Talk:Kitty Yung
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I really don't think this image is "appropriate" for Wikipedia - I find it a bit offensive, but others may be greatly offended by it. Normally such material (remember, this is porn, not anatomical or artistic) would be considered too indecent for an encyclopedia and more the matter of Playboy or a so-called "adult video store". Anybody agree? ( User:Jakes18)
- This one I don't feel strongly one way or another about. It is a very low resolution image that not much explicit can be gleened from and seems properly tagged. I don't see that Image:Kittyyung2-sm2.jpg is any more offensive than having an articles pron stars explicitily discussing their careers. -- Infrogmation 06:25, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- If they are offended by it, then why are they looking up porn stars in the first place? (Arundhati Bakshi (talk • contribs)) 12:17, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree there the picture itself is not tasteless in any sense. Also this is an adult topic etc. I mean for crying out loud we have topics about sexual postions and fetishes. I really don't think the picture is over the top at all. --Link25 08:26, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
There is a (much younger) Kitty Jung credited with several movies beginning in 2003, shortly after she turned 19- how are these two stars related?