I don't think we should have an actual photograph in this case. Just think what would be acceptable in schools (actually, a lot of wikipedia probably wouldn't be acceptable in schools, like its lack of "drugs are evil" stance, but this is much worse). I don't think photographs of genitalia belong in an encyclopedia, no matter how informative. Drawings would be a much better alternative.

sannse <sannse@delphiforums.com> wrote:

If they are copyright free (which would surprise me) a couple of them may be
better choices than John's version. The left side images on the bottom two
rows are informative without having the same "porn-like" feel of the earlier
images. As Anthere said, they would still need to be linked with a warning
rather than immediately visible. Personally I would still prefer a drawing,
mostly for aesthetic reasons but also because I believe a drawing can be
more informative in some situations.

Regards

sannse