#1
I was going through wikipedia before looking for some photographers for my college project, and as I went through, I started noticing some stuff on there which I was surprised to see. A few more related clicks and I was getting really surprised with some of the pictures they allow to be shown without any restrictions or 'prove you're 18+' link. I mean, there was one picture with younger kids in it if you catch my drift.

Now, I know wikipedia is controlled and updated by its users, but I thought there would be some form of screening process, especially with images.

I'm pretty liberal with my views on censorship, but I did find this surprising.

Am I just being silly? Have I just found an anomaly? What do you think?

EDIT: Need to clarify some stuff:

It wasn't any wierd photography project. I just got carried away with clicking on some related links.

It wasn't pornography, just nudity.

I know it's nothing major, but a lot of the big sites, such as deviantART, have restrictions to stop younger people viewing the images, and I was just a bit surprised.

And I can't remember the links. Go search for yourself if you want. =P
Quote by Teh Traineez0rz

I'm having chicken nuggets for lunch.

My Day > Yours
Last edited by MayContainNuts at Apr 6, 2008,
#2
Iunno... report it to them if you want to. They probably haven't gotten round to checking it maybe? Or they missed it somehow?

But I have no idea what the hell you had in mind for your photography project if that is the sort of image that you found...
#3
Was the pic of mere child nudity or full-blown child pornography? If it's just nudity, then there's nothing wrong with it at all.
Quote by BLOBERT
BRO
#6
Well as I'm sure everyone on here has visited the vagina page or breast page on wikipedia, you know there's pictures of nude bodies. I wondered too for a while about why they didn't have an 18+ warning on some pages.
#8
Quote by Reject_666_6
Was the pic of mere child nudity or full-blown child pornography? If it's just nudity, then there's nothing wrong with it at all.

Paedo
████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
#9
Quote by SG_dave
i've got to say it....

<.<

>.>


.... links???


sorry



cmon, it's wikipedia, you can give us links
#10
Haha, don't worry, it's not that kind of photography project.
I just got carried away with some related link clicking.

It's not pornography at all, just nudity. I know it's nothing major, but lots of major sites have restricions, such as deviantart.
Quote by Teh Traineez0rz

I'm having chicken nuggets for lunch.

My Day > Yours
#11
Yeah, I am intrigued(sp?)... link...
Quote by 20cdndollars
You are god, floppypick



Floppydick


If that's how you read my name, leave a message saying so on my profile
#12
well really, its an online encyclopedia.

Its really meant to cover everything, nothing is too taboo.


its in the name of knowledge!! ...... *shifty eyes*
#15
Wikipedia has no restrictions - thats the whole point of it. It's not suited to anyones views.

It's just neutral, they really don't care if you get insulted
#16
There is a bit on the RATM page, which talks of them protesting naked with duct tape over their mouths, with a full graphic image.
#17
the Electric Ladyland page has the original album cover, which sure aint of Jimi
Quote by AAAAAAAAAARGH
Gold/Silver/Crystal.

Simply because I could breed the pokemon, and act out my sick sexual fantasies between Dittos and Chanseys.


Quote by bequickorbedead
She had sex..with my...AIDS?
#18
Quote by hazzmatazz
There is a bit on the RATM page, which talks of them protesting naked with duct tape over their mouths, with a full graphic image.


I was disturbed when i saw it.

fapfapfap
#20
On The Rage Against The Machine wiki it has that pic with all of them standing there naked...i was kind of surprised to see that there