Template talk:Cyborg


 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached  Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, delete for lack of strong relations between topics

Cybersex
Should cybersex really be included in this template? It seems to me that it has absolutely nothing to do with cyborgs. I'm removing it from the template, but if you have a good reason why it should be included in the template put it back in and post your reason here. Beno1000 19:49, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
 * According to the TfD discussion, the assertion put forward was that cybersex quite literally is sex (in the broad sense) facilitated by cyborgization (also in the broad sense). In other words, without computer-augmented humans, cybersex could not occur.  Furthermore, phenomena and culture unique to cybersex are only possible because of this computer-augmentation of humans.  71.246.25.126 00:06, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Too general
Everything has to do with cyborgs. Computer processors, liquid crystal displays, prosthetic _anything_. Similarly, all those things could be said to be part of psychology and biology. I see no reason to have a series on Cyborgs where so many of the sub-topics it includes could be thrown just as easily into a number of other series. Plus, cyborgs are regarded as "fringe-y" and might serve to discredit the topics it is associated with. It should be deleted. LeoTrottier (talk) 18:20, 5 June 2008 (UTC)