File talk:Tubal pregnancy, gross pathology 01ee049 lores.jpg

Please read this
Wikipedia is not censored

Dude this is an awesome image! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.249.42.151 (talk) 00:05, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't there be some sort of warning that the true image is there?? --Stratman (talk) 18:35, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Can we delete this image. It really almost made me vomit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.88.48.183 (talk) 01:54, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * No, we can't. Wikipedia is not censored. 200.127.223.79 (talk) 20:10, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

This image sucks 87.55.68.116 (talk) 12:16, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I keep seeing "Wikipedia is not censored" but that's absolute rubbish. Of course it is censored. But moving along... This is a great photo. But medical textbooks are full of fabulous pictures that many non-medical people would find disturbing - this is a similar situation. The difference? If you're reading a medical textbook, you should be prepared to be confronted. But people, a group which includes the subset CHILDREN, have a right to research "embryo" without such graphic depictions. Is there a way a disclaimer could be included, so that great photos like this can be made available without foisting them upon the naive info seeker? Denizen of Reality (talk) 11:51, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

It is an "awesome" image. no, we should not delete it and yes, it may make you vomit. It is, what it is! If you are researching the term "embryo", what better way to dipict it than with an actual picture, instead of a cartoon image. We spend more time trying to shield the "naive info seeker" than we do trying to educate them. We leave so much unexplained and left wide open to to their imaginations. Which can be more harmful than good. As parents, we dread the inevitable question "were do babies come from" - how closed minded would we be if we still refered to it as "that magical place down there" - just show them a picture of "the life cycle of an embryo." (you don't have to tell all the details :) - Calvin - March 05 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.141.116.238 (talk) 02:10, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Bullshit, wikipedia is a common encyclopedia - it has a mission of containing useful information, but it does not have a mission of confronting naive people with reality. There are other sites, like rotten or liveleak, that do this. So hiding the image behind a warning is actually respect for freedom of other people. It lets everyone use wikipedia the way THEY want to, not YOU want them to. 06:09, 9 May 2009 (UTC)62.61.58.183 (talk)
 * -There is only one way to use Wikipedia: to access information. A picture of a real embryo contains a greater amount of information than a cartoon drawing of one. Therefore it's superior for Wikipedia's purpose. Also, there is already a disclaimer in the footer of every pageILikeFish (talk) 18:03, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

MOTHER OF GOD. 99.239.160.189 (talk) 00:51, 27 March 2010 (UTC)