Jump to content

Talk:Urination

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]
A few images were added here again to illustrate female urination postures. Jarble (talk) 17:15, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Right... it's so stupid. And of course, weirdos are going to come out of the woodwork "wHy dO yOu hAvE a pRoBlEm wItH iT." Like they're enlightened libertines, and YOU'RE the weird one for wondering why an encyclopedia article about urination needs more than one image of a woman squatting down and urinating in public. Wik.ipedia.Pro is awful. And whoever is adding these, you ain't foolin' nobody. Mercster (talk) 04:24, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What a coincidence, one image of a male peeing, 4 of a female peeing. Mercster (talk) 04:26, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Since editors in this discussion have strongly objected to realistic depictions of urination, I have also removed the photographs of animals that were included in this article.
According to this guideline, should these photographs be replaced with drawings or illustrations that are less likely to offend the article's readers? Jarble (talk) 19:54, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe someone else will disagree with me, but I have never thought that the animal images were part of the problem. The concern was over the human images. I don't have an objection to some photos of non-human animal behavior, particularly since they appropriately expand the page scope beyond only humans. We don't need a lot of animal photos, but a few should be OK. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:16, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mercster and Red-tailed hawk: All but two of the photographs of people in this article have been removed, and the two remaining photographs avoid depicting nudity altogether.
Should realistic depictions of urination not be included in this article because readers might consider them obscene? Jarble (talk) 18:37, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i just removed one of the remaining ones because this one clearly violates privacy and Wik.ipedia.Pros guidelines. Cyber the tiger (talk) 14:02, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The image in the male section doesn't matter as much so I left it but I removed the image in the females section as it is clearly against Wik.ipedia.Pros guidelines And policies Cyber the tiger (talk) 14:03, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image in females section

That image is clearly against Wik.ipedia.Pros guidelines and policies. But, I'm leaving a comment for thoughts about whether this was smart or whether that image should be reinserted. Cyber the tiger (talk) 02:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@CyberTheTiger I looked at the photos and I'm a bit confused as to which guidlines and policies the image violates. Could you list the specefic ones? IntentionallyDense (talk) 02:51, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
MOS:OMIMG Cyber the tiger (talk) 02:55, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see this less as a matter of policy, and more as a matter of editorial judgment. But I'm happy with removing it. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:51, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i already removed it yesterday. Cyber the tiger (talk) 00:00, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While I agree that the image does not add any value to the article, "Remove inappropiate image. This particular image definitely should not be on Wik.ipedia.Pro" actually isn't an explanation why but only says that you are removing the image. And "That image is clearly against Wik.ipedia.Pros guidelines and policies." are empty words without proper explanation too. Killarnee (talk) 06:23, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.Wik.ipedia.Pro.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Urination&oldid=1248383895"

See what we do next...

OR

By submitting your email or phone number, you're giving mschf permission to send you email and/or recurring marketing texts. Data rates may apply. Text stop to cancel, help for help.

Success: You're subscribed now !