A suggestion for the deleted porn pages (not the content, the pages)

As the title implies, the point of this thread isn't about the content of the deleted pages. The Fetish Fuel Wiki has agreed to take on the content, so anyone interested should start dealing with it from that end of things. Personally, I'm still working on getting the cut pages themselves.

Rather, this is about what the page will look like on our end. Many people have expressed concerns with the giant "WE DO NOT WANT A PAGE ON THIS TOPIC" banner, which has repeatedly been described as "scary" or "insulting." My suggestion is to replace this with a simple locked stub saying something along the lines of "This topic has been deemed porn. The Fetish Fuel Wiki may have a page on it, but we do not, and we claim no responsibility for their page."

Obviously, we'd need to make a page for the Fetish Fuel Wiki. Maybe locked, with one link to their main page (which is SFW) and no other, detailing briefly how it came to be and what it's purpose is and all that.

Does that sound like a good idea to anyone else?

edited 16th Apr '12 12:46:27 PM by Discar

Best news I've heard all day.

Maybe we should re-purpose the current fetish page and turn it into the Fetish Fuel Wiki page?

I disagree. After the council deems a page un-restorable, then yes, that is a good idea.

Until then, they should say "This was cut temporarily so its content can be reviewed. It may or may not be restored later. Please have patience and don't delete links to this page."

Prefer that. The main problem with the current system is that it sounds very final, which is problematic for stuff that was cut on suspicion but isn't particularly objectionable.

That actually could work.

Edit: Damnit Lebrel, you beat me to it.

edited 16th Apr '12 12:53:02 PM by tdgoodrich1

Yes, we should wait until the dust settles and everything is sorted out. Everything else that is deemed unsuitable will then be moved.

I assume that they'll accept the porn without plot stuff, but what about stuff that was accused for being questionable for having loli?

edited 16th Apr '12 1:05:02 PM by encrypted12345

Whoops, sorry, yes, I definitely meant after the council has deemed something porn.

I didn't ask, but the responses I got were "It was originally decided that all sex-related pages purged from TVT would be moved here, so unless that has changed, I'd say go for it!" That implies to me that it's fine.

As a member of that site, I can say Midnight68 was banned for putting underage girl Panty Shot pictures everywhere and calling this place full of "moralf*gs". As long as whatever is less explicit than that, it should be okay.

edited 16th Apr '12 1:10:47 PM by emeriin

Most of the works that have been deleted have been deleted because they were porn, not pedo stuff. It would imagine it would fit in just fine on the fetish fuel site. That and some of the deleted tropes.

+1

At least for changing the big, whole-page warning into a explanatory and fitting version in regards to the overall wiki style, being less "shouty".

edited 16th Apr '12 1:24:16 PM by Lock

We're being oversensitive with the "Cut page banner is insulting" thing. If we start migrating cut pages over to the Fetish Fuel Wiki, then maybe it should be changed, but right now it's fine

While we're on the topic, where do I go to suggest some pages to be cut. Do I have that privilege?

You don't have it as for now. Too much mess on the Cut List have people done.

I do find the current banner offensive, frankly. And I think the setup for reporting questionable stuff is still being worked on, so I'd wait for that to be finalized. Neither of the existing threads are for reporting.

edited 16th Apr '12 2:05:21 PM by lebrel

It's too blunt even though it hasn't been decided if tvtropes really doesn't want the work or not.

edited 16th Apr '12 2:06:03 PM by encrypted12345

@11 Whether or not the banner is insulting, it invites widespread panic and hysteria that will only grow as more pages are cut and more people see the banners, and it will leave people thinking the cuts are all permanent, which is already an inaccurate rumor.

edited 16th Apr '12 2:06:47 PM by ArcadesSabboth

That's the main issue with it. Somebody who stumbles across something like the Lolita page is going to assume that it's permanently nuked when in actuality it's probably going to be restored. Something like "This page is under review" would be a lot better from a practical, avoiding panic standpoint.

I agree. The way the banner looks right now is bound to confuse people about the exact nature of a page's content, making many of them look a lot worse than they are. And slapping the same banner on the discussion pages just makes it worse.

edited 16th Apr '12 3:12:30 PM by Nightraid

@JT: I agree with that, though I don't see it as being that dismissive in the first place.

(the following is NOT directed at JT, but in general):

To be impolitic, it does sound like the standard Anime-fan whine about being judged for what they like.

To that, I say: don't make it personal, because it's not. We have decided that several classes of material are inappropriate for our site. Not because of you, not directed at you, and in fact not thinking about your feelings whatsoever, because this is not about whether you feel accepted or not for liking hentai or lolicon.

Heck, I like erotica. I like certain types of porn. I can still accept that given American society (where the servers are hosted, where our advertising dollars come from, and where most of our users come from), there's a degree that we essentially have to conform to societal rules about what's acceptable. We also have to deal with the fact that pages about the works we're excluding here frequently get problematic — either they end up with a very negative tone (which we're not generally about), an inappropriately positive and problem-ignoring tone (also not what we're about), or just an overall skeevy tone, which is also not what we're about.

edited 16th Apr '12 3:21:08 PM by Morven

This isn't about wether we are accepted for the things we like, this is about the way the banner is presented and that even the discussion pages are locked, preventing a discussion of how to improve a page so that it won't have to be cut.

Also, please don't tell you don't think the majority of the council will consist of people who will take one look at a page that might be considered pornographic or pedophilic and slash it. I've noticed that a lot of people seem to have developed a certain "nuke it from orbit" attitude to problems on this wiki. Hell, there's even been talk about cutting the forum completely.

I'm just worried that whoever ends up as part of the council will act too rashly and just start cutting pages that have been slapped with that banner without any real concideration of the actual content.

The job of the council will be to evaluate things fairly and reasonably, rather than snap-judgmentally. They may still consider something you like to be over the acceptable line for this site.

The council will be composed of tropers who have demonstrated the ability to handle issues with care and without bias, tropers who have shown an awareness of nuance and can be trusted not to just dismiss or save things on an impulse without investigation.

In the case of works the council finds to be unsuitable for the wiki to cover, presentation isn't the issue.

I agree that the banner could be changed. At the very least, the text could be shrunk to a more normal size; as it is now, it comes across as very aggressive and in-your-face, which I don't think is what we're going for. I also agree that's the message seems misleadingly final.

To be impolitic, it does sound like the standard Anime-fan whine about being judged for what they like.

This has jack all to do with anime. Many non-anime works have been cut. Lolita has nothing to do with anime, and it is one of the pages with the notice on it that is causing people concern.

And people are concerned for a good reason. The notice is blatantly misleading. Misleading our readers should never be a goal of our wiki.

A simple "This page has been suspending pending review for compliance with our content policy" would work and be far, far more accurate.

edited 16th Apr '12 4:56:16 PM by Catbert

And here I was thinking Lolita was cut because people were using Alternate Character Interpretation on a work about Pedophilia. Maybe that's just me.

As it stands, I really don't see the problem with the font and message on the page. Some here are accusing it of fear mongering, but it gets their attention and hopefully gets more people to pay attention to what is happening in the forums. Instead of talking about how this will drive everyone into a panic, you could inform them of what is actually going on instead of jumping to conclusions.

but it gets their attention and hopefully gets more people to pay attention to what is happening in the forums.

Except that it doesn't point people toward the forums.

Instead of talking about how this will drive everyone into a panic, you could inform them of what is actually going on instead of jumping to conclusions.

Except that it doesn't inform people of what is going on, but is actively misinforming people. It should not be the place of the common lay troper to have to actively correct misinformation put out by this website's owner.