Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Nudity

Revival the WikiProject Nudity

Is there interest in reviving this WikiProject?

The Portal:Nudity was recreated a year ago and is one of the most popular portals, this shows the readers' interest in the theme.

Ping old participants @StuffOfInterest, Mattbuck, Dandelion~enwiki, Werldwayd, Cavallero, Lumos3, and Leangle30:.

Ping nudists editors @H3h, Canaen, Davidkevin, SheahanF, Skatamatic, Satellitehacker, Luvlymish, Disavian, Kathar, Axanon, SilentResident, AzseicsoK, Waynejayes, and Mo2010:.Guilherme Burn (talk) 11:58, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

I am AzseicsoK. I haven't dealt much with WikiProjects, and I don't think I've ever looked at a Portal here. I don't think I was aware that a project or a portal on nudity existed. I'm curious how you found me. I am indeed a nudist and an art model, and I have some UserBoxes about both (I created one or two of them myself). But I don't have one that puts me into any nudist user category or anything like that. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:43, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi AzseicsoK. I found you by {{User Nudist}}. Cool your work with nude art, you can help ping other users who know the theme.Guilherme Burn (talk) 14:39, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Ping naturalists naturists editors NaturistMale, NaturistFemale @Teh BaKa-NEKO, Joshbr, Marcipangris, Unicorn of Wisdom, Arilicious, Nicola Stalin, Xbony2, Cormac Nocton, Sohrab b.m~enwiki, 1c33y37, ThevikasIN, Joshbr, Salti sam, Kookyunii, Sl1nk3, Tdd4000, Jreznech, HypertimeTraveller, SilentResident, Smcg8374, AzseicsoK, Nicola Stalin, Waynejayes, Xbony2, MicrosoftSamTTS, Concept14, Hàlian, Otrop, Partomasten, KurtJmax, TerranBoy, VeryRarelyStable, and Prana1111:Guilherme Burn (talk) 18:09, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Guilherme Burn, may I refer you to one of the UserBoxes I created for myself--about knowing the difference between a "naturalist" and a "naturist." Uporządnicki (talk) 18:45, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

What would reviving the project actually entail? I haven't worked with WikiProjects before. —VeryRarelyStable 04:39, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

My editing experience is limited to nitpicking and flyspecking. If there are articles needing minor cleanup, I'm happy to help. Concept14 (talk) 22:57, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't have a specific plan and my knowledge is also limited, but I intend to follow the suggestions of WP: REVIVE. Per WP:CSB and WP:NOTCENSORED I think it is important to maintain the existence of this Wikiproject.Guilherme Burn (talk) 12:57, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm interested and will try to watch out for updates to the project. Leangle30 (talk) 00:30, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

I would be part of a project. I would like to see a place where we can get user boxes and a category of 'Naturist Wikipedians. Lumos3 (talk) 11:40, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Well, I wrote the Naturism in New Zealand article and the current incarnation of the Naturist resort article, as well as Pineglades Naturist Club and Wellington Naturist Club and the articles for a few clothing-optional beaches, and I've contributed to Naturism and Nude recreation. But what does being part of a WikiProject mean? —VeryRarelyStable 00:54, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Also, if I were to create a category for naturist Wikipedians, would anyone join it? —VeryRarelyStable 01:48, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

I see that no other user has added themselves as participants of this project, but I have done so. The first articles that I edited on WP 14 years ago were Nude (art) and Model (art), having been an active participant in both activities in the real world but also bringing my social sciences background to researching references. I have done a lot of work on the main article without much feedback.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 03:47, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

RE: to do list item

I know its overused, but Pioneer plaque humans.svg is better than the Vitruvian Man for the project template image.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 17:58, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

 DoneGuilherme Burn (talk) 11:17, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Vital article, but wrong category

I certainly think Nudity is a vital topic in Everyday life, but don't understand it listing under "Clothing and fashion" along with other garments. I have proposed moving it to the category Sexuality and gender on the talk page.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 15:32, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

I don't believe that is appropriate. Nudity is sometimes sexual and sometimes not – whereas, by contrast, it is always characterized by a particular choice of clothing, i.e. none. —VeryRarelyStable 23:01, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

It is the combination of clothing and fashion that bothers me. Nudity is not a fashion choice, but a core fact of human existence. It is a vital topic, but in what category?--WriterArtistDC (talk) 02:42, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

It might be that (at least as concerns naturism) a couple of alternative terms are clothes-free and clothing-optional. Perhaps the association with clothing in these terms might have inspired the original classification. I see in the history of several pages that there were more "clothing-optional/free" classifications in the past. Texttramp (talk) 19:56, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Collaboration, or at least comment RE: Nudity

Having many references and little else to do (not good weather for bicycling), I have been adding content to the Main Article of this project. Is there any interest on anyone else's part? I have actually thought about a GA review.

