In the Portuguese key, please someone change "Epiderme" to "Epidídimos". 189.78.212.4 (talk) 03:41, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Why is it shaved? Unshaved genitalia would be more representative of what is normal. 83.104.249.240 (talk) 14:56, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
I have a couple of issues with this picture. First off, the testis to epididymis size ratio is MUCH, MUCH too large. The picture is downright misleading, which goes against it's very purpose (to educate, NOT to mislead). Secondly, the corpora cavernosa/corpus spongiosum have the same issue... the corpora cavernosa are way too small, as is the corpus spongiosum (plus their extent is not accurately represented). The caption is also not entirely clear/correct, the view isn't an "upper" view (whatever that means...), it's a ventral view. If anything, it's a bottom view. I also have a bunch of criticisms of other details, but those are my main issues. My point is that the picture isn't anatomically correct, and should either be called a schema, or corrected.--TAW (talk) 04:55, 19 April 2011 (UTC)