The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

> Help

This forum is for discussing specific Wikipedia editors, editing patterns, and general efforts by those editors to influence or direct content in ways that might not be in keeping with Wikipedia policy. Please source your claims and provide links where appropriate. For a glossary of terms frequently used when discussing Wikipedia and related projects, please refer to Wikipedia:Glossary.

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Penisthwaite
Versa
post Thu 22nd March 2012, 9:12pm
Post #1


Neophyte


Group: Contributors
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri 20th Jun 2008, 11:51pm
Member No.: 6,679

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



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

QUOTE
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
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Detective
post Thu 22nd March 2012, 9:56pm
Post #2


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 331
Joined: Thu 9th Dec 2010, 11:17am
Member No.: 35,179



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. biggrin.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Proabivouac
post Thu 22nd March 2012, 10:28pm
Post #3


Bane of all wikiland
*******

Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,246
Joined: Thu 23rd Aug 2007, 8:25am
Member No.: 2,647

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Versa @ Thu 22nd March 2012, 9:12pm) *

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.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Web Fred
post Thu 22nd March 2012, 11:46pm
Post #4


Pervert & Swinger
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 739
Joined: Sat 13th Feb 2010, 3:25pm
From: Manchester, UK
Member No.: 17,141

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



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!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Somey
post Fri 23rd March 2012, 3:46am
Post #5


Can't actually moderate (or even post)
*********

Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,815
Joined: Sat 17th Jun 2006, 7:47pm
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275



QUOTE(Versa @ Thu 22nd March 2012, 4:12pm) *
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. hrmph.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Web Fred
post Fri 23rd March 2012, 1:46pm
Post #6


Pervert & Swinger
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 739
Joined: Sat 13th Feb 2010, 3:25pm
From: Manchester, UK
Member No.: 17,141

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Somey @ Fri 23rd March 2012, 3:46am) *

QUOTE(Versa @ Thu 22nd March 2012, 4:12pm) *
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. hrmph.gif


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.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
A Horse With No Name
post Fri 23rd March 2012, 3:47pm
Post #7


I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin!
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,471
Joined: Mon 26th Jan 2009, 1:54pm
Member No.: 9,985



Good thing that barnstar is not in 3D, otherwise it would poke you in the eye! wink.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Wikitaka
post Fri 23rd March 2012, 5:15pm
Post #8


New Member
*

Group: Contributors
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri 9th Mar 2012, 9:47pm
Member No.: 76,720



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
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd 10 14, 9:55pm