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
Soo I've run into this on Internalized Categorism
- In Slave Maker, the state religion is homophobic and also holds similar prejudice against bondage. Characters who engage in lesbian sex or bondage will lose morality, thus becoming Depraved Homosexuals or proof that Bondage Is Bad. However, in the case of lesbianism, this effect is clearly caused by internalized homophobia, since only those who believe in the homophobic state religion are affected: Characters who follow "the old gods" or "no gods" do not lose morality over same-sex sex acts. However, both religions disapprove of bondage - making it less obvious that the morality loss from bondage is also caused by Internalized Categorism.
- Worth noting that bondage is heavily tied to being a Pony girl. This apparently is allowed, even in public, with no shame on either the slave or the slaver. But a Pony girl is socially considered an animal, with no right to speak, refuse sex (in a setting where slaves can say "No") or wear anything but leather straps. Pony girls are used to pull carts, and there are official riding races. So bondage is shunned on "normal" slaves but mostly allowed for slaves degraded to labor animals.
And it kinda feels like it may going too indepth on the smutty side but I'm not sure, so I'd like some more opinions on whether to fix it up or toss entirely?
I’m going to pass the link embedded in the Fireball 20 XL example on Streisand Effect if there’s any Content-Policy-violating content due to the nature of the site and accusations. I don’t have time to do so on my own. (Or should we just remove the link because we’re not scandelmongers?)
Content Warning: My posts may involve my actions dealing with R-rated or Not Safe for Work content. Same for my edit history.Corruption by a Minor has this entry:
- Not surprisingly, many Lolicon and Shotacon hentai have a plot along these lines.
And while it's not explicit or anything...ew?
Ew or not, it's too general and should be cut on that basis.
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.Someone added this to Characters.Power Rangers Dino Fury:
There's got to be a more tasteful way to word that last part.
It's not that detailed, IMO. The grammar is more glaring to me than the lewdness.
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.
Maybe cut "sexy" or change to "revealing"?
"sexy outfits which shows off her legs and cleavage" — "shows" should be "show" cuz it's plural.
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.Found this entry in a character page for Power Rangers
- Rule 34: Granted, many of the Rangers could qualify for various reasons (Trini for She's a Man in Japan, the male Rangers for being Messrs. Fanservice or Chick Magnets, all the brainwashing), but Kimberly had a whole newsgroup dedicated to her. And like Austin St. John, Amy Jo Johnson was rumored to have starred in porn
I'm not very familiar with Power Rangers but I believe this entry should be cut due to violating lewdness policies. What do you guys think? Should this entry be cut?
I don't think Rule 34 is supposed to be used in trope lists... for good reason.
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.

Then we have complaining issues.
Edited by Delibirda on Jul 27th 2021 at 8:25:51 PM
"Listen up, Marina, because this is SUPER important. Whatever you do, don't eat th“ “DON'T EAT WHAT?! Your text box ran out of space!”