Talk:Penis/Archive 5

message: A large part of the edits to this article is vandalism of teh kind which would be blocked by semi-protection. What would people think about permanently semi-protecting the article? Thue | talk 13:29, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protection 

message: I don't know if it's just me, but I find "Other terms for it are: the (male) member or - for the erect state - the phallus. " to be very cludgy/clunky as a sentence.  I suggest a rewording, but am not sure how important leaving in the male member reference is.  I do agree with leaving the phallus. Gordon Bonnar 03:50, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reworded the intro--Clawed 09:16, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wording of first sentence 

message: In the circumsicisian section  there are two photos showing the difference between a circumsided and uncircumsised penis.
:User:Masalai recently changed the caption from 
Uncircumcised penis (L), circumcised penis (R). to Uncircumcised penis (L), uncircumcised penis with foreskin retracted(R).'.
and after I reverted then placed this on my talk page
:I am perplexed at your continued restoration of the incorrect label of a photo of an uncircumcised penis with the foreskin retracted as a circumcised penis which it plainly is not. You will note that the source of the photo is a Russian article; doubtless the latter is considerably less well known there than in Western countries. There is a photo of a circumcised (albeit mis-spelled) penis at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Circumsized_penis.gif and perhaps you would like to substitute that photo for the inappropriate one that appears in the article. It would be better to have a photo illustrating what the subsection of the article is discussing anyway. Masalai 00:13, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  image captions 

message: I removed the Template:adult tag, on the basis that this is completely POV. If younger readers can't handle information about the penis, then they shouldn't read an article with that title. Benami 18:05, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adult Content tag 

message: I removed a sentence about pediatric penile trauma that cited a study done by M.S. EL-BAHNASAWY and M.T. EL-SHERBINY of The Urology and Nephrology Centre, Mansoura University Mansoura, Egypt. The study specifically states in "In our region, ritual circumcision and hair-tie strangulation injuries are the most common causes of penile trauma in children." The sentence in the article left out the words "In our region" - that is, the area served by the clinic at Mansoura University in Egypt- thereby making the conclusions seem stronger and more universally applicable than they actually were. Benami 23:03, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Penile trauma 

message: Relation to female genitals
The glans of the penis is homologous to the clitoral glans, the corpora cavernosa are homologous to the body of the clitoris, the corpus spongiosum is homologous to the vestibular bulbs beneath the labia minora, and the scrotum is homologous to the labia minora, labia majora and clitoral hood. The raphe does not exist in females, because there the two halves are not connected.
I'm seeing a lot of big words but they're all gibberish to me. Without the aid of a diagram or some other aid to tell what it is each term is talking about, is it really helping? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Airconditioning (talk • contribs) .
:A few remarks...
:#Please sign your comments with ~~~~
:#This is not the Simple English Wikipedia, occasionally it uses multisyllable words that aren't used in everyday speech :-p
:#All the "gibberish" in there is wikilinked, it's an encyclopedia, read and learn...read back to the previous subsection if you need a wikilink to raphe
:Tomertalk 14:55, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gibberish? 

message: Is it really apprioprate to post pictures of erect male penises? I think it should be taken down.
::No it shouldnt be taken down, of course it's appropriate, you're looking at an article about the penis, why shouldnt there be a photo of it? TR_Wolf
:It is really quite relevant... I say (and consensus seems to be) that it stays. Thue | talk 23:15, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe would be a good idea to at least give a warning that there are "explicit" pictures here?  A number of ppl probably would find it objectionable.  Ikh (talk) 17:34, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But they probably aren't looking for articles about penises. Mark1 17:42, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: On the contrary, most people that go ranting about indecency and penises and stuff generally go to certain webpages about those things on purpose so they can complain about it.--70.125.21.96 22:26, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Penis pics? 

message: I removed the following passage from the "Fears and Reassurance" section:
::As mentioned earlier, the raphe is the visible ridge between the lateral halves of the penis, found on the ventral or under side of the penis, running from the meatus (opening of the urethra) across the scrotum to the perineum (area between scrotum and anus). This ridge is actually the "biological zipper" that closes the urethra during the normal course of fetal development. When the urethra does not close normally, the resulting condition is called hypospadias. Surgery is required to close the urethra. Treatment may involve multiple surgeries and attendant pain.::
This describes a birth defect, not something along the lines of penis hysteria. It seemed to be badly placed, and the last sentence seems like fluff. Benami 05:28, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fears 

message: If people are too insecure about their own sexuality that even seeing a picture of a penis leads them to question it, that who am I to force them?--—The preceding signed comment was added by Bob Saget (talk • contribs) {{SUBST:{2|}}}. 04:23, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: I agree

message: why is there a section dedicated to the animal penis, most of the information for the section is crude and unnecessary
Believe it or not humans are animals too, hence we also have animal penises.  And anyway, the vast majority of the penises in the world are nonhuman, so it only makes sense to cover them as well.  --Cyde Weys 20:15, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  animals 

message: Does anyone have any idea about why this page is currently protected from being edited?
:The article is protected from being edited by unregistered, anonymous users and new users. You need to sign up and edit legitimately for a short time before being allowed to edit articles such as this that are frequently vandalized by anons. FCYTravis 05:32, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  protected page 

message: The thumbnail picture under erection is broken and I can't fix because I don't have an account. Please fix, thank you.
:The picture looks like it works to me.  Please consider creating an account.   ⇔    | | ⊕ ⊥ (t-c-e) 11:06, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  broken image 

