Las fotos hardcore de la Wikipedia

Si no habéis buscado nunca ningún artículo sobre sexualidad en la Wikipedia, ya estáis tardando...
uno muy ilustrativo sobre el tema del que quiero hablar es este: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penis

Que conste que a mí no me parece mal que en una enciclopedia aparezcan fotos explícitas de los órganos sexuales, es algo necesario si se quiere tratar con cierta profundidad y rigor el tema, pero me temo que el fervor de la gente por colaborar con material sin copyright se puede tornar excesivo.

¿Realmente son necesarias 5 fotos de rabos pinochos, depilados y con lubricante para explicar lo que es una polla? Me parece a mí que los exhibicionistas han encontrado un nuevo nicho ahí, y cuelgan sus fotos en la wikipedia para excitarse sabiendo que sus miembros viriles serán contemplados por cientos de miles de personas al día...

He vuelto a ojear el artículo y ahora sólo quedan 3 fotos y un diagrama. Le estoy echando un vistazo a la página de la discusión sobre el artículo, a ver qué cuenta la gente... y me encuentro con que es bastante más larga y divertida la discusión que el propio artículo.

La verdad es que algunos son tronchantes (de troncho):

Ah-ha-ha! That photo of an erect penis isn't a penis - it's a Monster Penis! It rises way above that guy's navel, and is enormous in girth. That's a gay-porn penis. The other penises pictured fall into the range of sizes for the vast majority of penises. What a joke.16:01, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

That image needs to be replaced (image: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Erect_penis_with_labels.jpg), it is really unnecessary to have that type of image on wikipedia. Someone replace it with a picture that would actually be used in a medical text book - if a medical text book would work for doctors, then it will work for wikipedia. 71.195.168.138 02:33, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree! The image is ridiculous, he is all hard, shaved, and lubed up like straight out of a porn. I didn't have Wikipedia when I was a little kid, but I'm sure I was curious and looked up "penis" in the Encyclopedia Britannica. If I would have seen an image like that, I would probably have been emotionally scarred. Whoever added it must be a perv.

Yeah! like who is the dude with the ego? You need to post your dick for the whole world to see. Would some please replace that photo with a medical illustration.

I bet it is Stew17s own penis. Lame.

If you look at the proportionality of the penis itself, it doesn't seem particularly large. The shaving helps show the testicles clearly, and a "flaccid only" policy would be censorship. Erections needn't be a mystery topic. This photo also shows the contour of the shaft clearly. I believe most encyclopedias would leave people with the misconception that the body of a penis is just a cylinder with a tiny urethra down the center -- see the top illustration, for example. 72.244.206.38 06:49, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

About that image, I know it's gross but it didn't make thorw up or emotionally scar me at all and I'm 10 turning 11 next year. You are just over reacting. Patrickstar2 (talk) 11:45, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

I protest the fact that there are no pictures of black/asian/anything else penises here. Black guys have dicks too.

No shit? I've been limiting my dick sucking to only a tiny percentage of the population? I've wasted my life! Seriously though, what do you think of a montage of penises of all races/sizes etc.? I think that would probably be the best approach for any wikipedia article about a human physical feature. We should always strive to be representative of all the different variations of a given thing so that readers are aware of all the different looks of a thing that fall under a given name. I volunteer you to go out and start asking men on the street of all different races if you can photograph their penises. 69.171.60.23 19:46, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

can a penus be removed when you have cancer in it and still urneate

Yes. It's easy to remove your penis. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.171.60.23 (talk) 19:47, 21 February 2007 (UTC).

Just make sure you twist the shaft counter-clockwise until it comes loose; clockwise will tighten it.

I think it's funny that all the penis photographs are "oriented" from left to right. How Western| of us! 129.137.160.100 16:22, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I Think that if you want pitures of black and asian cocks then take a pic of your cock and put it on here. simple as that!--Random05 23:11, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Obviously it's only white men who are exhibitionists! talk 16:44 20 January 2008 (UTC)

It is a bit weird that all of the images on this page show the foreskin either fully retracted or entirely cut off. Worldwide, only around 15% of men are circumcised, and the other 85% don't exactly walk around all day with their foreskins pulled right back.

Seguid leyendo por vuestra cuenta si queréis, que no tiene desperdicio.

Por suerte, el mecanismo de regulación (que no censura) popular parece que funciona bien y la wikipedia no se convierte en un medio de difusión de porno amateur (que para eso existen otros sitios mucho más eficaces que todos conocemos y huelga en la redundancia que yo comente aquí ;-D).

Aquí os dejo la lista de imágenes no aptas para la wikipedia para que os echéis unas risas con lo friki que puede llegar a ser la gente (¡sí, hay fotos de auto-felaciones! xD), eso sí también os advierto que hay algunas imágenes dignas de rotten dot com.