Commons:Deletion requests/File:Pissing in a glass.jpg
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.
Out of project scope, bad quality (flares), derivate from another image, I know, that images of urinating persons are of an anatomical and encyclopedical interesst but there are better pictures without the pornographic context of this image. --Liberaler Humanist (talk) 22:24, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Keep This file has already been kept twice !!! (see here). Abuse of DR. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 08:40, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment The main problem is the bad quality. There are many better pictures of urinating persons. --Liberaler Humanist (talk) 11:02, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Delete...two DRs, not used in any Wiki => so why should be keep such pictures? Just because commons is a dumb data base? --Yikrazuul (talk) 16:59, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
- No we have to keep that just because Commons may illustrate any kind of subjects including sexual subjects. And 2 (now 3) DRs just mean that some people don't understand what Commons is made for and prefer puritanism and/or censorship. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 13:30, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
- Keep We do have better photos of female urination, but this one is part of a set along with File:Drinking urine.jpg. A project may reasonably wish to present both images together in sequence. The nominator also seems to be missing the point that non-pornographic images of female urination cannot be used to illustrate articles on urolagnia such as en:urolagnia. Dcoetzee (talk) 12:12, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- Delete - Low quality photo. As a replacement I propose a woman pissing in another woman's mouth, that's double the fun you know. Aberforth (talk) 00:31, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
- And are you going to provide that image yourself? Anatiomaros (talk) 00:39, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
- No, I'm not paid to be on stage to do that, like the woman depicted. Which also means she may not really have a fetish for that, and that she's just paid to drink the stuff. Therefore, the image is not really suitable for the page about urophilia. Why do you think there are drawings of people engaging in acts that would be publicly embarrassing, instead of photos of real people doing them? Did this woman expect to be put on a high traffic site? Aberforth (talk) 15:29, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- 1) I'd support the deletion of this file if we had a better photo of the same subject but we have none. 2) Even if this woman is not urolagniac in her private life, it is a urolagniac show, so it illustrate urolagnia (same argument if you consider it might not be real pee). 3) This is a public show, she may be aware of the risks to see her pictures uploaded on the net. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 16:56, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- The fact is: you can't know for sure. Maybe she quit that job, because she felt uncomfortable, so she wouldn't like to have that stuff floating around the nets. Aberforth (talk) 23:20, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- Unvalid argument. If a porn star quits his/her job, s/he won't complain about the public broadcast of his previous work ! Same here. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 17:04, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
- The fact is: you can't know for sure. Maybe she quit that job, because she felt uncomfortable, so she wouldn't like to have that stuff floating around the nets. Aberforth (talk) 23:20, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- 1) I'd support the deletion of this file if we had a better photo of the same subject but we have none. 2) Even if this woman is not urolagniac in her private life, it is a urolagniac show, so it illustrate urolagnia (same argument if you consider it might not be real pee). 3) This is a public show, she may be aware of the risks to see her pictures uploaded on the net. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 16:56, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- No, I'm not paid to be on stage to do that, like the woman depicted. Which also means she may not really have a fetish for that, and that she's just paid to drink the stuff. Therefore, the image is not really suitable for the page about urophilia. Why do you think there are drawings of people engaging in acts that would be publicly embarrassing, instead of photos of real people doing them? Did this woman expect to be put on a high traffic site? Aberforth (talk) 15:29, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- And are you going to provide that image yourself? Anatiomaros (talk) 00:39, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
- Keep per TwoWings and Dcoetzee. Anatiomaros (talk) 00:37, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Kept. Jcb (talk) 23:34, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
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.
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Out of scope, low quality image, bad quality. Plus commons is not a porn image dump Tyw7 (☎ Contact me! • Contributions) Changing the world one edit at a time! 15:04, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Kept; per decision earlier this year and repeated earlier discussions. Feel free to upload a higher quality photo of the practice of urolagnia if you wish. Cheers! Infrogmation (talk) 15:44, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
