Talk:Woman/Archive 2

message: D'ya know what I think would make a great traditional role picture? One of an ndebele woman decorating her house. They do these brightly coloured geometric designs freehand. The lines are straight, the proportions are correct - it's bloody amazing looking! I've had a quick look round the web, but the only decent quality pictures can find are commercial news pictures, which are unlikely to be released to use onder a free licence. Anyone going to South Africa on holiday? Theresa Knott  (The snott rake) 11:29, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: We have some south african wikipedians actually, you might want to ask them. Cheers, Sam Spade Wants you to vote! 11:47, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

text: What would be best is for everybody to contribute / locate images, and then have us (editors in the talk page) reach consensus as to which are best suited for the article. If every image so selected just so happened to be a blood relative of yours, that would be a compliment to you, not an act of egoism on your part. Frankly, you’re the only person who thus far has been motivated to produce an image of a young girl, or an old woman, and so you might be genetically superior in representing womankind by default ;) In summary, until a better image is available, we should go w what we have, regardless of if it’s your family, FBI most wanted list, or what-have-you. Oh, and thanx for your contribution, btw! Sam Spade Wants you to vote! 12:04, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: 	Following the advice of  Sam Spade,  I again placed pictures about my relatives in the article.  This is the last time I shall do so    --  This feels very egotistic to me.    If people do not like the image, I shall not object to its removal.  This is the last time I shall add pictures to the article.  The Encyclopædia WikiPedia.Org is not about me.  I added this picture:
	thumb|center|Theme And Variation Of Related Women
	--
	Ŭalabio 07:54, 2004 Dec 31 (UTC)
Cool. Its not a perfect image, a bit of a wide angle, but its definitely worth having at the present time, thanks. We need more content tho, does anybody have some facts to add about women? I guess its up to me...  11:55, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: 	Gathering Images	

message: Hello all. Is there a reason why the nude woman is placed next to the slang section? Timbo 05:20, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Why is walabio's family pic next to vulger slang? The article is now poc heavy, and content light. If only 1/2 the energy put towards arguing about images in the talk page was put towards contributing content to the article, it would be in much better shape ;)  11:53, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Placement of nude 

message: Hi: Wikipedia is beginning to be peppered with photos that belong in "Playboy" etc. No moral person can accept the possible consequences of this development. Please express your views at:
Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Nudity (full frontal) pictures in an encyclopedia? 
Thank you for giving this matter your serious attention! IZAK 11:51, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Full frontal discussion 

message: Gee, I'm sorry I missed the fireworks... I just stumbled upon this debate and I have a few comments. First of all, I found the statement "we must assume that our readers have no idea that men and women have different genitals" amusing. By the same logic, should we assume that readers don't know that women and girls have different sexual characteristics and so provide them with a handy image illustrating the difference? (That was facetious.)
Seriously, though, if the assumption were true it seems the reader would likely be:
# too young to understand the article, anyway; or
# a child and from a family and/or in a society that would object to them seeing such a picture; or
# an adult and in a society that would object to them seeing such a picture.
That's not to say that, in my opinion, any of these possibilities argue against including a nude image; it just struck me as odd that no one made the connection even when aspects of the last two points were raised.
More to the point, I wonder why the "assumption" should guide image selection for this particular article. To be sure, I think it's proper for the Biology section to contain relevant diagrams, but it seems to me that nude photographs might be more relevant in the articles Human, Human anatomy, or Secondary sexual characteristics, which could be (and in some cases are) pointed to from here. In any of these, images of a nude woman and man could justifiably be included, which would obviously more directly address the "assumption" being made.
Anyway, for the record, had the image controversy not arisen, I wouldn't have objected to any of the images talked about as serious contenders for inclusion, not even the allegedly "sexy", "offensive" and "sexist" :Image:Frau.jpg -- but given a choice, the latter is actually the one I would prefer if the purpose is simply to show what a nude woman looks like (as far as art goes, I prefer :Image:Bouguereau venus detail.jpg). On the other hand, 
it might be less controversial if we tried to find an image that contained nudity "for a good reason", such as a woman breastfeeding a child, for example. This would illustrate at least two or three differences between men and women without getting (as much) into "pornography" issues.
- dcljr 08:22, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nude images controversy 

message: Per Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Woman in 1911 Brittanica, I moved that article to Woman/1911 Britannica.  Anyone is invited to merge anything useful to Woman.  dbenbenn | talk 17:48, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I already tried that, see Legal_rights_of_women and Woman#Legal_rights_of_women_historically. Cheers, (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 21:09, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  subpage [[Woman/1911 Britannica]] 

message: This has been created as a separate article.  As it stands it needs a lot of work (in terms both of wikification and of its personal-essay character), but if it could be slavaged, where might it best be merged?  I've removed a 'speedy delete' template from it, but I can't add a 'merge' template until I know where (or even if it's worth merging).  Any suggestions gratefully received. Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 21:34, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Portraiture and Biographies]]