TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

Content Policy Discussion

Go To

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:

    open/close all folders 

    What we want flagged and what we don't want flagged 
For starters, when flagging a work, please provide detailed reasons in the box that comes up upon flagging. Any flag issued without such arguments will be removed and a notice posted on the discussion page in question. Abusing the system can result in flagging/forum privileges being restricted or removed altogether.

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.
  • Pages still locked or cut as a result of The Second Google Incident are not going to be unlocked or restored. As of July 2024, the site owners have been very clear about this. Do not list them here, as we're not going to review them again.

    How to provide feedback 
First off, as mentioned above we request a reason either in the threads or in the work's discussion page preferably before flagging.
  1. If it's paedophile-pandering approximately how old are the characters involved? What happens? Is it graphic? Is it merely implied?
  2. List what objectionable content there is, and how much of the work consists of that.
  3. 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.
  4. 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".
  5. 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?

    How the forum operates 
Each work is discussed in a dedicated thread and decisions based on a thread consensus, with the following rules:
  • 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.

    Special rules for Fanfic Recommendations 
These rules are not enforced here; they are up to this thread.

    FAQ 

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. You mention that there will be no further reviews of work cut or locked after The Second Google Incident. What about the pages that have already been reviewed and unlocked or restored?
A. We're not overturning those previous decisions. However, if a restored/unlocked page causes problems again, it's very likely to be locked or cut, and it won't get a third chance if that happens.

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.

    Processing cut decisions 
If there is a decision to completely cut a work from the wiki, a moderator will take the following steps:
  1. Modpost in the thread to acknowledge the decision
  2. Lock all applicable pages and subpages
  3. Put an explanatory notice on the work page discussion pages, including a link to the relevant CVD thread.
  4. Add the work to Administivia's Content Policy page list
  5. Check for reviews and delete and that exist
  6. Check for work-specific forum threads and lock any that exist. Threads that discuss multiple works may warrant a modpost to explain that this one has been removed from the wiki.
  7. Submit the pages to the cut list
  8. Cut the pages
  9. Lock the thread
    Glossary 
Warning: This documents the usage of the terms during the policy discussions, and might not accurately reflect the outside meanings of these terms:
  • 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.

    Further reading 
For issues not covered here, further explanation exist on these pages:

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 Jul 21st 2024 at 6:53:12 PM

Arha Since: Jan, 2010
#1301: May 30th 2014 at 2:13:32 AM

It actually used to be a page that had no real idea what it wanted to be iirc. But that's neither here nor there. ...And I think it was rewritten before the crackdown.

Pyrite Until further notice from Right. Beneath. You. Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Hiding
Until further notice
#1302: May 30th 2014 at 2:25:03 AM

It looks like it could use another rewrite, too, but that's more an issue of unclear writing rather than objectionable content. But if that's not an option (and assuming it's not cut), at the very least, the now-dead link to Shotacon should be removed.

edited 30th May '14 2:35:12 AM by Pyrite

Not a substitute for a formal medical consultation.
MarqFJA The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer from Deserts of the Middle East (Before Recorded History) Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
#1303: May 30th 2014 at 3:20:10 AM

Wait, why not repurpose Shotacon to be the current Lolicon article's opposite?

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
Pyrite Until further notice from Right. Beneath. You. Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Hiding
Until further notice
#1304: May 30th 2014 at 5:02:08 AM

Because we don't really need two articles which cover (mostly) the same thing.

The only rationale I can think of to keep the Lolicon entry, even, is because it's played straight in some mainstream Japanese works; works that involve being mistaken for a lolicon can be put under Mistaken for Pedophile. In which case, the most you'd need (if at all) would be a description of the character trait, any nuances in its portrayal that make it different from Western media, possibly the origins of the term, and a mention that its Distaff Counterpart is Shotacon. The current page has most of this information (except background): it's just that the writing feels unwieldy and could be trimmed a little.

edited 30th May '14 7:04:51 AM by Pyrite

Not a substitute for a formal medical consultation.
Arha Since: Jan, 2010
#1305: May 30th 2014 at 5:10:35 AM

I don't see what's wrong with having an article for pedophiles. It's already locked.

