Penisthwaite Options

[Versa]

Hello,

While looking for something else, I noticed that Ryan Postlethwaite is allowed to have an image of a "Human penis both flaccid and erect" on his user page but no one else allowed to.

See details at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Bad_image_list

File:Human penis both flaccid and erect.jpg except on Penis, User:Ryan Postlethwaite/Awards, User:Ryan Postlethwaite

Does anyone know how one would get permission for such a thing - not that I want one - does ArbCom or a steward have to O.K. it?

As far as I can tell it was WJBScribe who originally gave the explicit permission to Ryan.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=200365817

[Detective]

Were I minded to be cynical or unkind - which heaven forfend! - I might suggest that such a photo is particularly appropriate on Ryan Postlethwaite's page.

[Proabivouac]

As far as I can tell it was WJBScribe who originally gave the explicit permission to Ryan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=200365817

You'd think someone would have taken one look at this and banned them both on the spot.

[Web Fred]

Whomever okayed the "Big Schlong Barnnstar" [sic] I suppose.

I wonder if anyone else is likely to be awarded this award?

I can think of few who I'd award it to, but only as a reference to their personality, not their cojones!

[Somey]

While looking for something else, I noticed that Ryan Postlethwaite is allowed to have an image of a "Human penis both flaccid and erect" on his user page but no one else allowed to.

This is exactly what I've said about Wikipedia all along: Once you start requiring users to post photos of their penises on their user-profile pages, where does it end? How do you avoid creating a slippery slope? First you'll have people like Ryan Postlethwaite insisting on posting two penis photos, then it'll be three penis photos, then four... until finally there are so many penis photos on everyone's use page that the fundamental vision and purpose that led them to require the penis photos in the first place has been lost, the entire conceptual rationale in ruins, scattered to the four winds. And what about the tiny number of female users on Wikipedia - where are they going to get their penis photos? Will they accept photos of fake penises or dildos, or fanciful drawings, paintings or sculptures of same, in those cases? And what if some enterprising female Wikipedian decides to "push the envelope" by painting a picture of a giant penis and then claiming it's representative of her actual penis? Even though she isn't supposed to have one in the first place? This sort of downward-spiraling phallic-image one-upmanship can only lead to one terrible, inevitable result: Penis Wars!

Frankly, if I were Jimbo, I'd deal with this problem decisively, by cutting it off at the root.

[Web Fred]

While looking for something else, I noticed that Ryan Postlethwaite is allowed to have an image of a "Human penis both flaccid and erect" on his user page but no one else allowed to.

This is exactly what I've said about Wikipedia all along: Once you start requiring users to post photos of their penises on their user-profile pages, where does it end? How do you avoid creating a slippery slope? First you'll have people like Ryan Postlethwaite insisting on posting two penis photos, then it'll be three penis photos, then four... until finally there are so many penis photos on everyone's use page that the fundamental vision and purpose that led them to require the penis photos in the first place has been lost, the entire conceptual rationale in ruins, scattered to the four winds. And what about the tiny number of female users on Wikipedia - where are they going to get their penis photos? Will they accept photos of fake penises or dildos, or fanciful drawings, paintings or sculptures of same, in those cases? And what if some enterprising female Wikipedian decides to "push the envelope" by painting a picture of a giant penis and then claiming it's representative of her actual penis? Even though she isn't supposed to have one in the first place? This sort of downward-spiraling phallic-image one-upmanship can only lead to one terrible, inevitable result: Penis Wars!

Frankly, if I were Jimbo, I'd deal with this problem decisively, by cutting it off at the root.

To be fair, it wasn't him who put it there and it is in a collapsed box so people can't just come across it (no pun intended) accidentally.

Sort of puts my "waxed pudendum" page into perspective though.

[A Horse With No Name]

Good thing that barnstar is not in 3D, otherwise it would poke you in the eye!

[Wikitaka]

Some other strange allowances:

File:Gynecomastia 001.jpg except on User:DerZornScottish

File:Nazi Swastika.svg except on User:Branson288, User:Sherurcij, User:The Great Duck, Talk:Son of a bitch,

File:Semfac01.png except on User:Seedfeeder

File:Trollface.jpg except on User:Kotengu