Welcome to the Content Violations Discussion forum, where we discuss whether a work violates The Content Policy.
Remember that the forum rules apply here
, plus the following:
- You don't PM moderators about stuff pertaining to the policies, except for thread reasons;
- We tolerate links to scanlation sites unlike in the rest of the site due to its purpose, although it's preferred to remove them when they have done their jobs;
- The forum is not a soapbox for your own views on the policy or on morality. Please leave them at the door.
Violations of these rules can result in a ban from the subforum, or from the entire forum.
Otherwise:
Also, keep in mind that there are works that we don't want flagged without a really good reason as they are not likely in violation of policy:
- Is a film rated below "R" for U.S. distribution.
- Is a show that can be aired on prime time television.
- Is a video game that is rated below "M" by the ESRB.
- Is a written work that is sold in major bookstores without an "adult" or "mature" label.
- Is an anime/manga/etc. that is approved for U.S. import as a non-adult work.
- Is read/shown/taught in high school or below.
- Is in another format and meets equivalent criteria.
What we're looking for:
- Pure porn, or porn with an Excuse Plot only,
- Anything that has explicit underage sex,
- Implied sex of preteens or younger, and
- Fanservice intended to cater to pedophiles (lolicon and shotacon fanservice can count).
A couple of guidelines so the procedure can move smoothly:
- Do not list whole indexes or works just because they are on a certain index or have lolicon, H-Game or shotacon on their trope list.
- Do not list works you know nothing about without at least reading the trope page.
- Do not list works that you know are G-rated but you find creepy.
- If it's paedophile-pandering approximately how old are the characters involved? What happens? Is it graphic? Is it merely implied?
- List what objectionable content there is, and how much of the work consists of that.
- If it's entirely sex, say so. People have different ideas of what porn is. We all have the same idea of what a work being entirely sex scenes is.
- If you're not sure about a work, say so, or ask someone who does know that work. But don't make blanket accusations. Post here: "I don't know about this work, but the page says X".
- Google and Wikipedia are your friendsnote . Do a little digging on works you aren't sure about.
Also, in the case of H Games, there is this questioning to fill up:
- When are the sex scenes located?
- Are they spread out over the game?
- How much gameplay is there between sex scenes?
- Are they only at the endings?
- How hard do you have to work to get an ending?
- Are they in every ending? Every good ending?
- Are the sex scenes optional via a choice in the menu?
- Would the story make sense without them with minimal or no rewriting?
- Are the scenes made up of stills, or are they animated?
- How explicit are the sex scenes?
- This isn't a headcount. Your opinion is only considered if it explains in at least some detail how you came to the conclusion that the work is/isn't porn/paedopandering.
- When a moderator determines that the discussion has yielded a consensus, they can enact its conclusion/ask a moderator to enact the conclusion.
- The discussion is only about whether the work qualifies as porn or as paedopandering. We don't assess anything else in this process.
.
Q: Why is this happening?
A: Concerning the porn, it tends to attract creepy edits that have brought us into issues with the adservers while not significantly contributing to our core purpose - tropology. Concerning paedophilia-pandering, such works are just plain creepy to have pages about.
Q: What can I do to help clean the site?
A: You can flag content as unsuitable using the flag tool, which is located in the Tools menu to the right of each article, keeping the criteria in mind. Also, you can help enforce No Lewdness, No Prudishness across the wiki, possibly though cleaning pages listed in this Long Term Projects thread.
Q. This episodic work isn't finished yet. Shouldn't we wait for the ending before discussing it?
A. No. If released instalments may violate the content policy, we want to take action as soon as that's established — we don't need to wait for the ending. We can always revisit a decision to cut or keep once the work is over, but that point might still be years or decades away.
Q: This work is not actually/primarily pornographic. Why was it cut?
A: This could be for a number of different reasons. If the work was deemed to be paedopandering, for example, it will be cut whether or not it's actually sexually explicit. Being pro-paedophilia or pandering to paedophiles is bad enough, even if the work is nominally anti-paedophilia. Of course, it's possible that there was a mistake and then you should appeal it - please check the reasons first, however.
Q: This work is being/has been cut, but it is not a violation of the Content Policy. How do I make an appeal?
A: Flag the work page using the button in the sidebar and state your reasons for restoration.
Q: This work is pretty much pure porn, but it's really good porn. Can an exception be made?
A: Nope, sorry. If it's mainly porn, it goes.
Q: Why would you cut this? In [culture x], it is totally acceptable.
A: The vast majority of our readers come from the Americas or Western Europe, so we will be adhering to what could broadly be termed "Western" standards. This means we will not be permitting works which sexualize 12 year olds, and nor will we be demanding that every picture of a woman on the site must wear a burqa.
