• 62 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for hailinel
#1 Edited by Hailinel (25787 posts) -

OK, these pages have been around for a while, but the question should be asked again. Why does the wiki have penis and vagina concept pages? For one thing, they're not concepts. They are physical objects, and generally are found attached to people. Because, you know, they're genitalia. It's not like we have concept pages for hai--

Wait, there's a pubic hair concept, too? What the hell, people?

OK, it's not like there's a concept page for index fingers, or eyes. Heck, the Eye page is an object page.

If the Penis and Vagina pages are to remain concepts, they should be renamed as "Phallic Imagery" and "Yonic Imagery" for games that contain such.

Avatar image for video_game_king
#2 Posted by Video_Game_King (36564 posts) -

@Hailinel said:

Wait, there's a pubic hair concept, too? What the hell, people?

I think when I created that page, somebody else was saying it and the mods (or ) said "if it's in a game, go for it". Believe me, I've created worse pages. (I didn't know. I DIDN'T KNOW!)

Avatar image for beachthunder
#3 Posted by BeachThunder (14579 posts) -

I believe the term you're looking for is 'yonic'.

Online
Avatar image for hailinel
#4 Posted by Hailinel (25787 posts) -

@BeachThunder said:

I believe the term you're looking for is 'yonic'.

*Googles*

Yep, you're right.

Avatar image for praxis
#5 Posted by Praxis (278 posts) -

You can add breasts to this list, which is also inexplicably a concept page.

Avatar image for dagbiker
#6 Edited by Dagbiker (7041 posts) -
Avatar image for deusx
#7 Posted by Deusx (1943 posts) -

Video Game protagonists has both penises and vaginas. /thread.

Seriously now, what do you have against sexual organs? Don't be so ashamed man let it loose.

Avatar image for demoskinos
#8 Posted by Demoskinos (17325 posts) -

@Hailinel: I think there is a big difference between "imagery" and the actual physical thing. For instance Dante Inferno's "Lust" level features a ton of phallic imagery but never any actual penises. Where as GTA IV straight up has a big old wang on display.

Avatar image for subjugation
#9 Posted by Subjugation (4963 posts) -

I have to agree with Hailinel on this one. It's strange enough for the pages to exist in the first place, and if they're to continue to exist they should at least be properly classified as objects rather than concepts.

Avatar image for thedudeofgaming
#10 Posted by TheDudeOfGaming (6117 posts) -

I respectfully disagree, they shouldn't be deleted..

Avatar image for hailinel
#11 Posted by Hailinel (25787 posts) -

@Demoskinos said:

@Hailinel: I think there is a big difference between "imagery" and the actual physical thing. For instance Dante Inferno's "Lust" level features a ton of phallic imagery but never any actual penises. Where as GTA IV straight up has a big old wang on display.

Then the Dante's Inferno imagery would be part of the concept page. If anything, GTAIV would be on a Penis object page (if such were to be allowed), or the nudity concept page.

Avatar image for hailinel
#12 Posted by Hailinel (25787 posts) -

@TheDudeOfGaming said:

I respectfully disagree, they shouldn't be deleted..

And why not?

Avatar image for ifail
#13 Edited by iFail (239 posts) -

If someone would actually read what Hailinel said, it's not anything to do with it being genitalia. It's just that they are not concepts and shouldn't be categorized as such.

Avatar image for thatfrood
#14 Edited by ThatFrood (3471 posts) -

From a use standpoint, I could see myself being interesting in finding games that have shown a penis in game, or a vagina. Not so much for games that have shown an elbow. Having a penis in your game definitely has meaning beyond "it's a body part". 
How, exactly, that should be categorized I don't know. Should it be an object or concept? 
Phallic imagery and straight-up-dick are two different things in my eyes. Phallic imagery suggests to me dick stand-ins, whereas a straight-up-dick suggests to me a straight-up-dick. But hey, this isn't me giving an academic distinction, so go ahead and file dicks under the phallic imagery concept page. All I know is that having a penis/vagina in your game is significant. Look at the attention Heavy Rain was given for having a nude shower scene that showed pubic hair. 
 
I agree that it can't be taken too far, though. We don't need concept pages for, say, areola or taint. I think a more appropriate way to handle this is have a page for "Male nudity" and "female nudity" and have penis/vagina be aliases. "Phallic imagery" and "yonic imagery" are related but not quite the same idea.

Avatar image for slag
#15 Posted by Slag (7349 posts) -

Man y'all be findin tons of pages to delete lately!

I agree with , at the very least these should be reclassified away from concepts.

Avatar image for medacris
#16 Posted by medacris (738 posts) -

I agree with changing it to "phallic imagery" or "yonic imagery". Or possibly just "uncensored nudity in non-pornographic games".

Avatar image for the_nubster
#17 Posted by The_Nubster (3157 posts) -

If it's going to stay a concept, it should be nudity. Otherwise, classify it as an object.

