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

I was just about to say that. For the record, the content that falls afoul of our guidelines is in Chapter 5, where a character of undefined age - but presumably no older than 17 - with what is self-described as a "loli body" achieves sexual gratification through self-mutilation (with a larger focus on the mutilation compared to the gratification). The work as a whole so far reads as gratuitous and fetishistic, and if it's pre-emptively advertising itself as potentially containing [everything in those tags] in the future, I guess that's even more reason for it to be cut.

So we were discussing The Manga Guide To Psychosomatic Illnesses awhile back and I just wanted to let everyone know the first episode of the anime adaptation aired on crunchyroll a bit ago under the name Comical Psychosomatic Medicine.

I'd just like a clarification, if there's an example discussing the porn industry, should it be purged from a page? I came across one in the real life section of a page earlier and was unsure of whether to delete it.

edited 14th Feb '15 8:09:51 PM by Joesolo

I believe that with porn it depends on how graphic it is, and whether it really is an example that can be thoroughly written out without being too revealing. (So many bad pun opportunities with this reply.)

Note, not a mod or P5 member.

It made passing mention to "mature performers" in one. Another was mainly discussing interracial couplings on said films.

The biggest problem with the topic was the gushing and graphic examples that were so wide-spread before. Relative to now, anyway. It's not like the topic is entirely verboten. (Also not a mod or P5.)

Alrighty then. I just don't run into examples from that...particular branch of media much and had vague memories of the google incident so I figured I'd ask before I did anything.

I'd be more concerned that it might be a general example rather than citing a specific incident or work.

If memory serves, it was discussing a particular...actress and her work after leaving "The industry" to promote sex worker issues, her organization's failure, and her rejoining "the workforce" afterwards.

It doesn't sound relevant to our mission but I don't know specifically where or what the example is.

Yea from what you guys have said it's not a violation.

I've been wondering: What's P5's stance on series that got Bleached Underpants?

These can get articles for the Bleached versions if the normal one is not policy compliant, usually.

I see. If that's the case, I'd like to appeal for Eiyuu Senki. There was a P5 thread that decided for it to be cutlisted, but there is an all-ages version available for the PS 3 and the PS Vita (Source, check under 'Releases'). As one of the players of the all-ages version, I can vouch that the game does not constitute a violation of the current Wiki's content policy.

edited 21st Feb '15 1:54:35 AM by FlowingCotton

Thanks for letting us know. For those who might not remember: our concern was that the original version had H-scenes involving prepubescent characters. I know you've mentioned that it's an all-ages version, but for the sake of redundancy - are you saying that the all-ages version has removed not only the CGs for those scenes, but also the explicit sexualisation of said characters (which may involve both graphics and text)?

(Previous discussion thread here. Note also that it's planned for a release to Western markets, release date TBA.)

Obviously graphic C Gs are out (otherwise it won't make it into consoles in the first place). Comparing other screenshots showed that they toned down the Clothing Damage sprites when characters are defeated.

As for sexualisation, it's your standard anime fare, nothing too objectionable.

So, what's the final verdict? I figured unlocking the page would be for the best.

I think you still have to flag the page and formally request for a review, but it's been a while since I've gone over the policy. Also, you should probably wait a little longer for the reply.

Yeah, you've just a little bit of discussion. Very little bit. The whole P5 business is very slow nowadays. Don't rush.

And yes, you still should go to the redlink page and file for a content review on it.

Okay, I'm back. Sorry for the long absence, guys—college work pulled a dogpile on me.

Here's the current queue.◊ For the sake of a recap, what do we do need to know about all of these works (and trope)?

Ryona is fetishizing beating someone up, so far as I know. I don't see why we need it any more than any other porn tropes, which I think we've largely purged. Caligula has clean cuts if nothing else. If Eiyuu Senki has clean ports then oh wow that art looks awful. And did someone put reins on a succubus?

Anyway, if they have clean version then that pretty much means they pass isn't it? Despite the succubus. Since that wouldn't be in a clean port.

edited 3rd Mar '15 11:08:54 AM by Arha

The clean versions of Eiyuu Senki are apparently westward bound too, IGN has TBA listings for the PS 3 and Vita versions. Gematsu link with shots.

edited 3rd Mar '15 11:05:28 AM by Memers

Noting here that The Carp On The Chopping Block Jumps Twice goes under the title Sojou no Koi wa Nido Haneru. And checking up several comments on forums regarding that manga, they all talk about the romance and little about intercourse, so I suspect it's a romance manga with some sexuality thrown in.

I read that as, "The Crap On The Chopping Block Jumps Twice". It just seemed appropriate for P5.

I would think that all-ages releases should pass. But for Eiyuu Senki, given the difference between our guidelines and Japanese standards, there may be content left over that still wouldn't pass, especially where paedobait is concerned. (Note that the release info on the vndb page lists the censored PS 3 / Vita release as "17+".) Hence my questions for clarification.

...and you can't automatically assume that "succubus = ban". Capcom would be screwed. *coughMorrigancough*

edited 3rd Mar '15 3:56:30 PM by Pyrite

Oh, I know it's not against the rules. I just think it's ridiculous. And apparently the succubus is Alexander the Great. Whee.

Ports to the PS3 and whatnot definitely remove all sex cgs and usually sex scenes entirely unless they're somehow actually necessary for the plot, such as involving pregnancy. Even so, I think they generally have a fade to black at those points. As for risque but not entirely sexual cgs, they generally stick more clothing onto the characters.