This article is within the scope of WikiProject Nudity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of nudity and naturism 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.NudityWikipedia:WikiProject NudityTemplate:WikiProject Nuditynudity articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Travel and Tourism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of travel and tourism related articles 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.Travel and TourismWikipedia:WikiProject Travel and TourismTemplate:WikiProject Travel and TourismTourism articles
I edited the Nudity navbox, replacing the link to category:Naturist resorts with a link to this article.--WriterArtistDC (talk) 16:41, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of work has gone into this article and it is excellent. Well done.--ClemRutter (talk) 16:58, 10 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You have inserted a problematic image- have you got model release forms from each of the identifiable people. You have to be exceedingly careful with images- it seems appropiate to put it in a less prominent position. For a naturist resort, you need to show a complete age range which conflicts with national laws. For a subject relevant to two or more continents you need to have a geographical balance too. --ClemRutter (talk) 09:26, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The photo was recently made the lede photo at Naturism. It's not my photo, so no, I haven't got release forms, but you can see that everyone depicted is willingly facing the camera. It's been on Wikimedia Commons since 2014, which I would have thought was time enough for someone to complain if they were going to.
I presume if there are complaints it will be taken down and its uploader given a warning, and I'll come back and find it redlinked on the page. If that happens I'll find a new image, or failing that I'll put back the swimming-pool photo that was there before (confusingly composed and non-illustrative though that was).
I don't see that it's necessary, or for that matter possible, to cover anything like the full range of naturist diversity in any one photo. The article isn't long enough yet for more than three or four images to even fit in it. I feel the new image captures what makes a naturist resort a naturist resort better than any other single image I have seen on the site, which is why I chose it for the lede. If I find one that's even better, I'll put that one up instead. Empty restaurants and aerial shots of swimming pools don't convey the same idea.
But thank you for taking the time to discuss this with me. —VeryRarelyStable 10:59, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Addendum: However, it would have been more courteous to discuss it without reverting to your own version before gaining consensus. —VeryRarelyStable 11:38, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You have taken the decision, I disagree with you. If lockdown is ever over you should take a trip to Monta, or even Adge and enjoy all the facilities. You will find several communities there: Families with kids under fourteen running around during the day- and as the sun looses it it heat, the sports freaks playing on the courts and pitches until about eight, when there is a lull till the teenagers get their gladrags on and head to the discos and night-clubs which close ar about four. They head to the shopping centre and wait to the bakers open and bring back fresh bread to their parents tents, chalets or mobile homes and slide into a deep sleep. Parents see the bread and know they are safe. Yes it is impossible to express in one photo. The photo you wat to use- is suitable to illustrate a naturist club so can stay on the naturism site- but I am dubious that it represents Naturist resorts even Agde. The building look very tacky- not the sort of place that attract families that are paying 25 to 40 K, for their mobile home and pitch. For fun look at this - on the neighbouring site- I am a tent man!
You can tell the photos I took by a four digit number. I cannot publish (or in the last 10 years even take any photo in a UK or EU Naturist resort), others have braved it but personally I can't name a quality photo, that expresses a resort while not breaching WP rules on not uses photos that show an identifiable image, ones that will not breach the US federal and state laws and local laws.
You are driving this article: but do get the format right. MOS. The first image goes after all the head tags. ClemRutter (talk) 16:16, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not seeing where any of that bears on the choice of lede photo. Wikipedia isn't a commercial site and doesn't have to make naturist resorts look glamorous. The building in that photo looks pretty similar to Pineglades Naturist Club where I go a couple of times a year; I don't have $25–40,000 to spend on a camping pitch. —VeryRarelyStable 06:03, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds idyllic. I see they have revised their photography policy. Is there any way you could get them to release some approved shots through commons. You would have to go through the OTRS procedure if you didn't press the trigger. I wouldn't call this a 'resort', to me it is a normal 'club site' that is open to non-members- resorts are invariably commercial in the EU, though some are operated as co-operatives. All would hire out some pitches on long leases. Sadly Corvid has made visiting any of the EU sites nigh impossible- what a waste of a summer.ClemRutter (talk) 09:38, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm finding it increasingly difficult to follow this conversation. I must reiterate: the photo now in the lede on this page is not mine; I got it from Wikimedia Commons; whatever process had to be completed for it to be uploaded and accepted, was completed by somebody who wasn't me. I have never submitted a naturist photo, nor for that matter any photo with human subjects, to Wikimedia. Whatever queries you have about the process used to upload this photo must be directed to the person who uploaded it. I just put it on the page.