Issues:

• The History section duplicates the separate article to a good degree, but not being a historian, it is taking a different direction, particularly by my creating a subsection on Colonialism.
• As is my tendency, the wording may need translation into more everyday language.
• Having access to a university library, many of my sources are inaccessible to the typical editor.

To be continued... --WriterArtistDC (talk) 04:19, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Articles on nudist organizations

@Texttramp:: Both the draft article on the Naturist Society and the live article on the American Association for Nude Recreation suffer the same problem, the lack of reliable sources. Membership organizations in general tend to be of interest only to members, with sources limited to their own publications or websites, with the inevitable charge of bias or self-promotion. Specific mentions of these groups are absent from academic research on nudism in general. The mainstream media ignores naturism unless it comes up in another context, usually scandalous. I think it is sufficient to have these organization included in the section on American naturism rather than having their own articles.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 17:25, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

@WriterArtistDC: I agree and I've noticed the dearth of valid sources outside the organizations I've examined. I marked TNS as a to do on the project page to see what others thought. The same consolidation could be done for many other pages (most of which just have short blurbs). They could be consolidated into the Naturism article under the appropriate sections (FCN/FQN/FQN-FCN Union under Canada, AANR & TNS info under US, etc.). I was thinking that each individual country section on the Naturism page should have a note about the national naturist representative organization.Texttramp (talk) 18:57, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

@Texttramp:: The next thing to do would be to move the TNS article back to MAIN: and tag both it and the AANR article with a merge into section template? I could do this but am not really interested in doing the content merge itself since I am fixing several articles that make reference to the evolution of human nakedness and the invention of clothing: such as History_of_clothing_and_textiles#Prehistoric_development and Human_evolution#Transition_to_behavioral_modernity. These are inconsistent, do not use the more reliable or latest research, and other issues. The answer might be to create a separate article on the topic.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 15:02, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

I have created a section Talk:Naturism#Proposed_merge_into_section for discussion of the merges.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 15:31, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

"Naturist editors" category?

I've mentioned this before, and I think someone else did, too, at some point, but no-one answered. Shall I create a category of naturist Wikipedia editors, that people can then add themselves to if they want? —VeryRarelyStable 05:48, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Doesn’t the active participant list on the project page serve this purpose? WriterArtistDC (talk) 12:30, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

You're probably right :) Klaas `Z4␟` V 16:51, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

The three of us are very proud...--WriterArtistDC (talk) 23:39, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Project home page rework

Doing some work on the project home page, playing around with some design changes -- for instance, moved several sections into their existing subpages (Participants, Announcements, To do list, Web resources). My thinking is that this makes the home page a little easier to edit/manage without so much text to work around all at once. My eventual goal is to make the project page somewhat resemble the Nudity Portal (double column with well-defined sections). If anyone thinks this is the wrong approach, I'll put it back the way it was.

Also, I made a change to the way the article assessment process works. It now counts redirect pages, which weren't counted or classified previously. I don't know about anyone else, but I find it helpful to see all the redirects that fall under the project's purview. These stats now show on the category pages, such as Redirect-Class nudity articles, but they aren't reflected in the Assessments table. Haven't figured out why, yet.

