Talk:Prince Albert (genital piercing): Difference between revisions
Minor fixes, cleanup and additional "Not a forum" notice. Removing comments per WP:NOTFORUM. |
Removing comments per WP:NOTFORUM. |
||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
Nevermind... after researching it a bit, I think the article is just fine how it is, but how it ended up top is a different problem, it's due people linking to it more than the other one so it's nothing that can be fixed, more of a problem on Google's end... [[User:Ikmxx|Ikmxx]] ([[User talk:Ikmxx|talk]]) 05:36, 19 June 2013 (UTC) |
Nevermind... after researching it a bit, I think the article is just fine how it is, but how it ended up top is a different problem, it's due people linking to it more than the other one so it's nothing that can be fixed, more of a problem on Google's end... [[User:Ikmxx|Ikmxx]] ([[User talk:Ikmxx|talk]]) 05:36, 19 June 2013 (UTC) |
||
== Name? == |
|||
So why is it called a "Prince Albert" piercing? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/75.163.165.120|75.163.165.120]] ([[User talk:75.163.165.120|talk]]) 16:15, 13 July 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
== main page image == |
== main page image == |
||
Revision as of 21:04, 27 August 2015
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Prince Albert (genital piercing) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1, 2 |
 | Wikipedia is not censored. Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to Wikipedia's content disclaimer regarding potentially objectionable content and options for not seeing an image. |
 | This page is not a forum for general discussion about technical issues/general comments. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about technical issues/general comments at the Reference desk. |
 | Body Modification (defunct) | |||
| ||||
 | Much discussion has gone into the use and type of images in this article, as well as their placement. Moving, resizing or deleting the images in this article is considered vandalism and all such changes will be reverted. Please see the archived image discussions for details. |
Image placement
In case you missed the notice above, much discussion has gone into the use and type of images in this article, as well as their placement. Moving, resizing or deleting the images in this article is considered vandalism and all such changes will be reverted. Please see the archived discussions for details: Archive 1 Archive 2. Jokestress (talk) 01:43, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THEY BE PLACED ELSEWHERE OUR UNDER AGE VERIFICATION! MY 12 YEAR OLD SON LED ME TO THIS ARTICLE THINKING IT WAS FUNNY. HE THEN TOOK ME ON A TOUR OF SEVERAL OTHER GOODIES THAT ARE OF NAKED PEOPLE. THIS IS PORN! THERE NEEDS TO BE USER LOGIN AND PASSWORD INFORMATION AND PROOF OF AGE. NOT SAYING THE INFORMATION IS INAPPROPRIATE FOR ALL AGES - BUT UNDER 18 THERE NEEDS TO BE A RESTRICTION. DOES NOBODY MONITOR THE TYPES OF PICS AND THINGS ARE POSTED? AS A PARENT IT GREATLY ANGERS AND CONCERNS ME.WIKIPEDIA IS SUCH A WONDERFUL TOOL FOR LEARNING. BUT IF IT CAN'T BE CONTROLLED AND REGULATED THEN IT NEEDS TO BE SHUT DOWN. AS OF NOW MY SON'S COMPUTER HAS WIKIPEDIA BLOCKED AND i PLAN TO TALK TO THE SCHOOL BOARD ABOUT THIS AS WELL.
ALL THAT REALLY NEEDS TO BE SAID TO THE CHILD IS THAT A P.A. IS A PIERCING OF THE PENIS - THE END. THE PARENT CAN DECIDE IF THEY WISH TO ELABORATE TO THE CHILD.
- Wikipedia is not censored. That means relevant images will be included and we do not hide them. Period. If you don't want your child to see images of a pierced penis on an article about pierced penises, you should be monitoring their Internet usage more closely. Babysitting your kid is not our job. ICYTIGER'SBLOOD 19:24, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
Hatnote
Because this is frequently the top search engine result for "Prince Albert," even though the primary here is Prince Albert, I believe WP:HATNOTE allows for a notation to otheruses. Jokestress (talk) 22:22, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Still the top search result on Google for Prince Albert, people are using this as an example of "Wiki-porn"... How notable or wide-spread is this type of piercing? If it isn't, maybe you could somehow merge it with other genital piercings? Ikmxx (talk) 04:42, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
Nevermind... after researching it a bit, I think the article is just fine how it is, but how it ended up top is a different problem, it's due people linking to it more than the other one so it's nothing that can be fixed, more of a problem on Google's end... Ikmxx (talk) 05:36, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
main page image
The main page image on the article is laughably un-encyclopedic. It looks like the kind of unsolicited dick pic you'd get from a sketchy online hookup. It's blurry, dark, poorly framed and obviously taken by the subject himself. There are two other images in the article which are both better illustrations, so this image serves no purpose and should be removed. WP:CENSOR does not apply here, but WP:GRATUITOUS does. 24.91.28.20 (talk) 04:31, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
- Article has been updated (including better images). — 78.149.199.229 (talk) 21:36, 24 August 2015 (UTC)