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

Alright. P5? I personally think we should unlock pages that were restored after rogue cuts.

edited 7th Jun '12 9:06:47 PM by Ramidel

Oh, goodie. Thank you!

By the stopped clock principle, even a rogue cut by an outright troll will occasionally be right.

Sigh. Back to work.

Re: Papa No Iukoto O Kikinasai: Sorairo No Hibiki

Looks like only 2 chapters are available. This one revolves more around Sora and the choir club, it seems.

Chapter 1: Clean apart from one page in which four members of the choir club (all middle school age, none of which include Sora) trip and...well, guess. Inclined to call that more comedic than fanservice, but still fanservice. Note that in this particular spinoff, Sora is explicitly 12.

Chapter 2: One token panty shot, otherwise clean

Pro:

• Almost entirely clean, in fact the cleanest of the three manga so far
• Shonen demographic, placing the fanservice close to age group of intended demographic

Con:

• Key word there is almost: a token panty shot each chapter.

Yeah, nothing to worry about here, this one's on the same level as Dragon Crisis in terms of content.

edited 7th Jun '12 9:26:25 PM by tdgoodrich1

@Hershele: Yeah, but that doesn't mean we should leave 'em locked by default unless a 5Per has a specific issue with any such page.

Otherwise, put them on the flagging tool.

@Ramidel: Ah. Sorry, after reading some of the views people have of the series that seem to ignore most of what actually happens... it's kind of got me on edge.

edited 7th Jun '12 9:42:52 PM by Morganite

Re: Papa No Iukoto O Kikinasai: Usagi no Mark

Only one chapter available.

In two words: Entirely clean.

Not surprising given this one's (a)shoujo and (b)about a 3 year old girl, her classmates, and her teacher. It's more "Awwww...look at the cute kids" than anything else.

Pro:

• Clean
• No fanservice
• Uh... it's clean?

Con:

• So much fluffiness...

I need to watch some Black Lagoon or Hellsing or something to get that out of my system.

edited 7th Jun '12 9:47:25 PM by tdgoodrich1

Should the blocked out pages still be appearing in the random list? Its rather frustrating to get the unwanted topic banner that often.

Re: Restored pages. I think it's been long enough that we don't have to worry too much about trolls jumping on them. If we're wrong, we can always lock them again.

Well that was satisfying. I just watched every usage of the F-word in Black Lagoon. All 260 of them.

Back on subject though.

Re: Papa No Iukoto O Kikinasai: Miu-Sama Iu Toori

Only 3 chapters available.

The scanlation group helpfully included a breakdown of Papakiki and all of its spinoffs. While helpful, I can't link it here, regrettably. Gives the scanlation group's breakdown of the material, including content warnings.

As for the actual manga:

Chapter 1 and 2 look clean. About as objectionable as it gets is the playboy (not remotely seriously) flirting with Miu. Amusingly, a little ways in, Yuuta's sister gets all of them to cosplay. Nothing objectionable in 3, either.

In case you were curious about the cosplay

Pro:

• Shoujo demographic
• Clean with regards to fanservice
• When in doubt, see above

Con:

• Out of obligation to put something here: The art style is different from the other manga.

Think I will knock out the last spinoff tomorrow.

ATTN: @P5: PM me if you want that breakdown I mentioned.

edited 7th Jun '12 10:53:23 PM by tdgoodrich1

The picture in Clingy Jealous Girl it's from Izumo 2: Gakuen Kyousoukyoku (not sure if it's a visual novel or something else entirely), a work without an article. If anyone knows about it, is the work safe to pothole as a red link or it breaks the content rules?

PD: I do know we are not to cut pictures just for their source, I'm just wondering if the work should be potholed or be given a warning to not create an article for it.

It has no article not because we cut it but because no one ever made one for it. So far as I know, anyway.

I know, that's why I asked if it was safe to pothole and that way encourage someone to make an article for it.

edited 8th Jun '12 5:42:23 AM by Elbruno

It's fine to make the redlink; hopefully it will spur someone to make the page.