Pyrite Until further notice from Right. Beneath. You. Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Hiding
Until further notice
#1306: May 30th 2014 at 5:13:59 AM

Eh, what I meant was that we don't really need a separate article for Shotacon. Have edited my previous post to clarify.

edited 30th May '14 5:21:22 AM by Pyrite

Not a substitute for a formal medical consultation.
MarqFJA The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer from Deserts of the Middle East (Before Recorded History) Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
#1307: May 30th 2014 at 5:22:08 AM

The only rationale I can think of to keep the Lolicon entry, even, is because of its played straight in mainstream Japanese works; works that involve being mistaken for a lolicon can be put under Mistaken for Pedophile. In which case, the most you'd need (if at all) would be a description of the character trait, any nuances in its portrayal that make it different from Western media, possibly the origins of the term, and a mention that its Distaff Counterpart is Shotacon. So there's no need for two articles which cover (mostly) the same thing.
Then make it a redirect to Lolicon to cover gender-inverted instances in Japanese works, then.

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
Pyrite Until further notice from Right. Beneath. You. Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: Hiding
Until further notice
#1308: May 30th 2014 at 5:24:06 AM

Which is reasonable and part of what I had in mind, but I'm not going to waste time on it if working on it is discouraged, and I don't know if anyone's going to be inclined to unlock it for cleanup either.

Have edited my previous post again, because I'm not making my points very well tonight.

EDIT: I had a look at the previous discussion thread, and you did discuss the merge / split issue the last time around (okay, you all did, I don't think I was paying attention to that at the time), although it never really got off the ground. Anyway, it's probably going to get cut sooner or later, so I don't really see a point in tweaking the description.

edited 30th May '14 9:04:21 AM by Pyrite

Not a substitute for a formal medical consultation.
konekootome the cat who wanders from In the middle of something for once Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: Californicating
the cat who wanders
#1309: May 30th 2014 at 6:36:25 PM

I was planning to make a page for the Tsubasa Chronicle fanfic Shatterheart but then I saw the No Lewdness, No Prudishness page and I want some clarification. The pairing is Kurogane and Syaoran, who in story are 27 and 21 but Syaoran has the appearance of a 15-16 year old, which is stated in story and the story has a few sex scenes with them. I want to know if it violates the rule or not because he borders on the no Older Than They Look Rule of No Lewdness. If he violates the rule I will not make the page and get rid of the Fan Fic Rec I made for it. If doesn't can I make the page?

I'm asking here because I was told on the Ask The Tropers forum this would be the best place to ask.

MarqFJA The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer from Deserts of the Middle East (Before Recorded History) Relationship Status: Anime is my true love
The Cosmopolitan Fictioneer
#1310: May 31st 2014 at 4:23:30 AM

... You don't need to post the same question on multiple threads in this subforum. The P5 thread is where the question should go, BTW.

edited 31st May '14 4:23:43 AM by MarqFJA

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.
BlackSunNocturne Since: Aug, 2013
#1311: Jun 2nd 2014 at 2:17:50 PM

Soo let me get this straight.... The Art of Bra Removal and Black Bra and Panties were deleted because the image was "too explicit"? Really? If that was the case, just remove the pictures then.

Also: Google's policies are incredibly asinine and hypocritical at best.

Arha Since: Jan, 2010
#1312: Jun 2nd 2014 at 2:19:43 PM

Complaining about Google will get you nowhere unless you feel like funding the site yourself.

BlackSunNocturne Since: Aug, 2013
#1313: Jun 2nd 2014 at 2:30:06 PM

You forget, this is the internet. People complain about things they can't change.

I'm just waiting for all of my favorite Visual Novels to be cut because they're classified as Eroges and have sex in them (Katawa Shoujo, Fate/stay night, Majikoi....) and the site is going down that road it would seem.

BestOf FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC! from Finland Since: Oct, 2010 Relationship Status: Falling within your bell curve
FABRICATI DIEM, PVNC!
#1314: Jun 2nd 2014 at 2:34:12 PM

We have no intention of cutting works that aren't porn. Well, as long as they comply with the other half of the Content Policy (which would be the thing about the sexualisation of minors). As long as it's clear that the work isn't primarily about explicit sex scenes it should be fine. We're not cutting anything just because it has a sex scene in it, as long as it is primarily something else.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.
Deadbeatloser22 from Disappeared by Space Magic (Great Old One) Relationship Status: Tsundere'ing
#1315: Jun 2nd 2014 at 2:37:31 PM

In fact I'm pretty sure Fate/Stay Night has been through the system and been cleared.

