Hacker News Reader

Comment by aidenn0 | Hacker News Reader

Adult content is notoriously hard to filter on since nobody can agree what qualifies, and pretty much any site with user-generated content has content that is objectionable to someone.

Do you filter Wikipedia as "adult content"? Certainly one of these[1] images qualifies under most standards?

1: NSFW https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Bad_image_list

View on HN

There are lots more examples than Wikipedia, although that's a good one. Reddit, Twitter, and YouTube are other examples where you can find adult content if you're looking for it, but if you block the whole site, you block a whole bunch of useful and in some cases educational content along with it.

Now all that being said, this is a decent enough way to at least block the obvious stuff like Pornhub. For some, that might be good enough.

I have never seen the wikipedia "bad image list" before - and I am confused ... after clicking on a few of these images, randomly, every single one (under File Usage) reports:

No pages on the English Wikipedia use this file (pages on other projects are not listed).

... so why do these images persist in the wikipedia ?

The fourth one on the list is used on the page "Phallus".

But I can't answer your question.

Thank you for that link, reading through the filenames was quite humorous. Agreed, what is considered "adult content" varies significantly between people, and whether children should be able to access what is considered medical/anatomical reference is a frequent argument.

Well this was one rabbit hole I would've preferred not to have visited...!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com