Talk:Mammary intercourse

message: I want to add 3 pictures. Same as the french edition.
File:Boobjob 001.jpg|The woman is holding her breasts with her hands in such a way that they are surrounding the penis.
File:Boobjob 003.jpg|The woman is squeezing her breasts with her hands around the penis of her partner.
File:Boobjob 004.jpg|Cum on the chest after the act is over.
 1. Unalaq (talk) 06:05, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Question: How would this provide more context than is already provided by the lead image of the page? I currently fail to see how this would meet the guidelines at MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE or WP:GALLERY. Please note that all other language versions of Wikipedia are entirely separate projects – what is done there is completely irrelevant. Tollens (talk) 06:55, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Because these pictures show the process of mammary intercourse and the results of the act. And to be honest, I asked because I saw them that way in French Wikipedia. I didn't know that other languages are completely irrelevant. 1. Unalaq (talk) 09:01, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspect these pictures and his other picture uploaded will eventually be removed from Wikipedia.  I also think it's not necessary.  The image on the page already seems illustrative enough.  The use of the photos seems to raise a number of questions, such as do such pictures require 2257 paperwork in the USA?  Who becomes the custodian of record?  What about model releases? Centerone (talk) 04:30, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Since the photos have been on the server for over 4 years, there is little reason to believe that the photos will be removed.I do think the photos add value to the article, as it shows the act w/o adding a pornographic video. So I added the photos but using different captions for the photos. Up the Walls (talk) 03:42, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I reverted because we generally don't use explicit photos in these articles, especially when we have perfectly good illustrations anyway that already show the act. See WP:GRATUITOUS. What other language Wikipedias do is irrelevant (many of them are underscrutinized anyway) and just because the images survived on Commons doesn't mean they were uploaded with both people's consent. Crossroads -talk- 17:38, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Since the images don't show faces, I don't see a need for consent. How would anybody prove that it's their genitals that are in the photograph? Up the Walls (talk) 23:24, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm pretty sure US law regarding such images requires consent, model releases, and the like whether or not faces are shown. However, the person who uploaded these also uploaded a BJ image that does show a woman's face and it's highly likely that it's the same person. It's one thing to upload these to your personal account on some personal or adult interaction website or app, it's an entirely different thing for us to use them. We have no idea if these were just grabbed off the web somewhere, or anything about the person who uploaded them - it's not like they're a longstanding Wikipedia editor with a history that could help to give them the benefit of the doubt; these images seem to be their only contribution to the site. Centerone (talk) 06:01, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: There is really no need to debate whether or not the images "". The fact is . Up the Walls (talk) 06:39, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 26 October 2023