Talk:Playboy
 | A fact from Playboy appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 25 October 2021. The text of the entry was as follows: |  |
Picture?[change source]
I think we should have a picture, because it helps explanation. I also know that the "usual" pictures shown are of completely nude women. What I added showed three women in swimsuits. If I attached any moral judgment, where is the problem of such an image? --Eptalon (talk) 16:50, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
- Not that my opinion is necessary, but I feel that the picture (yours) provides a good representation of the article, without (from a moral standpoint) going too far. Good call. Griffinofwales (talk) 21:57, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
- The people shown in this picture are listed as being playmates, from Brazil. There are plenty of pictures showing nude people, on commons, but they are not listed as "playmates" (whatever that means). There are also different poses which allow to show a naked person, but which "hides" the details; e.g. photographed laterally, breasts may be visible... Big question though is that of purpose: What purpose should the image have? - n my opinion, it should illustrate and explain the subject of the article. People looking for yet another site of getting images of nude women are probably better served elsewhere. Does anyone think that a picture such as the ones shown in nude photography or erotic photography would be better suited? --Eptalon (talk) 22:13, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
- The German article seems to have a picture that is classified as "free art" (and that shows more, of another Playmate). Big question do we want/need it? --Eptalon (talk) 22:28, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
- I like the photo that you use, I think it represents what most people think of when they think of Playboy (besides the magazine itself & Hugh Hefner). Griffinofwales (talk) 01:23, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
- The German article seems to have a picture that is classified as "free art" (and that shows more, of another Playmate). Big question do we want/need it? --Eptalon (talk) 22:28, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
- The people shown in this picture are listed as being playmates, from Brazil. There are plenty of pictures showing nude people, on commons, but they are not listed as "playmates" (whatever that means). There are also different poses which allow to show a naked person, but which "hides" the details; e.g. photographed laterally, breasts may be visible... Big question though is that of purpose: What purpose should the image have? - n my opinion, it should illustrate and explain the subject of the article. People looking for yet another site of getting images of nude women are probably better served elsewhere. Does anyone think that a picture such as the ones shown in nude photography or erotic photography would be better suited? --Eptalon (talk) 22:13, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
The article picture should be the first issue cover. The picture currently in the article is more appropriate for an article on Playboy "bunnies" or Playboy clubs. It does not represent the magazine adequately. There is absolutely no reason why the picture in the article should be one of a nude woman. Oregonian2012 (talk) 08:32, 30 June 2013 (UTC)