message: I reverted this version:
:The most prevalent form of genital alteration in some countries is circumcision: removal of part or all of the foreskin for various cultural, religious, and more rarely medical reasons - it is argued and heavily supported that with proper hygiene, there is no medical advantage to a circumsized penis - even though some believe that it will better protect them from sexually-transmitted infections, which is false. In many cases, such as in some United States hospitals, the frenulum and part of the shaft skin is also removed. 
back to:
:The most prevalent form of genital alteration in some countries is circumcision: removal of part or all of the foreskin for various cultural, religious, and more rarely medical reasons. In many cases, such as in some United States hospitals, the frenulum and part of the shaft skin is also removed.
The first version is too argumentative and the topic is better left to be dealt with within the main article (genital modification and mutilation).    ⇔    | | ⊕ ⊥ (t-c-e) 06:44, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modification and Mutilation 

message: An image, :Image:Penis3ym.jpg, has been being added to the "Size" section by User:Poona.  This image doesn't seem to add much, if anything, to the article, which already has various illustrations, and certainly seem to add anything to the section on penis size.  I, and others, have removed this photo for this reason. -- AJR | Talk 19:52, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And I've listed that image for deletion. It's a low quality picture and possibly a "vanity" pic. OhNoitsJamieTalk 20:18, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The latest image 

message: what's going on here?--Alhutch 02:59, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: actually, User:My Cat inn did not semi-protect the page, it has been protected since January 30th! I'm unprotecting since there hasn't been much recent vandalism.--Alhutch 03:05, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  semi-protection and image removal 

message: Even though the pictures on this page are appropriate to the topic, I think that for some, even the 2 or 3 photos on this page may be a little too graphic. Perhaps you can remove the photos and just create links to them with a warning for mature audiences only.
: for mature audience only? why is that? --tasc 20:45, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: the sizes seem pretty appropriate to me. you didn't actually change the sizes on those edits you made. you don't understand how to change image sizes. there is nothing wrong with the size of these images. they are not "giant".--Alhutch 22:46, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is censoring possible? 

message: So, whilst doing some research on music, I wanted to read Wikipedia's description of a 'presto'.  Clicking on it brought me to 'Penis'.
On this occasion, I'd have settled for a stub, rather than penis.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.176.86.11 (talk • contribs) .
*um,  never redirected here--64.12.116.199 00:42, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Presto! 

message: Mention how Mother Nature ever figured out how to make two functions into one unit, i.e., urine and sperm use same hole. Also if all other animals are like that.  Hmmm, eating and breathing use same throat, also multi-function...
:It's simple, it was designed by a civil engineer ;-) -- AJR | Talk 22:38, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm. If I recall correctly there is at least one kind of mammal that has a prehensile penis. That idea came up on the Babylon science fiction TV program, which had the only picture of a humanoid penis in action that I've ever seen on network TV.  Regrettably it was being used in cheating at cards rather than a more noble cause. 金 (Kim) 17:25, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

text: uhm, how do you use your dick to cheat at cards? 82.171.195.140 23:13, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  two functions into one: how'd they come up with that? 

message: Can someone familiar with the topic of anatomical records see if there's anything worth merging from this article to here? Johnleemk | Talk 14:59, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[List of Sexual Records]] 

message: The Latin word for "tail" is cauda... I do not see how this is relevant to the word penis. Should this bit in the entymology section be removed?
:Webster's New World Dictionary of the English Language says that the word 'originally meant "tail" in Latin. Sometimes words get borrowed to speak of something unspeakable (as in "Get some tail!") and later the word ceases to be a euphemism.  At that point people don't know whether the guy is saying his goat has an infected tail or an infected penis. So then they have to find another word to use. That sounds like what happened with the Latin.  Anyway, the article is accurate as is. 金 (Kim) 22:40, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latin Roots? 

message: I have 2 questions about it:
#Is it possible to have one?
#What is the term for it?
The Republican 03:19, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Penis wider than it is long 

message: What happened to the image 'Penis reduced.jpg'?  Someone had defaced it with a large black rectangle.  I have tried to revert it to an original version, but it is confusing, what with browser caching.  I needed 'Shift-Ctrl-R' here on Firefox/Linux to see my changes.  I believe 'Ctrl-F5' and 'Shift-F5' work on other clients.  But looking at the history of the image, this is a regular sport it seems.  Maybe if the article needs protecting then so do the images?  By the way, I'm not sure that I finally reverted to the best previous version as there are so many.  This one was "17:27, 18 September 2005 . . Nickptar", and looks fine to me.  --Nigelj 20:35, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalised image too? 

message: I think non human penis section should be removed (or separted), otherwise, it's appropriate to be placed with other articles about human organs 86.16.112.143 09:41, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  organs in non humans 

message: Maybe we should issue a warning about the pictures below.... I don't mind it but some people might.  Pseudoanonymous 00:35, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warning of images? 

message: Is there any need for this article to remain semi-protected. It has been protected since 5 May.--Clawed 02:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Semi-protection

message: Im removing that male genital infection photo.There is no need for it and i nearly get sick looking at it.--Dermo69
: Cry us a river, and drown in it.  That's enclyopedic information.  Deal with it 65.125.133.211 20:59, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Male Genital Infection Picture

message: I suggest that the photographs of phalli be de-inlined, so that they will be displayed on the article page as shown in the example here. We would still preserve access to the photographs for readers who wished to view them, but they would not be obtrusively displayed to readers who do not want to view explicit photographs of human genitalia. John254 05:32, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, no no.  No thank you.  Needless hassle in order not to offend imaginary prudes (who also like to read articles about penises) is not a good idea. HenryFlower 06:58, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Please direct any further discussion on this proposal(s) to :Talk:Vulva#Proposed_de-inlining_of_pictures_containing_graphic_nudity --Clawed 11:04, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

text: No censorship on wikipedia Janviermichelle 04:58, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed de-inlining of pictures containing graphic nudity