Q: How can you possibly claim to know authorial intent? (Roland Barthes is my co-pilot.)
A: It is not important what the authorial intent was, only the outcome.
Q: Wikipedia have articles on all kinds of awful stuff. Why can't we do the same?
A: Wikipedia is a strictly academic site. They have to cite sources and a "no censorship rule". They also do not aim to be Family Friendly, and are not reliant upon third party ads for funding. Conversely, one of our stated aims is to celebrate fiction, and our generally light, non-negative tone is a reflection of this, which has led to much more gushing about inappropiate content.
Q: So should I take every article here as an endorsement of whatever it describes?
A: No, of course not. We have pages on Greedy Jew, Adolf Hitler and Mein Kampf after all. However, if we choose to focus our attention on schoolgirls' thighs or porn, it does reflect very poorly on us. Fan Fic Recommendations are a slightly different issue. If a work is recommended there, this should be taken as an endorsement by the troper who wrote it.
Q: Are we allowed to make forum threads about works processed by the Content Violation Discussions forum?
A: If it was voted "clean and keep", a forum thread is relatively safe as long as it is restricted to talking about the clean parts. Anything with a stronger judgement is discouraged on the forums.
Q: Where can I find decisions regarding a work?
A: They are linked from the discussion page. Sometimes the old list of content reviews or the thread list in this forum can help as well.
Q: I still have some questions/concerns.
A: We will be happy to answer them. There is a thread for this.
- Guro: Violence played for titillation. (contrast Gorn)
- 5P or P5: The panel that administered the policy prior to the review system being overhauled in 2022. See 5P.
- P(a)edoshit: Older term for "P(a)edopandering", deprecated for being inflammatory.
- Porn: A work mostly concerned with sexual arousal. Having NSFW or explicit scenes doesn't automatically make a work porn — it's when showcasing explicit scenes is the entire point of the work.
Also, questions about the policy can be asked here. They will be added to this thread's FAQ section once answered.
Edited by Mrph1 on May 5th 2024 at 6:00:30 PM
^Usually, you go to Page Restoration Petitions for that.
That said, I recall that it was cut for being an useless breast tropes directory by the admin.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
TV Tropes' Sonic Wiki Curator
To be honest, I don't know why it was cut, either. None of the tropes in it were inherently pornographic...
Experience has taught me to investigate anything that glows.
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Well, maybe a couple of the newly-added ones were at least nearly-porn-exclusive, but by and large the index was not that objectionable as a breasts-specific subindex of Anatomy Tropes.
And did he define what he meant by "useless"?
edited 8th Oct '12 11:02:27 AM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
It was cut because "Let's gather all this breast obsessed tropes in one place! No thanks."
In short, it's unnecessary.
"If you aren't him, then you apparently got your brain from the same discount retailer, so..." - Fighteer
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
... Okay, I guess we should've instead made a non-gender-specific Chest Tropes index instead. Would there be any objections if we simply moved the tropes to Anatomy Tropes as a sublist (akin to Bigger Is Better's sublists)?
edited 8th Oct '12 11:05:07 AM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
TV Tropes' Sonic Wiki Curator
In short, it's unnecessary.
Oh, if that's the case... eh, it should probably stay cut, then.
Experience has taught me to investigate anything that glows.
There is already such a discussion. Wait a mo.
[1]
edited 8th Oct '12 11:06:59 AM by SeptimusHeap
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
Gah, ninja-edited my previous post.
@Septimus: Said discussion was locked for no apparent reason.
edited 8th Oct '12 11:06:51 AM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
Because it was done, I remember.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
If that's true, then they could've at least mentioned that in the thread. And did they somehow miss adding Buxom Is Better to Anatomy Tropes?
PS: I don't get how an index about breasts-related tropes is somehow unspeakably worse than an index about butts-related tropes or an index about nudity-related tropes.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
Something strange...
@350: Yep, that's what I was looking for.
"So... the time has come for you to meet your demise..."
Until further notice
No offence intended, lu, but that description doesn't reflect the nature of the index correctly. As body parts with a bearing on personal appearance, breasts are referenced in mainstream media quite extensively, and not necessarily in a lewd / pornographic manner, even if some sexual undertones are inevitably present in the majority. If we're worried about creepy edits, the focus should be on maintaining the pages on the index, and not the index itself, which is neutral by design. (It's just a descriptive paragraph and a list.)
I agree that it's "unnecessary" in the same way that sub-indexes for specific body parts are "unnecessary". Actually, I'd argue for treating them the same way as any other body part, as I'm not entirely convinced that having an index on breasts crosses the line into "pervert bait"...