And, finally, changed the banner at the top of the page to show it as "active". Texttramp (talk) 15:48, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I pulled the trigger and went for a whole redesign of the layout. Tried to group similar areas together. Again, if anyone objects, I can revert it. Texttramp (talk) 21:24, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your work. I have begun working through the articles in the navbox to check if the project banner is on the talk page also.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 03:57, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

New articles list box added

I re-arranged the page and added a new feature: Recent Wikipedia additions. This is a list of new articles added to Wikipedia that fit a set of rules (regex expressions). I set up some initial rules to grab a short list of terms, but the rules can easily be updated and expanded to tweak the results. (Just collecting text terms in articles at the moment; still need to add categories.) The list is updated daily and will show the last 14 days of recent additions that fit the search criteria. It is possible for there to be false positives, so carefully check each article before tagging, and if you see a way to adjust the rules, please do so. The bot behind this is InceptionBot and the rules can be modified on the AlexNewArtBot page. The WikiProject Nudity links (Search results | log | rules) are under the Miscellaneous section. The rules instructions are also on that page. Texttramp (talk) 00:05, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Peer review

My request for peer review of Nudity came and went without comment. Could I get some indication from anyone about what I have done in the past months? Any opinions about the article size? I have been considering what content could be moved to a new article, beginning with the Prehistory of nakedness and clothing.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 16:17, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Cleanup of lists

I have begun a cleanup of the list articles of places for nude recreation.

WP has no rules, but any list or article needs a definition to limit the content to a coherent topic. Otherwise, there would be no rationale for the guideline WP:TOPIC.

There are two criteria for defining nude recreation used by naturist organizations: places were public nudity is legal; and places where there are reliable sources that state that public nudity is tolerated, although not officially. Any other places, such as remote beaches with so few visitors that nudity is irrelevant, would be excluded from a list as having no RS (other than a personal blog) in addition to being off-topic. --WriterArtistDC (talk) 22:06, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

On the subject of incoherent topics, "things considered unusual" qualifies unless the "thing" was declared unusual by an expert cited in a reliable source. This leads to the "Category" "Lists of things considered unusual". Making lists present the problem of having a source that states that the things, while unusual, are sufficiently similar to be on the same list. Many are entirely subjective, such as lists of unusual names for things. The category is incoherent and subjective, so the lists of places for nude recreation should not be included.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 01:43, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Category added to project

I've pulled Category:Body painting into the project's category tree and located it under Category:Nude art. It occurred to me while reading about Joanne Gair, the artist behind the cover photo Demi's Birthday Suit, that we were missing an entire art form that probably should be part of our scope. It's a small category at the moment (only two pages), but it's the only place I could see that might encompass both the art form and the artists who practice it. Texttramp (talk) 00:34, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Managing linked articles and references

@VeryRarelyStable:

@Texttramp:

Response to discussion on Nudity talk page would be appreciated.

--WriterArtistDC (talk) 16:59, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

@WriterArtistDC: I added my thoughts. Texttramp (talk) 12:43, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Note - @VeryRarelyStable:, @Texttramp:- I am not accustomed to pinging individuals in order to prompt feedback when I am editing, but I expect watchers of the articles to monitor my work, and I do the same.

I have plunged into the project of balancing the history content between the related articles, and it is proceeding faster than I expected. I was a programmer/analyst before my retirement (although given my academic background, more of an industrial psychologist), and have come up with a method of using apps and my sandbox to do the sorting out of references by topic outside main space. I have finished adding all the relevant citations from Nudity to History of nudity, and will begin to re-write the content to balance the two article's coverage of their respective topics.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 22:48, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Request for Assessment

Hello! I have improved the Puppetry of the Penis article by adding over 2000 words, media, an infobox and references for my university assignment. I have added it to WikiProject Nudity as I believe it falls within the scope of the project. It would be very helpful if this article could be re-assessed, and I welcome all feedback for improvement. There is also a banner at the top of the article from 2012 requesting a need for additional citations, and I was hoping this could be reviewed. I have since added over 30 new references to the article to improve verifiability and credibility. Thank you very much. Rubyredgirl (talk) 07:25, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Comments re: Art modeling

I have been working on the article Model (art) and have had participation only from editors interested in the art aspect, not nudity. I have also created a draft for an article about a model who worked for at least fifty years in DC: Draft:Russell Nesbit. Any comments would be appreciated. --WriterArtistDC (talk) 22:21, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Proposed category changes

I would like to make a the following changes to the project's category structure.

1. Remove Social nudity advocates from Nudity and protest as a sub-category.

Rationale: The people listed as Social nudity advocates primarily focus on nudity as a lifestyle in itself, while those listed under Nudity and protest use nudity as part of larger social and/or political goals. Including Social nudity advocates under Nudity and protest gives an incorrect impression of the purpose social nudity advocacy (that it's a form of protest only).

