User talk:FT2/ap

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

[edit] RFC: handling of "laws on animal pornography"

This entire field is being brought up to more in-depth standards following someone's submission of a related article for Featured Article. In the course of doing so, I'm not sure what's best to do with laws about animal pornography (ie production, distribution, ownership). Are they best listed as 1) a section under "laws about zoosexuality", 2) as a section under "animal pornography", or 3) as a new article "laws on animal pornography"? I'd appreciate review, to consider what's best.

[edit] Background and options

Animal pornography is distinct from zoosexuality. The major distinction is that laws covering the pornography relate to possession, sale, distribution, transportation of images and media, rather than legality or illegality of the act. A bit like how homosexuality and the law would differ from laws on gay pornography.

Zoosexuality and the law contains laws on the act itself, and how laws concerning the activity have developed and are formed. This draft article on "Animal pornography" will contain culture and background information on animal pornography and be the lead article for Category:Animal pornography (presently none exists): its making, its sale, its contents and history.

The wikitable "list of laws" (at present placed in zoosexuality and the law), on whether it is legal to sell, or promote, or distribute, or own, such media, is ambiguous:

  • Should it go with laws on zoosexuality? But although its the law, this is not law on zoosexuality, rather its law related to ownership and sale of porn.
  • Should it go with "animal pornography"? It would make more sense there, but then the animal pornography article starts to contain its own legal section. is this a good thing?
  • Should there be a 3rd article, "laws on animal pornography"? But then, we start to get article spread. Surely its not necessary for the simple existence of a table, to create a new article.

Comments appreciated after reviewing this draft, and the zoosexuality and the law article, and how other editors would place the material? FT2 (Talk) 16:11, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comments

I'm sorry, I hate to be closed minded but that's some stuff I just didn't need or want to know. I'm not sure that a detailed set of articles on this is needed. As a person with no prior knowledge of this topic, I found the information to be more detailed than I would ever want. ColtsScore 09:09, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. Oddly, that's a good test for an encyclopedia -- does it act as a source of significant knowledge and information beyond what's usually known? is it needed? Well... it goes on in real life. So should it be ignored? FT2 (Talk | email) 10:03, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Because Zoosexuality and the law is specifically about the legal aspects, then it should probably go there, with a short section and a "Main article: " in the animal pornography article. Overall, I think there might be too much separation as it is. —Centrx→talk • 02:34, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../f/t/2/User_talk%7EFT2_ap_d465.html"