This wiki is so amusing!

Re: Papa No Iukoto O Kikinasai: Takanashi no Hidamari

Chapter 1:

Revolves around the voice actress neighbor. Unlike the previous seinen spin-off, this one appears to shy away from full-on nippleage. It's also a bit tamer with regards to sheer amount of fanservice. No sexualization of the sisters is present.

Chapter 2:

Revolves around the landlady. Tamer than previous chapter, with only a couple of panels that focus on her chest. About as bad as it gets is an innocent bath scene in which the two older sisters get modesty towels and Hina gets covered in a mass of suds larger than she is. Still no sexualization of the sisters. Not a fan of the art direction in this chapter, not that that is relevant.

Chapter 3:

This one already looks more explicit one page in. The bottom panel has the sisters' undies knocked off their porch while drying. This one apparently revolves around one of the other neighbors not previously seen. She gets a straightforward shower scene, this time without Barbie Doll Anatomy.

Pro:

• No fanservice of the sisters
• At worst fanservicey

Con

• Inconsistent levels of fanservice due to each chapter being done by different artists

Honestly, if these three chapters are indicative, the other seinen spinoff is considerably more explicit. Verdict to follow.

Re: Papakiki and all its spinoffs

Verdict: Keep, clean if necessary

Pro:

• Never pornographic
• Both shoujo spinoffs entirely clean, shonen spinoff mostly clean
• Fanservice in seinen spinoffs is restricted to older characters
• Fanservice in main (shonen) adaptation of LNs is of characters close in age to target demographic (or older)

Con:

• Problematic material still present in both anime and main shonen manga

edited 8th Jun '12 8:48:40 AM by tdgoodrich1

Flagged Sex Ward. Somehow, it survived the initial purge, although it was on the Hentai index.

Sex Ward was already flagged, if I'm not mistaken, and it's on the list of resolved pages with three devilheads. Just waiting for the cut now.

edited 8th Jun '12 9:42:36 AM by TwoGunAngel

It was, and just needs a disposition.

EDIT: Just checked the queue, and it looks like someone trying to page-type The Last Of Us accidentally reported it for content violations. The page suggests a not-yet-released survival horror game, which is why I assume a mistake.

edited 8th Jun '12 11:10:35 AM by LargoQuagmire

Or a Nightmare Fetishist to whom that sort of thing is porn

Some folks on special efforts are concerned about Anita Blake - there might be a shotacon scene in it and of course, there's the magic vagina. Anyone who loves this series have any ideas?

I believe Shima has already called that one as being exempt from cutting. It's a mainstream novel series that didn't start out porn-y, became porn-y, and has been moving away from its porniness. It can probably be cleaned, but things like that should be being cleaned anyway.

I think the person who flagged The Last of Us assumed it was pedophilic because the main Girl is much younger then the main character. Naturally, I seriously doubt that it will be due to it being on a console, and what is likely totally lack of sexual/adult content because of it.

edited 8th Jun '12 4:32:33 PM by Roraborialis

Hey, should we separate this thread into to parts: A *New* About Content Violations (about the actual content violations,) and a General Flagged Works thread (For discussing and reviewing flagged works?) Currently we have people discussing both here, and having both in the same thread clutters it up slightly, causing minor confusion.

People discussing the actual policies are causing problems for people who want to review works that have been flagged, people who are reviewing works that have been flagged are cluttering out people trying to have discussions. Both groups belong here, and both groups serve a purpose, but I can imagine that I am not the only person who is frustrated here when you come to this thread to talk about one thing, to find the people in the thread are currently in the mood for the other. If anything, the people linking important details will have an easier time this way.

Edit: Whoops, Umm, I saw the checkmark next to the subject and thought I hadn't posted last. Sorry for the double post.

edited 8th Jun '12 7:59:33 PM by Roraborialis