This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Anatomy: Gross Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anatomy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anatomy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnatomyWikipedia:WikiProject AnatomyTemplate:WikiProject AnatomyAnatomy articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been classified as relating to gross anatomy.

Should read "urethra" not "ureter." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.216.43.110 (talk • contribs)

Japseye redirects here, but is not mentioned in the article. Best regards, 92.231.229.23 (talk) 23:13, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tom (LT), regarding this? What are the two images you want to discuss?

No need to ping me when you reply. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 22:38, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Flyer, the two images below. Maybe there are better ones out there. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:42, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• 
  Female urethral opening within vulval vestibule
• 

Out of those two options? Like you, I think that the second one is the poorer choice. This is because it's less encyclopedic. Our readers do expect more clinical pictures. They don't expect one showing a real-life woman with her wedding and/or another ring on, lying on a bed spreading her legs and vulva, and anatomy labels thrown on top of it. As you know, we do use real-life images in more than one of our female anatomy articles, but the images are always (well, usually) cropped in a way that they appear to be solely about the anatomy in question. In this case, the woman's hands, manicured nails, rings and upper torso are distractions. As for the first image, which is used in different Wikipedia articles (and in foreign-language ones as well), it clearly doesn't state "urinary meatus." Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 20:22, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your well thought-out comments. That's a very logical rationale and also in keeping with our principles. Have added a male and female image to the article. --Tom (LT) (talk) 10:05, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

where,