Talk:Anal piercing

Latest comment: 8 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified

Graphic Anal Photos Much Unappreciated

edit

The picture attached to the article is quite unnecessary and obscene. I dislike how these pages on bodily modification are often used to justify atrocious and distasteful images. "In the name of knowledge", I don't think so. Remove? Deathkami (talk) 15:07, 21 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

No. Wikipedia is not censored and that includes sexual content you may personally find obscene. If you don't want to see the images, you can configure your browser so you don't have to. --132 16:50, 21 May 2010 (UTC)Reply


There really is nothing more disgusting than the human body... 93.205.238.110 (talk) 19:15, 27 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Anal piercing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:29, 12 October 2016 (UTC)Reply