Now take a look at the text of the page: for the purposes of this article a "naturist resort" includes any landed naturist facility, though it is acknowledged that this is not universal usage. Naturist facilities come in different sizes, qualities, and degrees of commercialization, but there are no sharp boundaries that can be drawn across that spectrum, and so this article is about them all.
I don't see how it's a problem having the same lede photo as Naturism. It's a good, illustrative photo. There is no requirement that Wikipedia use different photos in every article on closely related topics.
If you read the sign in the background of the current lede photo, you'll see it says "Positively no attire permitted in this pool. Nude bathing only." That's a sign you would only see at a naturist resort. Now the writing behind the people in your proposed photo might well be equally unambiguous, but I can't read it, and nor can your typical English-speaker, which is a problem in an English Wikipedia article.
Additionally, I have not been able to confirm the existence of a "Penag Durian Farm Resort". There does appear to exist a Nature Fruit Farm Resort in Penang where they grow durian, but if they're a naturist resort then their website is remarkably secretive about it. —VeryRarelyStable 08:14, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have had a look at the proposed replacement picture, and I am against the change. Nine guys sat in a posed photo with no context does not represent a resort. I want a photo that represents something like [1]- that is a resort. The Florida picture is a little closer- but as it says in the article, the US seem to use the term to include 'club sites' or any where that hires out a pitch. Google 'CHM Montalivet' for more ideas. ClemRutter (talk) 09:24, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is the "Naturist resort" article, not the CHM Montalivet article. At this time the existing lede photo is still the one I believe best represents the article's subject matter. —VeryRarelyStable 10:18, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
While the current picture is eye catching it is not representative of naturism because all its subjects are young. Pasting it on multiple articles across Wikipedia is bad for the encyclopedia and bad for naturism. Here's another Commons image from a resort in Spain Nudist area of a hotel in FuerteventuraLumos3 (talk) 10:54, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is a much better picture; it looks like a naturist resort, and it would be a good idea to put it somewhere on the Naturism article. And you are quite right about the subjects being young in the existing image. My issue this time is, reading the caption, I see it says "Nudist area of a hotel in Fuerteventura". If the hotel only allows nudity in some parts of its grounds, does that count as a naturist resort? —VeryRarelyStable 20:58, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We seem to be understanding each other on the kind of picture needed . Here's one from Commons of CHM Montalivet which fits any criteria of what a naturist resort is but maybe focuses too much on the facilities and not the people. CHM Monta,the world's first naturist holiday resort. Lumos3 (talk) 22:45, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that one has been suggested before. I don't think it works for this article because you can't tell, looking at it, that that's a naturist resort and not just any old hotel with an outdoor pool. The Fuerteventura one is much more suitable, if we can get some clarification of whether it is in fact a naturist resort. —VeryRarelyStable 23:43, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Simply, it is a hotel that has a FKK lawn. It isn't a resort. There are no restaurants, shops, activiities, games for the kids, miniclubs, pools- where are the camping pitches.The Monta shot is a publicity promo- all the shots I have taken are not suitable, as for the last 25 years there has been a no camera convention. The article is however on the resort, that is what needs to be illustrated. A check list of the features needed to be illustrated can be worked out by studying The Monta Website or Euronat. Good luck. ClemRutter (talk) 13:48, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Fuerteventura is a large island in the Canaries. It is not naturist , but has many hotels that call themselve naturist resorts or clubs. I think a hotel that is partly naturist does fall within the description we have of naturist resort if the naturist facilities are extensive. Even a major naturist resort like Cap d'Agde has non naturist sections with soft boundaries.
We are not told which hotel the picture is taken at.
I suspect it is Club Jandia Princess which describes a separate naturist section and the pictures show the same distinctive white sun loungers.
The owners are obviously hedging their bets on both naturist and textile custom.
See description and photos at
[2]
and
[3]
I think we should add this as a supplementary illustration in the article to give the reader an idea of what a naturist resort looks like. Lumos3 (talk) 15:08, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please ignore the village of Cap d'Agde- its for 'Swingers' or échangistes and is relaxed about flesh. The naturist resort there is Rene Oltra,and we have no photos- I have visited the beach there- but did not investigate the residences, cleaner beaches along the coast! Following the link- I read that sunbathing is only available for Adults- that sounds very échangiste to me. ClemRutter (talk) 20:15, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