...with the following caveat: I'm going to assume that it's because the sexual connotations associated with references to breasts seems to be more common than those associated with the other two (it's easier to find comedic non-sexual references to butts and nudity than breasts, for example). (On that note, though, I'm also going to assume that that's why Gag Penis isn't even on the Anatomy Tropes page while Gag Boobs and the other breast-related tropes keep their places there, at least.)
edited 9th Oct '12 5:00:29 AM by Pyrite
Not a substitute for a formal medical consultation.
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
The addition of Gag Boobs to Anatomy Tropes is actually a recent thing, prompted by the deletion of Keep Abreast Of This Index. For that matter, Anatomy Tropes is itself quite young — not even a year old, IIRC; I should know, since I'm its creator.
edited 9th Oct '12 4:50:39 AM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
Until further notice
I noticed. Actually, I'm not sure if there's been specific discussion on what belongs there and what doesn't. The YKTTW doesn't really provide much useful information. (For example, why Nudity Tropes are a sub-index on the page, when they don't deal with specific body parts so much as appearance as a whole - but that might be more suited for TRS.)
edited 9th Oct '12 4:58:29 AM by Pyrite
Not a substitute for a formal medical consultation.
I still don't really understand what's the problem of stating facts and tropes of works here like Kiss X Sis (tv series)? I don't really get the "what's the problem?"
From what I understood, there's the problem of having pedophiles in this site because they can edit works to make 'em look pedophile even if they were never thought to be like that.
The system already has such feature. There's the possibility to lock and prevent edits.
What I think: If the page already has too much paedopandering then we should lock and hide it from the general public until it is cleaned. When it is cleaned, the page is then opened for the public as read-only just like many other pages are currently.
Why can't that (what's in the previous paragraph) be applied to tv tropes?
Please read the second paragraph of the Content Policy.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
Why were Legal Jailbait's examples cut entirely? Lu 127 had time and again affirmed that they had been cleaned up thoroughly whenever the issue was brought up in the past.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
*checks history*
Eddie, "No examples of this paedopandering, please."
My bet is that he random walked onto the page =/
edited 23rd Oct '12 8:16:38 AM by Adannor
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
Any hope that raising up the issue on the Restoration Petitions thread would actually be looked at and/or not insta-vetoed?
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
Hi
It's dicey, but I'd say go for it; if we've got at least one mod that can vouch for their being clean, and the P5 can do the same upon examination, that's better than nothing.
edited 23rd Oct '12 9:38:52 AM by Willbyr
The Demon Slayer
At least Fast Eddie ended up expanding on the description a bit before doing the sectionectomy, which I rather like. A lot of those examples were rather iffy anyway — I highly doubt Chibi-Usa was meant to pander to the creepers, to give just one example from the former list.
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
Civilian Chibi-Usa? Most probably not. But Sailor Chibi Moon, complete with Fanservicey Transformation Sequence? I would say yes.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
Mm, regardless of specific examples, I think that "unageing being in a body of a child" is a valid and exampable trope which can be done without any sort of fancervice and pedo implications... However, the current name "Legal Jailbait" may be carrying those implications and that set him off.
For example of validity...
- Mimi of Mnemosyne looks like a child but is really much older thanks to her immortality.
She's not presented in any fanservicey way, IIRC, however her looking like a child and drinking vodka like water is a character trait that I believe should be tropable.
- Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha has Vita, a Ridiculously Human Program who has the body of an eight-year old despite being a few centuries old. Her appearance is a bit of a sore spot for her and she gets annoyed whenever someone refers to her as a kid. This isn't helped at all by the fact that her "sisters", who are roughly the same age, both have permanent large-breasted 20-something bodies. There's also the combat Cyborg Cinque, who happens to be one of the oldest members of the Numbers despite having the body of a child.
Again, not presented as fanservice.
Or on the other hand, that
- Shizuku the Mizuchi of Omamori Himari. Her exact age isn't specified, but she is at least 100 years old and looks about ten, gets just as many NSFW fanservice shots as the more mature-looking girls, and has spent most of the series blatantly and obviously trying to get the teenage male lead into bed.
may be passe.
The Demon Slayer
@Marq: Considering Sailor Moon was primarily marketed toward the shoujo demographic, I'm still inclined to disagree. There is something to be said about the Periphery Demographic that show drew, and I'm willing to bet there were a few creepers among that crowd who were attracted to the Token Mini-Moe of the main cast. I doubt that was Takeuchi's intention when she was designing the character though.
edited 23rd Oct '12 10:33:38 AM by TwoGunAngel
<looks back at the last page or so of discussion> ... Would this be a bad time and wrong place to ask just why Keep Abreast Of This Index was cut with no warning around this June?
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.