Talk:Hurtcore

Adult hurtcore

hurtcore is not just child pornography, I’m pretty sure adult hurtcore exists too. 2A02:C7F:50B1:F200:6404:8038:B963:31CD (talk) 20:28, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

It primarily is CP, but "adult hurtcore" does exists and thats why I added portion mentioning it on the page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lil Sad Lil Happy (talk • contribs) 21:23, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Adult hurtcore may be the same as bondage pornography. –LDM2003 ^{talk to me!} 10:06, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

I think it'll be worth it to add the Nth room as an example of adult hurtcore. 109.191.102.171 (talk) 13:41, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Needlessly shocking and graphic depictions

The "Notable cases" section contains extremely graphic descriptions of harm to infants that go well beyond what's needed to convey the nature of their suffering. This isn't about the topic itself being offensive, the article clearly deserves to exist. The question is whether the level of detail serves the reader's understanding or whether it's gratuitous. For comparison, Wikipedia's articles on serial killers and war crimes generally summarise the nature of offences without reproducing graphic specifics. The same standard should apply here.

There's also a dignity issue. The victims of these crimes had no say in what happened to them. Reproducing graphic specifics of what was done to them in a public encyclopedia objectifies them in much the same way as the people who originally hurt them. These are real children, whose worst moments don't need to be laid out in detail for the world to read. I'd propose trimming the most graphic passages in the notable cases section to summary-level descriptions, keeping the sourced facts but reducing the explicit detail. This seems consistent with WP:NOTCENSORED (which doesn't mean "include maximum detail"), WP:GRATUITOUS, and the spirit of WP:BLP as it applies to victims. ~2026-10963-97 (talk) 22:02, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-10963-97 i removed some of the excessive detail Cmrc23 ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ 14:04, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

stop sugarcoating the article Jasonhxiss (talk) 17:46, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

I'm not, it simply isn't necessary Cmrc23 ʕ•ᴥ•ʔ 01:10, 21 March 2026 (UTC)

Relevance of Schellenberger?

Scully and Falder both have their own Wiki articles, and Graham and Spearman are both notable for how prolific they were. So why is Brian Tod Schellenberger mentioned? His case is extremely obscure and he wasn't a serial offender. It seems the only reason it's mentioned is for the graphic details. But what sets him apart from other arrested individuals mentioned? What makes him a "Notable case"? Fella9421321312231 (talk) 22:45, 31 August 2026 (UTC)