Avatar image for dagbiker
#18 Posted by Dagbiker (7041 posts) -

No one is going to search "Yonic Imagery." No one knows what that means.

Avatar image for hailinel
#19 Posted by Hailinel (25787 posts) -

@Dagbiker said:

No one is going to search "Yonic Imagery." No one knows what that means.

Then they can find out when they do a search for the vaginal imagery alias.

Avatar image for thatfrood
#20 Posted by ThatFrood (3471 posts) -
@The_Nubster said:

If it's going to stay a concept, it should be nudity. Otherwise, classify it as an object.

I agree here. A Male Nudity concept page and a Female Nudity concept page are what are needed, and under those we can file all manner of areolas and penii. 
I don't think yonic imagery and phallic imagery are appropriate substitutions, as that gives the imagery in question a symbolic nature. There's nothing symbolic about running around with your cock out in saint's row. It's just a cock. 
That doesn't mean we don't need a yonic imagery and phallic imagery page, however.
Avatar image for animasta
#21 Posted by Animasta (14903 posts) -

@Dagbiker said:

No one is going to search "Yonic Imagery." No one knows what that means.

people should yonic is an awesome word

and searching for vaginal would lead to the same place anyway

Avatar image for eirikr
#22 Posted by Eirikr (1083 posts) -

@Dagbiker said:

No one is going to search "Yonic Imagery." No one knows what that means.

I would. :(

Avatar image for bobafettjm
#23 Posted by bobafettjm (2091 posts) -

I would not be sad to see these pages go.

Avatar image for ravenlight
#24 Posted by Ravenlight (8057 posts) -

@Video_Game_King said:

Believe me, I've created worse pages. (I didn't know. I DIDN'T KNOW!)

Your dirty secret is out and if it wasn't a weeknight, I'd track down the game and add an in-depth summary.

Avatar image for video_game_king
#25 Posted by Video_Game_King (36564 posts) -

@Ravenlight:

Well, at least I'm not the top editor on that page. How do you sleep at night?

Avatar image for seedofpower
#26 Posted by Seedofpower (4059 posts) -

The thing is you will delete these pages now but some twat is gonna come along and make new ones later. May as well live with them.

Avatar image for hailinel
#27 Posted by Hailinel (25787 posts) -

@Seedofpower said:

The thing is you will delete these pages now but some twat is gonna come along and make new ones later. May as well live with them.

Then they'd just get deleted again. It's been that way when someone makes a page that's been deleted before. Saying "someone's just going to make them again" isn't a sufficient reason to leave them be if they shouldn't be there to begin with.

Avatar image for mariachimacabre
#28 Posted by MariachiMacabre (7097 posts) -

Hailinel, Wiki Cop, is correct. Delete it because it's a tangible thing. Tangible things are not concepts.

Avatar image for video_game_king
#29 Edited by Video_Game_King (36564 posts) -

@Seedofpower said:

The thing is you will delete these pages now but some twat is gonna come along and make new ones later. May as well live with them.

Not if you add "penis" and "vagina" as aliases to the respective pages.

Also, I've just noticed that the URL for this thread titles it "Delete Penisvagina". Indeed; we must delete this unholy vampiric beast.

Avatar image for mlarrabee
#30 Posted by mlarrabee (3849 posts) -

Object, not concept.

Your gameplay can include penises, but your gameplay cannot be penises.

Avatar image for dagbiker
#31 Posted by Dagbiker (7041 posts) -

Let it be known. That on this day. The pinisvagina meetings were held and they lasted many nights.

Avatar image for marino
#32 Posted by Marino (6232 posts) -

@Hailinel: I'm all for deleting them. "Them" being the penis, vagina, and breasts pages. We have a nudity concept page that can cater to the first two (if not all 3), and a breast bounce concept page that is a valid concept.

I'm open to hearing an argument against this if there is one.

Staff
Avatar image for hamz
#33 Posted by Hamz (6899 posts) -

@Marino said:

@Hailinel: I'm all for deleting them. "Them" being the penis, vagina, and breasts pages. We have a nudity concept page that can cater to the first two (if not all 3), and a breast bounce concept page that is a valid concept.

I'm open to hearing an argument against this if there is one.

Agreed, definitely objects but not seeing much reason to retain the pages as concepts.

Avatar image for marino
#34 Posted by Marino (6232 posts) -

@Hamz: Honestly, I don't think they even warrant object pages. Technically, yes, they would be classified as objects, but are we going to have an object page for every body part, bone, organ, etc.? Seems useless and ripe for users to attach every possible humanoid character to everything.

Staff
Avatar image for bobafettjm
#35 Posted by bobafettjm (2091 posts) -

@Marino: Nuke 'em.

Avatar image for apathylad
#36 Posted by Apathylad (3234 posts) -
@mlarrabee

Object, not concept.

