Category talk:Pornography

This category is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles

Pornography

This category is within the scope of WikiProject Pornography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of pornography-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PornographyWikipedia:WikiProject PornographyTemplate:WikiProject PornographyPornography articles

removed

I removed

which do not include all of Porn

It's fundamentally important to realize that the only cats that Category:Pornography can be tagged with (included in, made a subcat of) are the ones that also could include every article that can be in either Category:Pornography or any of its subcats.

These two:

are good tags: pornography is inherantly about sexuality (even when it's really about power, it's about sexuality as a form of power), and nudity is so close to being essential to pornography as to do no harm.

These:

are on the borderline:

- homemade porn for one's own use is porn without being a sex business, and
- only the vagueness of "arts" makes it plausible that all porn, no matter how spontaneous and inept, should be included.

I won't argue if someone takes them out as well.

--Jerzy·t 14:05, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

individuals should go into "porn stars"

I think all names of individuals should not appear here but in cat. Porn stars or a more specific subcat. thereof (unless they are company owners or film directors or so). Can some robot do this ? — MFH:Talk 16:36, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

merge of erotica

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Oppose Erotica is not pronography. 172.129.61.138 22:24, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Although erotica perhaps is not such a commonly used word as porn, it makes for a decent, refined category. - Gilliam 04:25, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Erotica is heavily under-represented in wikipedia, but that's no reason to take it out. I'm adding things wherever I can... Cypherpress 01:19, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I see them as being distinct and meriting distinct categories AMProSoft 02:19, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Erotica encompasses such works as the erotic frescoes of Pompeii and various works of erotic literature, neither of which are considered "pornography" by most people. There is a grey area, but there is a body of work (no pun intended) that can be distinguished as erotica and not pornography. Joie de Vivre 18:11, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. It's not the same thing. --Two Wings (jraf ) 12:21, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Please provide definitions of what erotica is that pornography isn't. Arundhati lejeune 17:25, 24 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The boundary between erotica and pornography may be difficult to define - it depends on the individual and his/her taste, culture etc - but they are not the same thing, unless of course you are an outright puritan. There is a world of difference between the Biblcal Song of Solomon and a hardcore porn film! I see nobody has added a comment here since July 2007 and therefore propose removing the Merge tag in the near future as the consensus is overwhelmingly for maintaining the two categories (check out the relevant interwikis as well). Enaidmawr (talk) 21:48, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.