Talk:Safe sex
<templatestyles src="Module:Message box/tmbox.css"/><templatestyles src="Talk header/styles.css" />
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Safe sex Template:Pagetype. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Template:Find general sources |
| Archives: Template:Comma separated entries<templatestyles src="Template:Tooltip/styles.css" />Auto-archiving periodScript error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".: Template:Human readable duration File:Information icon4.svg |
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".Script error: No such module "Check for deprecated parameters".
Script error: No such module "Banner shell". Template:Category handlerScript error: No such module "Copied".
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
File:Sciences humaines.svg This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 July 2019 and 23 August 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lyjanicee, Huyha63, Sharonluong, Laurafansun. Peer reviewers: Blu65.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:32, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
File:Sciences humaines.svg This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 August 2020 and 10 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Heather98psu. Peer reviewers: Hbaranowski.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:32, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".
Foundations 2 2019 Group 2a
- Expand on the use of spermicide in condoms vs no spermicide in condoms
- Expand on the ineffectiveness of abstinence
Sharonluong (talk) 22:16, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
- PEER REVIEW
- Part 1 - The groups edits substantially improve the article and has satisfied the overall goals for improvement. Crystalnguyentan (talk) 20:56, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
- Part 2 -
- a) the draft submission reflects a neutral point of view Blu65 (talk) 21:19, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
- b) the points are verifiable with cited secondary sources that are freely available Crystalnguyentan (talk) 20:56, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
- c) the edits are formatted consistent with Wikipedia's manual of style Rgonzalezrios (talk) 21:53, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
- d) there is no evidence of plagiarism or copyright violation Yalda22 (talk) 16:29, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
Concern about explicit video content
Hello everyone, while I support the importance of comprehensive sex education, I’d like to raise a concern about the inclusion of the explicit video in this article. The video includes real-life, which I believe goes beyond what is necessary to demonstrate proper safe sex practices.
There is already a clear and informative diagram that shows the steps of condom application. This fulfills the educational purpose without the need for explicit sexual content. The presence of real sex acts, especially in a non-clinical context, also risks attracting viewers with non-educational intentions, which could undermine the credibility of Wikipedia as a neutral and reliable resource.
I suggest we consider replacing the video with a less explicit alternative—such as an animated or clinical demonstration—or removing it altogether, given that the instructional goal (see the image before) is already met.
I’d appreciate hearing others’ thoughts on this. Thank you! Agniv Nandy (talk) 08:00, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
- An anonymous editor added this video in the latest edit to this article - special:diff/1282456491/1287636024
- The video added was File:Safe sex.webm by commons:user:NudistPhotographer.
- I am in favor of demonstrative videos but this is obviously pornography and lacks an aim to be educational.
- Template:Ping Thanks for messaging here. Despite this article having a lot of watchers, I think that none of the usual reviewers checked this particular edit, because this video is not normally what Wikipedia editors accept for educational sexual content. Bluerasberry (talk) 15:32, 2 June 2025 (UTC)