Preliminary note: This is about pages, not works

As per the Wiki Talk thread, a great cleanup of creepy/perverse content on the wiki is in order. For reference, this includes:

1. Personal opinions on hotness. Examples should stand on their own without the introduction of YMMV material. Adding your own thoughts and feelings on an example is Natter and not needed. Don't try and extend your feelings to a larger group of fans either, e.g. "...and fangirls everywhere rejoiced". You're not fooling anyone.
2. Overly detailed examples. The example doesn't need to be an exact sensory account of the event. Too much of that and you end up sounding like you're writing porn. When in doubt, drop a few adjectives.
3. Unrelated fanservice mentions. If the hot bits aren't related to the example, they don't belong in the example. It's Natter and it just makes it sound like porn.
4. Pornographic writing. If you're writing porn, it should be somewhere other than the wiki. Keep it Family Friendly.
5. Pedo gushing. We don't need to describe children sexually. This should be cut immediately. We're not interested in hosting pedophilia fantasies. Period. If a work contains children having sex (i.e. Lolita), just state the facts and move on.
6. Titillation links. Tell, don't show. We don't need screen shots to illustrate fanservice. If a reader is really curious, they can go look it up on Google. (See also Weblinks Are Not Examples.)
7. Talking about actors instead of characters. An actor is not the character they play. When you're writing an example about a work, refer to the character, not the actor.
8. Fanfic Recs for underage sex. We will not host any recommendation for fics that have explicit sex involving people apparently*
   Yes, this includes Older Than They Look characters
   younger than 16. Period. Anyone confused by this simple rule is not needed to help us with the wiki.

If you find a page filled to the brim with this content and you can't look at it without being driven to madness, post it here so that it can be cleaned up.

Final notes:

1. Paedophilic content is to be removed or cut listed on sight.
2. Otherwise, "Cleanup" doesn't mean Bowdlerise or Example Sectionectomies. Go to the Trope Repair Shop for the latter. Please refrain from using the Cut List, too. And images may be pulled here for clear NSFWness, but unclear cases and after-pull go to Image Pickin'

edited 11th Apr '12 11:35:31 AM by SeptimusHeap

"Titillation links. Tell, don't show. We don't need screen shots to illustrate fanservice. If a reader is really curious, they can go look it up on Google. (See also Weblinks Are Not Examples.)"

If a picture is an example of a trope that just happens to be fanservice, I say that's acceptable as long as it's showing the trope, and stays PG-13 at most.

"Talking about actors instead of characters. An actor is not the character they play. When you're writing an example about a work, refer to the character, not the actor."

Um, how does that relate to perversity? Do you mean gushing about how hot an actor is?

edited 8th Mar '12 11:16:04 AM by DragonQuestZ

These things come from Sandbox.Dont Be Creepy. I'll watchlist it and update the OP in the case it changes.

^^ Yes, gushing about the actor who plays a character when the character is the example.

Well that isn't lewdness, since you can write about the actor in a non-lewd way, and it would still be a bad example.

How about "Don't gush about characters or the people who play them. Even an In-Universe example of Perverse Sexual Lust doesn't warrant an entry describing how hot a character or actor is."

I think that this discussion is better suited for the Wiki Talk thread or the sandbox discussion. I've both watchlisted and will update the OP if necessary - or a moderator might do it.

Is this the thread where say things like Zettai Ryouiki look like they were written with one hand?

Yes. If you need cleanup help, come here.

Though a little more detail would be nice.

United States Angels Corps might require a little stalinian purge since it is an explicitely pornographic work about rape, torture, murder and necrophilia formed on gurochan.

Not a policy violation from the look of it. The work is creepy, not our page.

Yeah, no. This is about improper pages, not works.

On a sidenote, is this important enough to warrant a pinning?

I would edit it into the OP in bold.

I think he means the thread. Although I like your idea too.

Yeah, I meant the thread with pinning/stickying. Anyway, I've added a note in the OP that this is about pages and not works.

...I edited the page a little... Should I put it back?:(

You cut a lot of legitimate tropes there. That's not the point of this. Please read Don't be creepy. I don't think you quite got our standards here. We aren't cutting tropes that actually happen in the work.

Everything's Better with Princesses should have probably stayed. The first person should stay gone.

edited 9th Mar '12 3:11:52 PM by shimaspawn

A troper just added a number of swimsuit catalog site links to the Barely-There Swimwear page. Since I am on dialup, I am reluctant to check these links for NSFW status. (My personal opinion is that because the trope is meant to be "in-universe only", linking advertisements for products is inappropriate and should be cut. But I'm also kind of conservative on that sort of thing, and want to get a second opinion.)

So, someone please stop by and check on that, and possibly the other image links? Thanks in advance.

I would be inclined to chop the example off after "vendors". That first bit is the important part, and the links are . . . questionable. The final sentence doesn't even make sense to me.

What are other people's thoughts?

I cut the whole thing. Final line of the description: "Note that this trope is not any swimsuit which the [[FetishFuel audience thinks is unusually small]], it must be reacted to as such within the story." (emphasis added to the relevant section.)

How are Chub Pan and CaptainGerBear looking to you guys? Last I checked, they were a tad salivatory.

I've FE in posts before describe wanting this site to be family friendly and for entertainment, which is part of the reason for wanting pedophilia stuff gone. I don't see the value in having a page for something that's literally just drawn snuff porn. I mean, I don't see pages for any HBO pornos on here, and USAC is pretty much the same thing.

Wrong thread, you want this one.

Still, we want the pages about porn and similar stuff. We just don't want pages with porn on them.

Relevant section from the Family Friendly policy:

edited 10th Mar '12 9:02:05 AM by Meeble

@ Culex 3: We have a page for The Tudors, Spartacus: Blood and Sand, Debbie Does Dallas, Deep Throat, Pirates XXX, FATAL, and a number of other works with Explicit Content. Just because the work isn't family friendly doesn't mean we don't trope it.

We write about porn. We just don't want the porn itself on the pages.

edited 10th Mar '12 10:09:46 AM by shimaspawn