This thread is for cleaning up pages that violate the No Lewdness, No Prudishness policy.
Do not use this thread for reporting pages that need to be cut for violating The Content Policy. Report pages that appear too lewd or gushy to have on the wiki using the "Report Page" button on the sidebar, with the checkbox saying "The page may violate the Content Policy" checked. That will create a thread on the Content Violation Discussions subforum
. The thread will be opened by a mod if the report is valid, and if it's deemed necessary, the page will be cleaned according to the Content Policy. (The list of pages that were deemed problematic can be found on The Content Policy's page.)
No Lewdness:
"Lewdness" is more than just being about something sexual or potentially sexual. Here are some signs of lewd writing:
- Personal opinions on hotness. Examples should stand on their own without the introduction of YMMV material. Adding your own thoughts and feelings on an example is an opinion, same as calling an example good or bad. Don't do it. Don't try and extend your feelings to a larger group of fans either, e.g. "...and fangirls everywhere rejoiced". You're not fooling anyone.
- Overly detailed examples. The example doesn't need to be an exact sensory account of the event. Too much of that and you end up sounding like you're writing porn. When in doubt, drop a few adjectives.
- Unrelated fanservice mentions. If the hot bits aren't related to the example, they don't belong in the example.
- Pornographic writing. If you're writing porn, it should be somewhere other than the wiki. Keep it Family Friendly.
- Titillation links. Tell, don't show. We don't need screen shots to illustrate NSFW fanservice. If a reader is really curious, they can go look it up on Google. (See also Weblinks Are Not Examples.)
- Pedo gushing. We don't need to describe children sexually. This should be cut immediately. We're not interested in hosting pedophilia fantasies. Period. If a work contains children having sex, even if portrayed negatively, report it as a potential violation of The Content Policy using the "Report Page" button◊ in the sidebar.
- Talking about actors instead of characters. An actor is not the character they play. When you're writing an example about a work, refer to the character, not the actor. This applies to non-sexual references, but too often it's tropers writing about how they find certain actors hot. That doesn't fit in character examples.
- Thinking a page with a Not Safe for Work subject is license to be lewd. Even when we discuss porn, we are about just stating the facts.
- Fanfic Recs for underage sex. We will not host any recommendation for fics that have explicit sex involving people apparently or actually younger than 16. Period. We categorically do not recommend fics with sex in which at least one participant:
- This applies even if all parties are underage.
No Prudishness:
- Don't cutlist or gut pages just because they're about sexual topics. Sex exists. It's used in media a lot. You'll just need to cope with that fact. Relationships, fanservice, and sexual activity all fall into their own tropes as a result.
- Don't be a Bluenose Bowdlerizer. We're not looking to censor all sex off the wiki. If the sex and sexuality is an honest part of the work and relevant to the example, it belongs there.
- The wiki is not rated G. We aren't sanitizing the wiki for small children. Sex and sexuality are part of media and we aren't going to ignore them. This wiki is Family Friendly, not Unsupervised Small Child Friendly. This isn't an excuse to make work pages dirtier than the work itself, as the above No Lewdness section makes clear, but neither is it an excuse to make those pages cleaner than the work itself.
For further explanations, please read this thread
Edited by GastonRabbit on Jan 6th 2024 at 3:54:01 AM
Through the 5P policy thread.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Pronounced YAK-you-luss
Parent Service is coming across as pretty greasy at the moment, and may need a walk through the Trope Repair Shop if we want to turn it into something other than who/what tropers find sexy in kids' shows.
What's precedent ever done for us?
Yes, we should remove Evil Is Sexy from Orphan. We are not calling small children sexy.
edited 3rd Jan '16 8:40:24 PM by shimaspawn
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
Parent Service has enough invocations, discussions, lampshadings, and Word of God examples to support a page, but it does need a good scrubbing.
So does this mean Lolita now violates the Content Policy?
The Unknown
Lolita is exempt due to being academically significant and demonizing pedophilia.
edited 16th Feb '16 6:48:43 AM by Karxrida
If a tree falls in the forest and nobody remembers it, who else will you have ice cream with?
Dread Sorcerer of Auchtermuchty
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
No. That was decided years ago, when Fast Eddie was in charge.
Sorcerer in training
Fast Eddie had to be hit over the head with a sledgehammer regarding Lolita 
, but after that it was voted to stay. Paraphrasing one person arguing for it to be kept, the main character's attempts to justify his behavior just make him look more and more terrible. That's why it's not going anywhere.