2. Move Nudity and protest up the category tree a couple levels to become a sub-category of Nudity.

Rationale: Currently, Nudity and protest is a sub-category of Clothing-free events. This seems the incorrect location for a couple of reasons:

A) Nude protesters often aren't advocating for social nudity as a lifestyle. They use nudity as part of a larger strategy (women's rights, animal rights, and other overarching goals). Clothing-free events is a sub-category of Naturism, which also isn't primarily focused on protest.

B) Not all protests involving nudity are "clothing-free"; some may entail only partial nudity (such as topfreedom events);

I propose to move Nudity and protest to become a direct sub-category of Nudity. This would put it above Naturism and at the same level as other nudity focused categories (Nudity in film, Nudity in religion, etc.).

3. In the Nudity category, there is inconsistency in how the sub-cats that begin with "Nudity" are alphabetically organized. Some are broken out by the relative subject area (Nudity in art is under "A", Nudity in religion is under "R"). Some are simply listed under "N" (Nudity in film, Nudity in mythology, etc.). I think having each sub-cat under its own alphabetic subject letter is best. So, I propose to sort all the general "Nudity in" categories by subject letter (Nudity in film under "F", Nudity in mythology under "M", Nudity in television and Nudity in theatre and dance both under "T"). Texttramp (talk) 13:43, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

(1, 2) - Yes, advocates and protest are distinct categories, the latter being a direct sub-category of nudity.

(3) - I don't know if there is a general rule regarding alpha order, but using the word that actually distinguishes the item makes sense, and should be applied consistently.

--WriterArtistDC (talk) 19:17, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Are Social nudity advocates and Naturists by country redundant?

Under Naturism we have a category for Social nudity advocates. We also have a general area (Naturists by country) and then people are listed by their individual countries (American naturists, German naturists, etc.). A problem is that some people are listed in both areas while others are only listed either by their national association or as an advocate. I think this makes it more difficult to find people associated with the growth and promotion of naturism (you have to know to check two separate categories).

Imagine a new reader interested in this subject area. They might read about Richard Ungewitter and see that he was a social nudity advocate, but not a German naturist (that is, until I added that category this morning -- this is what got me thinking).

I propose that all people under the Social nudity advocates category should only be associated with their respective country and we remove the Social nudity advocates category. My reasoning is that associating people with their country of activity provides a bit more information about them. It also allows people to focus only on their country or region of interest (say, someone who is only looking for information about French naturists). Any person with a page in Wikipedia is assumed to be notable, and any notable naturist would have to be (by definition) an advocate for the lifestyle because they are publicly known. I think this makes the Social nudity advocates category unnecessary. Texttramp (talk) 13:54, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

"Naturists by country" is not redundant, but of limited use. All activist are practitioners, but few WP articles are about practitioners that are not activists because it is something private, irrelevant to their notability or they live in a society such as Germany where it is so normal it is not mentioned (e.g. Angela Merkel). WriterArtistDC (talk) 00:16, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Okay, good point.

If I'm interpreting your word "practitioners" correctly, it would indicate someone who is a casual naturist, but not necessarily an activist?

As you said, this kind of practitioner rarely earns an article. So, perhaps, the best way is to assign everyone to Social nudity activists (as they all appear to be promoters of the lifestyle) and then also make sure they are associated with their proper national naturist category. Everyone would be "dual-homed", so to speak.

What do you think? Texttramp (talk) 04:47, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

I have taken a look at the actual members of the two categories and found only ~60 individuals when combined, for the reasons we have noted. Since Naturists by county that did not include activists would be about ten individuals, I do not find that useful as a category and would eliminate it. Better to just have an activist category with sub-categories for counties; e.g. American naturist activists.

Activism should be defined in a meaningful way, such as founding an organization or publishing a magazine/newsletter/guidebook, so I question some of those currently included. There are several "topfreedom" advocates are seeking the legalization of behavior that is normal in many countries, but do not advocate full nudity. There are also performance artists that appear naked or photograph naked people in public which does not further the normalization of the body that naturists seek, but instead exploit the shock value of nudity.

