Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Sex intercourse.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.
Pornographic picture Moez talk 18:58, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Keep Commons is not censored; this picture seems to have been taken by the uploader (see the Flickr source page). Off course it is pornography (for what else reason would you upload such pictures on Flickr?), but it does have an educational purpose. The only two reasons why this file shouldn't be kept, to me, would be the following:
- If en:Woman on top (sex position) was already including another file;
- If a better-quality picture (this one has a "small" resolution and does contain noise) was already there on Commons.
Diti (talk to the penguin) 17:24, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
- There are several other illustrations already on the article you cite, all of them show a woman on top a man, with different rotations between the man and the woman. I understand that it is the only camera made picture. For anatomical articles, I understand the value of a picture vs. a cartoon. This article is about a sexual position and a picture is superfluous. I don't really understand what is the added value of this pic. Moez talk 15:35, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
- Maybe I'm wrong (my reply is going to be only rhetorics), but the added value is likely the same as within an article about atomic bomb. Although schematics or other kinds of illustrations can describe well an article, a photograph isn't that superfluous; try to think as some people in an undeveloped country: if they browse a local version of Wikipedia, see the article and schematics, wouldn't they be willing to see how this typical mushroom shape does look, according to you? Anyway, if you don't want to see this picture on the article, maybe you should discuss it on the talk page; but I think it should stay on Commons at least, either because it's the only freely-licensed picture we have about this topic from now, and because it does have an educational value. According to me. Diti (talk to the penguin) 21:48, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Delete - It's a pretty crass image, and it doesn't really add all that much to en:Woman on top (sex position). That article is pretty overillustrated anyway, so I don't see that this image is needed. In addition:
- There may be USC 2257 concerns with the image, as Commons is arguably a "secondary producer" involved in "publishes, reproduces, or reissues" this explicit material. My bush lawyer view is that we should be keeping such records or at the very least ensuring that the source of the image (Flickr?) has.
- COM:PEOPLE states that "Nudes, underwear or swimsuit shots, unless obviously taken in a public place" are "normally not OK"
- I respect the opinion on the "Keep" votes above, but I think there are overriding concerns with this image. Lankiveil (talk) 02:21, 20 September 2008 (UTC).
- COM:PEOPLE applies to photos of identifiable people only. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:43, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Kept. The image is in use on en.W MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:43, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
