Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/List of places blurred out on Google Maps

Security
I'm surprised nobody has even mentioned security. That should be everyone's job to some extent. If Google Maps has been told not to provide certain images for security purposes, then I hope the high muckymucks of Wikipedia would cooperate if intelligence agencies asked for Office Actions to remove this list. I hope nobody uses it as a list of good places to bomb. Art LaPella 13:56, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not censored. The formless possibility of governmental intervention is no reason for us to pre-emptively watch our every move. We are also not sure why (or even if) the images are manipulated by Google; we can hardly avoid begging the question if we speculate on the motives. If the Office is involved, they will handle the situation as they see fit; the public will not be invited to decide their course of action. It is best, therefore, to constrain our arguments for or against deletion based on the current content policies and guidelines. — Kaustuv Chaudhuri 14:46, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not a Wikilawyer, but at least give me credit for worrying about the "formless possibility" of a bomb, not government intervention. Art LaPella 16:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Again, Wikipedia is not censored. — Kaustuv Chaudhuri 16:33, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

It occurs to me that if someone were to use GM/GE to find a target, they'd probably pick a locale first. Then, scan the area for blurry bits. And the realization of this also leads me to expect that we may start seeing some deliberately blurry bits that aren't sensitive at all. Which will suck. But then again, I don't agree with the point of blurring sensitive sites. GM/GE imagery is by no means really current, and most sensitive sites are presumably already camoflaged from above to avoid detection by, you know, actual U.S. rivals with access to uncensored satellite imagery. (As opposed to, you know, regular people using mapping sites). - Keith D. Tyler &para; (AMA) 18:27, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I will hastily yield to a security expert, but I just wanted you to think about it and I have succeeded. Al Qaeda, for instance, picks locales globally and has no satellites. I don't think North Korea has any either. Art LaPella 19:44, 13 April 2007 (UTC)