Your gameplay can include penises, but your gameplay cannot be penises.

Although for some reason "this game is ass" and "that game is the tits" are acceptable.

Anyways, yeah, body parts are objects.
Avatar image for hamz
#37 Posted by Hamz (6899 posts) -

@Marino said:

@Hamz: Honestly, I don't think they even warrant object pages. Technically, yes, they would be classified as objects, but are we going to have an object page for every body part, bone, organ, etc.? Seems useless and ripe for users to attach every possible humanoid character to everything.

I'm tired, what I meant to say was....I see validation in them being concepts but not objects. Sleepy Hamz is sleepy!

Avatar image for hailinel
#38 Posted by Hailinel (25787 posts) -
@Hamz

@Marino said:

@Hamz: Honestly, I don't think they even warrant object pages. Technically, yes, they would be classified as objects, but are we going to have an object page for every body part, bone, organ, etc.? Seems useless and ripe for users to attach every possible humanoid character to everything.

I'm tired, what I meant to say was....I see validation in them being concepts but not objects. Sleepy Hamz is sleepy!

They're body parts. What sort of justification could there be for concept pages?
Avatar image for thecreamfilling
#39 Posted by TheCreamFilling (1235 posts) -

But if they're deleted I can't Dig Deeper into Vagina!

Avatar image for bocam
#40 Posted by Bocam (4099 posts) -

@TheCreamFilling said:

But if they're deleted I can't Dig Deeper into Vagina!

I never thought of that. THEY NEED TO STAY.

Avatar image for onekillwonder_
#41 Posted by OneKillWonder_ (2357 posts) -

Hell no. You can delete Penis when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.

Avatar image for mikegosot
#42 Posted by MikeGosot (3237 posts) -
@Video_Game_King said:

@Seedofpower said:

The thing is you will delete these pages now but some twat is gonna come along and make new ones later. May as well live with them.

Not if you add "penis" and "vagina" as aliases to the respective pages.

Also, I've just noticed that the URL for this thread titles it "Delete Penisvagina". Indeed; we must delete this unholy vampiric beast.

Father-Mother disagrees.
Avatar image for hamz
#43 Posted by Hamz (6899 posts) -

@Hailinel said:

@Hamz

@Marino said:

@Hamz: Honestly, I don't think they even warrant object pages. Technically, yes, they would be classified as objects, but are we going to have an object page for every body part, bone, organ, etc.? Seems useless and ripe for users to attach every possible humanoid character to everything.

I'm tired, what I meant to say was....I see validation in them being concepts but not objects. Sleepy Hamz is sleepy!

They're body parts. What sort of justification could there be for concept pages?

I was leaning toward the Phallic/Yoni Imagery suggestion highlighted in your original post.

No Caption Provided
Avatar image for hailinel
#44 Posted by Hailinel (25787 posts) -
@Hamz

@Hailinel said:

@Hamz

@Marino said:

@Hamz: Honestly, I don't think they even warrant object pages. Technically, yes, they would be classified as objects, but are we going to have an object page for every body part, bone, organ, etc.? Seems useless and ripe for users to attach every possible humanoid character to everything.

I'm tired, what I meant to say was....I see validation in them being concepts but not objects. Sleepy Hamz is sleepy!

They're body parts. What sort of justification could there be for concept pages?

I was leaning toward the Phallic/Yoni Imagery suggestion highlighted in your original post.

No Caption Provided
Ah. Well, all right, then.
Avatar image for praxis
#45 Posted by Praxis (278 posts) -

@Hamz: My only concern with creating Phallic and Yonic Imagery pages is that it would naturally have a lot of overlap with the Nudity page. As an alternative, you could have a "Suggestive Imagery" page which would cover anything that resembles but is not actually genitalia.

Avatar image for hunter5024
#46 Posted by Hunter5024 (6702 posts) -

So now that the page is deleted how am I supposed to figure out which games have penises and vaginas in them?

Avatar image for marino
#47 Posted by Marino (6232 posts) -

@Hailinel: @Hamz: I've deleted penis, vagina, breast, and pubic hair as concept pages.

I'd say the "imagery" idea for concept pages is valid though. It should refer to examples like the picture Hamz posted, that boss in Borderlands, those phallic enemies in R-Type, and not actual penises/vaginas.

Staff
Avatar image for marino
#48 Posted by Marino (6232 posts) -

@Hunter5024 said:

So now that the page is deleted how am I supposed to figure out which games have penises and vaginas in them?

Nudity

Staff
Avatar image for hailinel
#49 Posted by Hailinel (25787 posts) -
@Marino Thanks!
Avatar image for lordandrew
#50 Posted by LordAndrew (14601 posts) -

@mlarrabee said:

Object, not concept.

Your gameplay can include penises, but your gameplay cannot be penises.

Duder, Superman 64's gameplay is totally penises.