Red Like Santa
What about Kodomo no Jikan?
Now known as Cyber Controller
It's not a matter of Admin Fiat so much that anybody who read it can tell it violates the Content Policy to a horrid degree. The story makes an attempt to condemn pedophilia, but clearly supports it by the story's design as well.
Admin Fiat just happened to happen, but there's no need to reevaluate it when it blatantly would never make it.
Hi
Bingo. There's so much loli fanservice that it completely undermines the overall intent of the story. It didn't help that the page at one point was loaded with scanlation links pointing to said fanservice and other not-so-savory stuff. Attempts were made to clean the page up and get rid of any inherent creepiness to its tone but it was deemed unsalvageable.
The only way I could see it and some other cut works brought back would be as example-less stub pages, much like what was agreed upon with F.A.T.A.L..
edited 17th Feb '16 10:31:26 AM by Willbyr
edited 2nd Sep '17 1:09:36 PM by YasminPerry
Best Known for the Fanservice is very pervy. I'd clean it up, but most of the examples make me go ewww.
This is probably old news, but has Valkyrie Drive: Mermaid been looked at? It's apparently about lesbians who gain superpowers by having sex with each other, and the sex is at least explicit enough to frequently show bare breasts (unsure about genitals though).
edited 13th Jun '16 8:33:31 PM by HamburgerTime
No genitals in that show.
Kukuku
Valkyrie Drive does go a bit further than your typical ecchi (direct fetish-pandering, on-screen sex, etc) but as previously mentioned:
1. Never shows genitals
2. Aired on public Japanese television (albeit censored)
3. Everyone involved in sexual activity is 16 or older.
However, I'd be for a P5 investigation if it makes others feel more comfortable...except for the fact that we don't have much of a P5 right now. There was a selection process thing announced a few weeks ago, I dunno how that's going...
edited 16th Jun '16 2:19:37 PM by Assassin-sensei
"A buddy is a buddy no matter how nutty."
Apparition in the Woods
Lover and Beloved seriously needs a good hard look, example-wise, but I'm not sure what's best cut and where. I obviously don't think that we should torch the examples section, or even necessarily cut most of the examples assuming that they fit, but some of those descriptions are way out of line,
I'll hide your name inside a word and paint your eyes with false perception.
Shocking Gun!
On Valkyrie Drive: Mermaid, one of characters is actually 15 years old (the dark-skinned one from the page image), but everyone else in the series is over 16 (I believe). There is a supplementary material what gives a Fridge Horror of sexual activities being done to a 9+ year old, but nothing of that kind is actually told in the side story, and even after a five year time skip, nothing explicit is told in it.
edited 21st Jul '16 7:04:58 AM by TPPR10
Continue the bloodline, Fujimaru!
The Rock Cocks has floated up in the queue. While the comic doesn't seem to be porn enough to just nuke it without P5, some of the stuff on the pages is over the line
- First off, tumblr link. It only has cropped links to the actual pages, but also has posts of outright sexually explicit fanart.
- Second, page illustrations. A bunch on the character page have nudity, ranging from bare asses to outright a cock peeking out.
Hi
The NSFW character pics and Tumblr link need to be snipped. As for the comic itself, what little I've seen of it gives me a Plot With Porn impression...Oglaf levels of explicitness, for sure.
edited 10th Sep '16 8:35:49 AM by Willbyr
Ok, snipped the direct site links. I left the link to patreon as that frontpage is SFW and links to the actual comic, so it kinda works as a gate check.
Pics cut: a lot of nudity here
◊, naked bum there
◊ and there
◊
edited 10th Sep '16 9:01:01 AM by Adannor
Ok a bit of a question - does wicks cleanup for P5 cuts go here or in some of the wick cleaning threads.
Anyway, I'll drop off the Related pages for Squad Broken and ryona genre (damn that's a lot of inbounds) as a memo to look through.
edited 7th Dec '16 11:54:08 PM by Adannor
Wick cleanup is not usually within the scope of 5P work at all, seeing as we still allow examples for 5P-cut works.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Yes, but there's still the rule that the examples themselves must be not about the sex parts.
And ryona is a genre. That's a bit of it's own deal - do we need that pointing out from works in which a female gets some battle damage?
It's been a while since I've paid any attention to this, so I need a reminder: how does someone bring something to the attention of the P5, if we're talking about a proposal rather than an existing page?