--WriterArtistDC (talk) 20:26, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources

Main page: User:Headbomb/unreliable

I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)

and turns it into something like

• John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments

Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 17:36, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello, Please note that Tableau vivant, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 8 May 2023 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team

GA review?

@VeryRarelyStable, Texttramp, and Demt1298: The main article of this project is now down to 9000 words, and seems focused on the essentials of the topic. Anyone who writes knows that it can never be done entirely alone. The "crowd" focused on grammar and spelling has done its job, but meaningful feedback on content is rare. I have in prior years submitted articles for GA review in order to draw such attention, all three having passed. Before doing so again, I would appreciate having some response on the current state of Nudity. (pun intended) WriterArtistDC (talk) 18:52, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

@WriterArtistDC This will be a first for me, but I am pleased to help review the article. I hope it helps. Demt1298 (talk) 15:27, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, any help is appreciated. After more than 15 years and working on three previous GA candidates, the technical issues are no problem. I am mainly concerned with the written content, since I am too familiar with the topic to always know if I am saying too much or too little. I will make the nomination for a formal review, but you can just make comments here.

--WriterArtistDC (talk) 01:52, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Naturism articles being merged

I participated two AfD discussions which has resulted in my implementing the decision to merge them into Naturism in the United States. See the talk page for details and to make any comments. WriterArtistDC (talk) 03:21, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Exploitative nude photograph of indigenous woman on Robert Peary page

I have been trying for some time to remove a nude photograph of an Inughuit girl, taken in exploitative conditions, from the page for American polar explorer, Robert Peary.

As I have set out at length in the discussion for the Robert Peary page, academic research has established that Peary and his fellow expedition members took a number of pornographic images of young Inughuit women. These women - including the woman in this particular photo - were almost all married. At the time, however, the Americans regarded the Inughuit as 'savages' and therefore fair game for them to use. Indeed, this particular woman had first been taken by Peary as his mistress (often wrongly described as his 'wife' - he was already married to an American) when she was 14. She had two children by him.

In her discussion of these photographs, Renée Hulan of St Mary's University, Halifax, Canada, took the decision not to publish any of the images to which she refers. (Renée Hulan, 'Alnayah’s People: Archival Photographs from West Greenland, 1908–1909', Interventions, 25:8, (2023), pp. 1088-1109, DOI: 10.1080/1369801X.2023.2169621 One particular photograph she discusses has a nude Inughuit woman tied to the Nast of the expedition ship.

These photographs were taken under exploitative conditions - the women were taken on board a ship, far from their homes, for many months. They are pornographic in intent and racist in origin.

However, each time I remove this image, it is reinstated by a contributor. He does not engage in the moral issues involved, but states only that I may not remove an image simply because 'I do not like it.' His tone, let it be added, is bullying and threatening.

I am certain you will agree that such a image is inappropriate for wikipedia. It is exploitative, pornographic and racist. The individual may even have been under 18 when the photograph was taken. Since I am unable, it seems, to remove it, I am hoping that you will assist me to do so. Jon Rosebank (talk) 09:46, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

User:Jon Rosebank calling other editors racist pornographers and pedophiles, and insulting their academic ability would seem to indicate you are the one engaging in bullying and harassment. ITBF (talk) 15:59, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I dare say you may wish to scrutinise Category:Vintage nude photographs to ensure there are no other "exploitative, pornographic and racist" nude images on Wikipedia. ITBF (talk) 16:00, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not censored. If you have sources, it would be appropriate to discuss Peary's behaviour in the article, and then give the image a caption indicating the circumstances under which it was taken. If it is not public domain and was put on Wikipedia without the permission of its owner, you can argue copyright violation. If the subject of the image is still alive and could be harmed by it, then you have further options. I'm afraid you're unlikely to get very far arguing that it doesn't have illustrative value. For what it's worth I would consider your arguments compelling if I were still editing a student magazine and deciding whether to include the photo; but this is Wikipedia, and the price of being able to edit Wikipedia any way we want is that everyone else also gets to edit it any way they want.

—VeryRarelyStable 23:24, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Cultural views on the midriff and navel

Cultural views on the midriff and navel, which is considered within this WikiProject's scope, could do with some help focusing the article and providing a broader overview of the topic, rather than rely on recentist pop-cultural coverage. GnocchiFan (talk) 21:21, 22 April 2024 (UTC)