"Yup. That tasted purple."
SeptimusHeap from Switzerland (Edited uphill both ways) Relationship Status: Mu
#1316: Jun 2nd 2014 at 2:38:23 PM

It has been processed by the system and cleared, yes.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Adannor (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#1317: Jun 2nd 2014 at 2:40:01 PM

>I'm just waiting for all of my favorite Visual Novels to be cut because they're classified as Eroges and have sex in them (Katawa Shoujo, Fate/stay night, Majikoi....) and the site is going down that road it would seem.

FSN got a pass, KS probably would get too if it would get brought up. Haven't heard of the third, but after a look, it has a clean anime, so at most it would get a cleanup if the page would be too descriptive about the hentai parts.

Stop the doomsaying, please.

edited 2nd Jun '14 2:41:18 PM by Adannor

Baseplate Since: Apr, 2012
#1318: Jun 2nd 2014 at 2:57:38 PM

I'm just wondering, does Google only have an issue with the images? If so, we can re-upload those tropes without any picture examples, and tell on the main page to 'not post any picture examples, please!'

Or is the issue more deeper. Can a moderator clarify?

"We dream of better worlds, so that one day we may surpass them."
tdgoodrich1 R.I.P 2 My Youth from Atlanta Since: Aug, 2011 Relationship Status: Californicating
R.I.P 2 My Youth
#1319: Jun 2nd 2014 at 3:04:24 PM

Katawa Shoujo has already been passed with 3-0, verdict of "no action".

"Polite life will fill you full of cancer." - Iggy Pop "I've seen the future, brother, it is murder." -Leonard Cohen
BlackSunNocturne Since: Aug, 2013
#1320: Jun 2nd 2014 at 3:13:16 PM

>I'm just wondering, does Google only have an issue with the images? If so, we can re-upload those tropes without any picture examples, and tell on the main page to 'not post any picture examples, please!'

I'm in agreement with this, because it's seriously confusing the hell out of me.

Komodin TV Tropes' Sonic Wiki Curator from Windy Hill Zone Since: Jan, 2001 Relationship Status: I like big bots and I can not lie
TV Tropes' Sonic Wiki Curator
#1321: Jun 2nd 2014 at 3:25:15 PM

"I'm just waiting for all of my favorite Visual Novels to be cut because they're classified as Eroges and have sex in them (Katawa Shoujo, Fate/stay night, Majikoi....) and the site is going down that road it would seem.

We're not gonna cut works just because they have sex in them at all. The general point of the P5 is that the (currently) three of us are to cut works that have nothing but sex and/or have child(-like) characters in sexual situations for the purposes of titillation.

Experience has taught me to investigate anything that glows.
Arha Since: Jan, 2010
#1322: Jun 2nd 2014 at 3:35:16 PM

Nobody is going to cut something like Grisaia or FSN. One has clean adaptations, the other doesn't violate the policy. Most VN articles we still have would fall under one of those two.

Baseplate Since: Apr, 2012
#1323: Jun 2nd 2014 at 4:43:56 PM

[up][up] (not sure what the correct formatting is...)

Additionally, if we want to prevent an issue like this trope deletion, we can just remove all images that pertain to that trope if you deem it to be too risque.

Again, if it's a deeper conflict with our paymasters then I suppose we can't do much about it. I suppose we just need to be more clear with our communication. :/

"We dream of better worlds, so that one day we may surpass them."
Adannor (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#1324: Jun 2nd 2014 at 9:31:57 PM

Note that those bra tropes have been cut by Fast Eddie personally, not by P5, and he doesn't post in these threads oftem. You'll need to PM him directly if you want to talk about those cuts.

Kaizerreich Flat and proud of it Since: Oct, 2012 Relationship Status: Maxing my social links
#1325: Jun 3rd 2014 at 12:44:09 AM

Komodin: "We're not gonna cut works just because they have sex in them at all. The general point of the P5 is that the (currently) three of us are to cut works that have nothing but sex and/or have child(-like) characters in sexual situations for the purposes of titillation."

Does that include Kagetsu Tohya? Ren is a succubus that looks about 10 and she has (a lot of?) sex with Shiki who is canonically 17.

edited 3rd Jun '14 1:11:05 AM by Kaizerreich


Total posts: 3,955
Top