Jump to content

Talk:Urination: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 23: Line 23:
:[[User:Red-tailed hawk|@Red-tailed hawk]] I suggest that these pictures be removed as they are not necessary and a violation of the privacy of the individuals depicted. [[Special:Contributions/117.208.238.71|117.208.238.71]] ([[User talk:117.208.238.71|talk]]) 04:25, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
:[[User:Red-tailed hawk|@Red-tailed hawk]] I suggest that these pictures be removed as they are not necessary and a violation of the privacy of the individuals depicted. [[Special:Contributions/117.208.238.71|117.208.238.71]] ([[User talk:117.208.238.71|talk]]) 04:25, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
::I've just removed some of them. I agree that it was getting ridiculous. --[[User:Tryptofish|Tryptofish]] ([[User talk:Tryptofish|talk]]) 22:35, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
::I've just removed some of them. I agree that it was getting ridiculous. --[[User:Tryptofish|Tryptofish]] ([[User talk:Tryptofish|talk]]) 22:35, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
:I find it a bit hilarious that this article's nearly 20-year history has been a revolving door of editors adding explicit images and other editors removing them. And in 20 years we've had the full spectrum participating, from POINTy editing and mere trolling, to objectivity and pragmatism, to (sometimes thinly veiled) prudishness.
:Quite fascinating. I expect the article's next 20 years to be exactly the same, too. [[File:Smile_eye.png|20px]] [[Special:Contributions/174.88.40.15|174.88.40.15]] ([[User talk:174.88.40.15|talk]]) 22:13, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:13, 14 August 2023


Do we need multiple pictures of people urinating in this article?

We currently have 3 such photographs, and I'm not really seeing the marginal educational value of having these. I understand that illustrating this topic may well require depictions of genitalia, but we should try to not be gratuitous in selecting our images. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 14:35, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Red-tailed hawk: The article now has 6 of these photos, since two more were recently added. This is probably too many, but the lead section still includes only artistic depictions instead of photographs. Jarble (talk) 19:39, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Red-tailed hawk I suggest that these pictures be removed as they are not necessary and a violation of the privacy of the individuals depicted. 117.208.238.71 (talk) 04:25, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've just removed some of them. I agree that it was getting ridiculous. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:35, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I find it a bit hilarious that this article's nearly 20-year history has been a revolving door of editors adding explicit images and other editors removing them. And in 20 years we've had the full spectrum participating, from POINTy editing and mere trolling, to objectivity and pragmatism, to (sometimes thinly veiled) prudishness.
Quite fascinating. I expect the article's next 20 years to be exactly the same, too. 174.88.40.15 (talk) 22:13, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]