Vicipaedia:Imagines in disputatione
E Vicipaedia
Latinitas huius paginae permaxime est corrigenda. Corrige vel rescribe si possis. Vide {{latinitas}}.Some images in the Latin Wikipedia have been discussed or are in discussion. The questions with an image mostly are:
- Shall we include it?
- Shall we hide it, using our {{monstrare}} template?
- Is it offending?
- etc.
Index |
[recensere] Activitates eroticae
[recensere] Carracci Le Satyre et la Nymphe.jpg
- http://la.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Activitates_eroticae&diff=next&oldid=181607
- http://la.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Activitates_eroticae&diff=next&oldid=190555
- http://la.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Activitates_eroticae&curid=10219&diff=191029&oldid=190719
- http://la.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Disputatio:Activitates_eroticae&curid=25137&diff=191030&oldid=190716
- Hiding this illustration is ridiculous. --Rolandus 18:50, 3 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
- I disagree. Just because it is illustrated doesn't mean that the content should be displayed. It isn't "tame" as Iacobus put it. Alexanderr 18:53, 3 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
- Consentio Rolando: ridiculous.--Ioshus (disp) 04:22, 4 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
- Et consentio Iacobo: tame.--Ioshus (disp) 04:23, 4 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
[recensere] Pornographia
[recensere] Carracci Jupiter et Junon.jpg
[recensere] Homophylophilia
[recensere] Hyakinthos.jpg
[recensere] Eiaculatum
[recensere] Semen2.jpg
[recensere] Sperm.jpg
[recensere] Ars vivendi
[recensere] Michelangelo Caravaggio 007.jpg
- Has not been discussed yet ...
- What, in all creation, could be offensive about this image? IacobusAmor 14:42, 3 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, I forgot the smiley, when I listed this image here. ;-) After all: This man is half naked and he is drinking a red liquid which might be wine. --Rolandus 15:08, 3 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
- Ha! He's only 23.6 percent naked. If you go to a respectable public beach on any continent, you'll see men 95.7 percent naked. The Bible and the Koran favorably mention wine. Bacchus seems to be wearing wearing fruits. Could that be what's objectionable? IacobusAmor 19:27, 3 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
- Silly, they favorably mention grape juice. But yes, you are right, everyone knows that God Hates Fruits. --Iustinus 17:25, 9 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
- Of course! How could I have missed that! ¶ Regarding ancient wine: there's almost no proposition so stupid that people won't trick themselves into believing. IacobusAmor 17:36, 9 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
- Silly, they favorably mention grape juice. But yes, you are right, everyone knows that God Hates Fruits. --Iustinus 17:25, 9 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
[recensere] Coitus oralis
[recensere] Roemer2.JPG
[recensere] Vide etiam
Eget haec commentatio nexibus intervicis. Quos adde, si sunt et si potes.
