupting our standards of professionalism without in any way supporting our core values, and the Wookieepedia community has every right - indeed, a responsibility - to step in and prevent that. jSarek (talk) 19:12, May 13, 2014 (UTC)
  • While I completely agree that current practice is perfectly fine as is, I have felt for a while that WP:NOTCENSORED could use an expansion to better clarify and explain. The reason for that is exactly what's been brought up here: user pages are censored by local policy, and Wikia's TOU effectively censors the entire wiki. I would support an amendment to WP:NOTCENSORED to clarify that the statement "Wookieepedia is not censored" is limited by relevant statements in the user page and user images as well as Wikia's TOU. We could also stand to clarify what is not being "censored", namely potentially objectionable/NSFW content as opposed to copyright violations and other categories of content that we do prohibit, since the word "censor" can apply to far more than just blue breasts and cuss words.
    Master JonathanCouncil Chambers
    14:46 UTC WedMay 14, 2014