Talk:Human penis size

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Human penis size article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9: 3 months

Wikipedia is not censored.
Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to Wikipedia's content disclaimer regarding potentially objectionable content and options for not seeing an image.

Human penis size was nominated as a good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (September 16, 2006). There are suggestions below for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

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
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.

Sexology and sexuality B‑class Mid‑importance

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality 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.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality
B	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.

Pozytyv (talk · contribs) has been paid by hiringking99 on their behalf. Affiliation: freelancer.com

Semi-protected edit request on 12 November 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change the example image of a "large penis" to a diagram or normal sized penis. This page is meant to be educational, and is often used to prove the normal size of a penis is approximately 5.3". By using a penis much larger than this, the page loses its educational purpose. 24.237.159.217 (talk) 05:40, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: There is nothing stopping you from suggesting the addition of other images (showing the average and small penises). M.Bitton (talk) 12:55, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 16 November 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change: An adult penis that is abnormally small but otherwise normally formed is referred to in medicine as a micropenis, with the cutoff usually being defined as around 3 inches (7.6 cm).

to:

An adult penis that is abnormally small but otherwise normally formed is referred to in medicine as a micropenis, usually being defined as around 2.5 SD below the average.

As per Citation 1 on micropenis. Or something akin to that. Of note is that the length in cm specified here is different from that on the micropenis page. 𝙏𝙚𝙧𝙧𝙖𝙞𝙣𝙢𝙖𝙣地形人 (talk) 17:29, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Partly done: I removed the statement from the lead on the basis that it is not in the article. The curious may read the section in this article, or the linked one (which has an unsourced length value so I did not include it here). LizardJr8 (talk) 04:49, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Asian men penis size

this part of the article read as follows:

"Alleged differences in races have led to the creation of sexual myths. A 2005 study reported that "there is no scientific background to support the alleged 'oversized' penis in black people"."

But those studies also found out that the idea that asian men having small penises is also false, so i would want an edit request that reads like this:

"Alleged differences in races have led to the creation of sexual myths. A 2005 study reported that "there is no scientific background to support the alleged 'oversized' penis in black people and that there's also no scientific background to support the alleged 'undersized' penis in asian people"."

would feel more board and accurate. 177.37.150.230 (talk) 16:44, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That source says Interestingly, there is no scientiﬁc background to support the alleged ‘oversized’ penis in black people. Mean penile ﬂaccid length and stretched length recently reported in 123 Korean military men were indeed lower than other values on non-Asian populations. At present, in the absence of any comparative study, these values remain debatable, but the possibility of racial differences in penile size should not be overlooked when investigating patients complaining of a short penis.

This clearly does not support your proposed edit. Do you have a better source? ꧁Zanahary꧂ 17:23, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i'm pretty sure this is not te only source used in the article. Many sources on the same article have claimed that te penis size of asian Men were not smaller than average than that of white or Black Men. The general world-wide male human genital size is 5 inches or 13.50cms. you can look UP the sources in the same article when they talk about east and southeast asian males. They found no real racial Variety in penis size among either black, white or asian males. Urologists don't believe penis size varies with Race either. 2804:29B8:509E:B6F9:3893:C1F9:DD57:4974 (talk) 00:07, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Korean study cited quite unreliable due to multiple problems, especially the measurement methodology. When looking at the data for Koreans, it's clear the studies by Son are outliers. Although with no clear evidence, when looking at studies using "stretched penile length" without clear clarification of stretching to the maximum, extremely low averages seem to occur quite commonly. A good example is Sengezer 2002 , where the stretched penile length avg. is 3.54in., yet the erect length avg. is 5.01in. Also in Takure 2021, where the avg. stretched length of Nigerian men under 50 is 4.17in., but the average for men over 50 is 5.55in. Surely, we can't take these averages for granted. I believe there are more studies that highlight the possible inaccuracy of stretched length measurement, especially when not specifically stretching to the max. To state that there's "no scientific background to support the alleged 'undersized' penis in asian people" may not even need a source, although I'm not too sure so I'll look into it. Way6t (talk) 22:24, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Totally agree. Its a myth RickyBlair668 (talk) 20:45, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Too long

Not a joke. This article is way too long. It’s not necessary to detail every single study that has ever been done on penis size. These should be summarised and cited. There is a lot of repetition and separate sections on eg. Correlation with hand size, with height, with shoe size… are really excessive. Btljs (talk) 07:40, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As-is, the article is about 5700 words. According to WP:TOOBIG, it is not very large ("Length alone does not justify division or trimming"). Викидим (talk) 08:18, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, but repetition does - or should. Btljs (talk) 15:02, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you, many sections can use a rewrite based on review articles from the peer-reviewed publications, not a piecemeal combination of peer-reviewed research on narrow topics and popular books. I have added three reviews to the list of literature for other editors to comment. Викидим (talk) 18:12, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]