Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Penis self-pictures
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This also applies for
Out of scope (see Commons:Project scope/Pages, galleries and categories). There is no educational need for knowing that the photographer shows the world his own dick.--141.84.69.20 00:53, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
- Apparently, this is really about the categories themselves, not their content. So I'd say
keep because the categories are non-empty, and useful to diffuse the Category:Penis. I don't think a category is educational or not educational per se (its content can be), it's just a mean to classify and render content more easily accessible. –Tryphon☂ 12:33, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
- The matter stays the same, there is no need to make self-made penis pictures accessible. If diffusion is the only concern, there should be better distinctions for that (pierced, glans, we).--141.84.69.20 12:50, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
- Additionally, I think that categories can have an educational use, just by the fact that people who educate may look for fitting images of a specific type. This is where these categories fail. I cannot imagine anybody looking for images where the penis shown just happens to be the photographer's. These categories don't serve the viewer but the uploader.--141.84.69.20 21:58, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
- Keep the categories, but delete pretty much everything new that goes into them, per Template:Nopenis. Stifle (talk) 17:27, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
- Keep: Keep and extend all three categories because they reassure young people of both sexes that the human penis comes in many different shapes and sizes, all of which are perfectly normal. All three categories are also useful for illustrating specific disorders which may require treatment. foxtrotuk 08:52, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
Delete No measurable encyclopaedic benefit. --Bjoern 18:38, 26 April 2009 (UTC)- Delete What's the use of distinguishing penis-self-portraits from other penises? The requester is perfectly right, this category only supports uploaders' exhibitionism. --KnightMove (talk) 08:55, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Comment I have something to say about it; Last year, the creator of this category [1] (whether he is homosexual or not is not the point), decided to control and chose the penises uploaded on commons. So he organised his own category and created a template of his own policy and put it on all the categories and talk pages of uploaders (good way to discourage people who had medical content to upload). I tried to stop him at the time, but off course, as an IP, i have been reverted and i have been told "stop or you will be blocked"... --89.226.117.72 14:46, 29 April 2009 (UTC)