Talk:Clitoris/Archive 8

message: It's a wonderful vagina. A human body part. 
If you don't like it, don't look it up.
End of story.
Good night.
* First you say clitoris then to say vagina. Are you confused? But yes that is exactly the problem. It does not depict the clitoris. It does not deserve to be on the clitoris page. - Robert the Bruce 15:10, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Beautiful Clitoris 

message: ...added to Wikipedia:Graphic and potentially disturbing images. All those who think we shouldn't be creating blanket rules for censorship of Wikipedia, feel free to vote with me.  — マイケル ₪ 03:12, Dec 28, 2004 (UTC)
I think suggesting that applying an inclusive solution to potentially offensive material, without advocating its removal, is "censorship" is hysterical. I do not understand the notion that if you do not like a liberal orthodox view of the world you are not welcome to use Wikipedia, and I do not see where this notion is supported in Wikipedia policy. Dr Zen 23:22, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: "People who are likely to be offended by website content (IOW, are not able to guess that an article on the penis in an encyclopaedia will contain photos of an erect penis, even though other encyclopaedias do not) and cannot take the simplest of reasonable steps to avoid this happening should avoid using the internet altogether." My addition in brackets and I've had enough of this, Tony. Dr Zen 05:57, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Excuse me, but didn't anyone who voted in favor of that censorship participate on this page?  In fact, did anyone even vote in favor of that censorship? anthony 警告 14:37, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

text: People who are likely to be offended by website content and cannot take the simplest of reasonable steps to avoid this happening should avoid using the internet altogether.
This is a general statement about using the internet.  If someone is likely to be offended by website content and still does not take precautions then they will be offended.  In my opinion someone who refuses to take reasonable precautions, in particular to avoid browsing websites whose owners state clearly that their site "contains many different images, some of which are considered objectionable or offensive by some readers, for example, some articles contain graphical depictions of violence, or photographs of human anatomy" should avoid using the internet.  They browse at their own risk. 
"and I've had enough of this, Tony."  If your additions to my words cause you discomfort, stop doing it. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 06:19, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  New vote option... 

message: I've edited the image as I indicated I would, as per the request of several other users. I put in the circles like some said they liked with the old photo. I've marked the other areas the article refers to. Let me know what you think. Do you like blue for the labels? Black blended in too much with the public hair. I have the Adobe Illustrator file on my computer, so I can make any requested changes.  — マイケル ₪ 04:03, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
: We should restore the compromise that was agreed by consensus to be put on the page until we resolve the issues in question, which we have moved much closer to doing.Dr Zen 04:37, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Please point to said consensus, because it was my understanding that you were trying to get the photo removed. So seeing as this "comprimise" only satisfies one side here, I don't believe that everyone would ever have come to such a comprimise. From what I have read, the consensus is that the photo should stay. Therefore I am reinstating it. I will only do it once however, so if you want to fight over it, you can fight with someone else.  — マイケル ₪ 04:50, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)
 
The discussion is above in Archive 5. There is no consensus for the photo. All parties to the discussion (but not outside editors, clearly) agreed on a compromise for a short while until we found a lasting solution. The link was put in by Theresa Knott, one of the pro editors. Now, please, we are trying to find a consensus solution. Let's stick to the task.Dr Zen 04:59, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  New image 

message: these are probably the part of the clitoris i understand the LEAST. i suspect many other people are similarly in the dark. 
Gringo300 05:40, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: this article needs to tell about the clitoral bulbs

message: *climax
*clime
*cling
*clinic
*clique
*clitic
I stopped looking after that. anthony 警告 14:57, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: My list demonstrates that there are ample means of obtaining Wikipedia content without seeing images you may find objectionable, even if users are not willing to learn how to operate their web browser.  No one ever denied that it's possible to get fucked up old copies of Wikipedia content. anthony 警告 20:30, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: We do not need to issue further warnings or worry about people finding the picture objectionable, because nobody has to come to Wikipedia to view our conten and nobody has to download the images in any case.  Likewise, no one ever said that a warning or worry was necessary, we just think it'd be a good idea.  Using your argument you could argue against the inclusion of anything.  anthony 警告 20:30, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: If we had to wait for a change to be necessary in order to improve Wikipedia we'd be waiting forever.  In fact, this image would have never been added in the first place, since it's not necessary. anthony 警告 16:23, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: A list of words which begin with cli

message: ... months ago? People want a clear image. People don't want a 'warning' or 'disclaimer.' If you hate vaginas so much, STFU and fork your own crazy wiki. --68.198.151.196 18:43, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Censorship  and vandalism  reverted yet again. chocolateboy 05:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: But there's simply no clitoris visible in that picture!  Here's a picture of a clitoris: http://www.pukka.net/snotsykims/temple/above.jpg 68.6.40.203 05:05, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hasn't this been resolved 

message: Hmmm,... this page still confuses and befuddles me. I cannot believe this discussion is still going on. Instead of conflict, why not show pics that may be more acceptable(meaning, if you oppose the current pic, please do provide a substitute)? I also think that a detailed illustration (I'm trying to find an illustration such as this) should accompany the pic of the clitoris. One that provides detailed info and a real picture that would show a girl what she does really look like. CiaraBeth 05:37, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Substitute?

message: I don't think one edit is an edit war. Vacuum c 16:08, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)
I'm mystified about this too.  The article was edited and then reverted around 0200 UST, then protected at around 1500, over twelve hours later with no intervening edits. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 16:55, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why was it just protected? 

message: I think a lot of the "debate" has been unproductive. I resent being caused a "hardliner" by people who have performed multiple reverts on this article in one day.  Three of us have tried to forge a consensus with opponents of the current picture, agreeing to replacement by a link for a brief period but the problem with that is that many others do not accept that.  I've come to believe that this is the most stable clitoris will ever be, and that this isn't necessarily something to worry about. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 01:30, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Consensus and debate