Just a thought
Shouldn't this say "viewer discretion"? I think people should know they can decide for themselves. I'd change it myself, but the page is protected. Flarn2006 (talk) 02:24, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
Image
The image used for this template seems a bit inappropriate. I'm not clutching my pearls but it just feels like an unnecessarily shocking image to have at the top of an article? Especially since the template is meant to be a warning about potentially shocking or inappropriate content, seems a bit counterproductive. Seeing as this template is only used on 9 pages, I don't think it could hurt to go with something a bit better. Perhaps this could work, similar to what has been proposed by BthrussellUK? Thoughts? (Oh, and don't get me started on the image hover text) Landfish7 09:53, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
Maushold
This template is really due for an update. How do we feel about using Maushold for the image instead of the somewhat jarring image we have now? Landfish7 09:58, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
- Made a draft of this. Let me know if you like it! Landfish7 10:15, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
- Looks great! Has the dual meaning of "hey there are kids here" since Maushold is visually a family, but also "if you know you know" when you consider the implications of the evolution method.
- It may also be good to add a "reason=" field or some such, so the template can give a brief summary of what the offending content is. For example, "firearms", "nudity", "vulgar language", etc. --Boblers (talk) 10:55, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
- +1 for Maushold, and also +1 for adding a "reason" field Minibug (talk) 11:15, 1 July 2023 (UTC)