NSFW links - Not terrible, but just not appropriate.
Collecting images for my next sub banner I fell down a few rabbit holes. I wanted a "censored" stamp image. In my search there was the Wikipedia article definition with an image of the Birth of Venus with black bars (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:CENSORED_The_Birth_of_Venus_by_William-Adolphe_Bouguereau_(1879).jpg) but the actual article had the image removed in Novemeber after being there for years (since 2016-09-03, I'd thought longer) because, "Not Notable. Somebody simply took a classic and doctored it. If we need an illustration at all, it should Notable in its own right." As I knew about this instance, I added the fig leaf focus on Michelangelo's David Wikipedia is fickle, but I suspect it will stay as my fourgy illustration is still on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_sex and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_position#Group_sex
Getting triggered...
Because I had to find the best version of this old fig leaf David I looked through various categories, including "Censorship" and "Censorship in art". What's most disturbing, is that in the https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Censorship there's a whole section on "Erotic images of children". I'm not for censorship but I'm not thrilled that's there. I managed to avoid the section for a while but became too curious. It was broken into 3 sub categories: "Erotic activities involving children" (All historic artwork, and the worst are still not very graphic, though some are very artistic none are composed well.), "Lolicon" (a handful of examples of non-graphic anime cartoons of kids), and "Child pornography" (charts and graphs). Most is not objectionable, but I feel like I should do something, like improve the category name(s), but I don't know what too, and even if I did it wouldn't make it go away. Maybe I'm too programmed and triggered. Maybe not. I really don't know.
there doesn't seem to be anything here