The Place for Purging Porn and Pedo-Pandering (AKA P5 flag evaluations)

Generally I'll give more leeway to something that has explicit content involving a 16 year old versus something that does the same for a 10 year old, but it really depends on the context of the work. I can't make any definitive statements til I take the time to review it.

Yeah, that was why I was wondering why someone reported it. Looking at the page, there's nothing that screams "this is something people to read to get off on little kids having sex," and from all I've ever heard about it it is explicit yaoi but it's also very much Plot With Porn.

Lolita has been reflagged. Please zap it.

Looks like the fast one is coding again. edit:OK funky layout is gone now.

edited 17th May '12 3:03:27 PM by Shadis

Is Arcade Gamer Fubuki going to get a review? I have no interest in the series, I'm just bugged by how the series article was just cut-listed instead of going to the 5P for review. At the very least, have Panctice Squad Cutterback (who put the article on the cut list in the first place) explain why they did that instead of going through the 5P process.

edited 17th May '12 3:41:29 PM by NeoChaos

It's on the list. They'll get to it when they get to it.

There is a link to the list in the P5 decisions and announcements thread.

edited 17th May '12 3:51:13 PM by TheOneWhoTropes

@Neo Chaos - That would go in the Petitions thread.

Where's the list again? reread, nvm

edited 17th May '12 4:27:54 PM by Enzeru

This may not be strictly speaking "on topic", but since the work in question has been discussed, I think that an anecdote may inject some levity into the conversation, so we don't all get bogged down by all the (frankly kind of depressing) pedo-pandering that has been dealt with, lately.

I was just at my local major chain bookstore, to pick up the remaining books in the Millennium and Hunger Games trilogies. Like most major bookstores, they have a shelf with the best-selling books in the store, for people to easily find. The entire top three was taken up by the Fifty Shades series.

smh

Freud Was Right, too right.

Sakura Gari? It's brutal, but it's not porn. I'll have to reread though. A main character was abused horribly as a child, but I'm not sure how explicit it was.

Checking back, the first chapter is 100 pages. No sex scenes. Note our hero here is in his 17th spring.

edited 17th May '12 8:40:53 PM by animeg3282

After reading through some of these cases, I am kinda worried. Sure, there are straightforward cases such as Monster Girl Quest that a simple google search will prove that, yeah, its totally just creepy porn. But some of these things that are getting flagged are both far too long to investigate, and often times have merits of their own that even leave people going "Darn, This really looks like it has its own merits, but it has this on 3 frames of X, thus it must go. Sorry." Or, eventually "OK, perhaps the light novel is clean, but the Anime of it is not. Sorry guys, only you can stop creepy anime adaptations."

If there was a "Put a warning and disclaimer on the page" option for borderline cases that are somewhat against the policy, but have strong enough merits to deserve a page here despite having a few screens pandering to a foreign demographic that is kinda squicky.

Moreso, having this disclaimer may cause the 5 p at being more effective at their job, a they would now at least be able to do something in cases where they might feel slightly guilty about completely cutting from the wiki, if say, it has a good plot, has excellent action, or is simply a good example of a large variety of clean tropes. Because, inversely. If we end up with the 5 P hesitating to do things because of said guilt, they very well may be shut down due to being ineffective, and a disclaimer saying that:

"Hey, this stuff has some nasty elements to it. We do not endorse these elements whatsoever, but this work was reviewed by a peer council, and it was concluded that it had enough good elements to justify keeping it on this wiki. Discretion is advised. *Link* Learn more as to why this work is flagged *Link*"

Is considerably better then leaving a work alone simply because one of the 5P did not feel that the cons outweighed the pros. This would help make the the 5P feel considerably less imposing, and thus, the cuts that do happen would be considerably more popular.

You can think of however you like, but Monster Girl Quest is a lot more than just porn. /offtopic

Its main appeal is the porn, from what I read about it. When I saw its trope page, it was basically all sex/porn tropes with some like "Idiot hero" and some mention of self awareness. (Although, the YMMV page had a link two one or two good music tracks that I will never find again.)

Regardless, it was an example. Examples are necessary to debate something as a whole.

I don't mean to offend you, but that stuff doesn't belong here according to the guidelines. There is some good these guidelines strive for, but right now they are a little too much all or nothing. Leaving unsafe works totally unmarked, and cutting out rather deep and complex works due to a paragraph worth of pandering is rather harsh.

If you really are hurt by my assessment, I will dive nose deep into it (With a diving mask and snorkel, and a rather thick, well armored diving suit,) if you think I would come to a different conclusion. If you cannot claim that I would come do a different conclusion after going through it, you cannot really blame me, or the 5 P for saying that it shouldn't be here.

edited 17th May '12 10:23:47 PM by Roraborialis

Don't really care whether it is or belongs here or not, I'm just saying it's not all porn. I saved the page, and looking over it, most of the tropes listed where story, character, or gameplay related.

As for things being too all or nothing, yes another solution could be better.

We will see if a sliding scale of responses resonates with with the rest of the community.

edited 17th May '12 10:35:37 PM by Roraborialis

They have locked and cleaned some pages.

True. That is somewhat borderline, but it is something. Page cleanup can get rid of nasty things on the page, but I am somewhat worried that this could lead to certain aspects not being mentioned, which could cause someone to be rather freaked out encountering them. Frankly, a tactful disclaimer saying that the work is not clean, the nasty bits are not endorsed, but that the trope page should stay clean would probably be better for TV-Tropes's reputation, and the accuracy (in completeness especially) of the works pages then cutting a large portion of the trope page, then locking it (Which could prevent any missing elements cut out due to the cleanup from getting mentioned. Which could lead to worse incidences then the trope page mentioning them in a slightly unsavory way.)

I would be much angrier about checking a work after reading about it here, and finding squicky material without any mention that it was there then a warning appearing at the top of the trope page that yes, this is a rather nasty work that has enough good elements outside of the squick to justify leaving it with a warning & disclaimer.

Quick Question does the trope lock up, lock up the YMMV and Discussion pages of the trope? OR are all related pages suspended.

Reported My Girlfriend Is The President. Mentions of lolicon both in article and in trope list, it needs a look if nothing else.

Also Nanatsuiro Drops, though that one can probably be fixed with redirection to Bleached Underpants version.

edited 18th May '12 1:43:47 AM by AGroupie

(I've forgotten which topic is which, so I'm gonna put this here for the meanwhile.)

I see we've got another victim of Possibly Misleading Description on the list.

Like Hidan No Aria before, these two facts do not necessarily combine into paedo-material. If the young main character gets no titillating scenes and the fanservice concentrates on older-looking and mature characters, there's no reason for this to be reviewed. Unlike Hidan No Aria, however, I have not seen it. So my questions are thus:

1) Has this already been discussed?

2) If not, can someone clear this up so that we can fix the description?

I don't really like the idea of opening up the floodgates to all Shana Clones who are potential love interests.

[sigh], but I do see Zero No Tsukaima is tagged as ecchi...

Yet it scores a PG 13+ rating.

Rating doesn't matter in cases of serious radar avoiding pedo-pandering... But is this it? I haven't seen the series, but most people say Loiuse is annoying I think.

Context and target audience factor in too though.

Zero no Tsukaima was voted by the 5P as "keep, this isn't pornography", unless you guys found something that they missed.

Oh, okay. So it is to be taken off the Pages Pending For Perusal By P 5, then?

I nuked a bunch that had already been taken care of. Really, that sandbox is outdated.

I dunno how up to date the P5 Decisions and Announcements post is either, if things have been resolved without a holler.

I guess that means we should mention if we see something on the voting tool resolved that's not in the post?