Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 14:19, 10 May 2011

Misplaced Pages is not censored. Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to Misplaced Pages's content disclaimer regarding potentially objectionable content and options for not seeing an image.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Anime and manga Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime, manga, and related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anime and mangaWikipedia:WikiProject Anime and mangaTemplate:WikiProject Anime and mangaanime and manga Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Pornography High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pornography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of pornography-related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PornographyWikipedia:WikiProject PornographyTemplate:WikiProject PornographyPornography High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Sexology and sexuality Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4

This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

This Article Does Not Need a Photo

I think most people can put two and two together. Hentai is pornographic anime. The picture is not representative of Hentai.

Hentai is often very sadistic and the girls faces usually border between looking like they are in extreme pain or are extremely ashamed.

Since the pictures causes a lot of controversy why have a picture anyways? There is no drawing for the article on Yaoi. Just a picture of a yaoi section at a comics store. Why not do the same here? take a picture of the adult anime section of a video store in Japan town San Francisco? If anyone wants to see what Hentai looks like they just have to google it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.229.11.51 (talk) 12:45, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I completely disagree that hentai is often "very sadistic", because a lot of it isn't...I do agree that the current image isn't a good representation of hentai in the least, although I disagree that this article shouldn't have an image. I'd rather it have no image than the image it has, but my past attempt to replace it was a failure...The "artist" is just too proud of his/her unauthentic, uninspired work to allow it to be replaced or removed. However, I could talk with some Japanese artists about allowing their work to be displayed on the article when I have the time or search around for some photography of an anime shop selling hentai and ask the photographer to allow it to be used. rzrscm (talk) 01:22, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

The artist(s) would have to do more than allow the image(s) to be displayed in Misplaced Pages. You would have to get the artist(s) to license their work for free distribution with no commercial restrictions (such as CC-BY-SA) or release it to the public domain. Many artists balk at giving up royalties and/or control over how the images are used. -- Donald Albury 12:31, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Lol, hentai not sadistic? You obviously haven't seen 99% of the hentai out there. Not ecchi, hentai. Seen guro? Bukkake? Rape? These things, and worse, tend to be a mainstay of the most popular hentai out there. Defending anime by saying it's not all hentai is one thing, but defending hentai by saying a lot of it isn't "sadistic" is pretty misleading to the genre. But it might depend on your opinion of sadism. --198.150.224.3 (talk) 19:18, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

You're judging all hentai by one standard? Look, some hentai is sadistic, but not all of it. That's like saying that all porn (live action stuff with actual people) is rape or is otherwise violent. There's a lot of hentai that isn't considered to be violent or sadistic by even the most strict of standards. The sadistic stuff exists but it's not the majority of the genre. Believe it or not, that stuff isn't as big of a thing as you think it is. It gets noticed more because it tends to be more extreme, thus getting more attention, but for every violent or otherwise sadistic hentai (video, game, manga, or what have you) there's about 5-10 normal ones (consensual sex). Tokyogirl79 (talk) 13:10, 11 April 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79

So Japan is very liberal with sex-related topics. They're naturally going to have more BDSM among other kinky fetishes that obviously sells in the market (otherwise, there would be no reason why people see so much of it). Exaggerating with that 99% figure isn't gonna go anywhere. However, the connection between Hentai and BDSM and other kinky fetishes, is like the connection between apples and the color red. Nowhere on an apple does it say that it has to be red, since there are green apples out there. Green apples are still apples despite not being red. They just happen to go together from time to time, so something being both pornographic and in a Japanese art style, doesn't imply anything kinky. There's no implication written anywhere. If for some reason we need a pornographic image to show what hentai is, the current image is just fine, though I'm not a person who's too fond of asburdly large breasts. 24.16.204.246 (talk) 00:47, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Non-pornographic picture replacement

I don't know what's worse: the fact it's explicit, probably isn't Japanese, probably doesn't define the genre well as a whole, or is self-advertisement. If the picture discussion is to be believed then people are just jacking off to it and wondering who drew it.

Last time I checked this was an encyclopedia, not an artwhore show -- Primetech

There's no pornographic content on the pornography section. Why don't we just upload a non-pornographic cover here? -- 198.150.224.3 (talk) 19:27, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

The picture has already been extensively discussed, please see the discussions in the archive. The consensus was largely that it is the best we have at this time and that it is better to have some picture rather than no picture. If you or anyone else can produce/find an/multiple alternative that can be distributed under the GFDL or a compatible license I am certain that it will be considered.

For now "crap", "artwhore show" and all the other opinions that you have stated are subjective and your own. Do refrain from removing material without checking previous discussions to determine the status of the article content. -- Dront (talk) 12:16, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

alright, here's an objective truth. People are jacking off to it. Read the image history. Which means the only purpose of the picture is to offend and cause controversy. -- 66.87.17.159 (talk) 17:36, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

So if someone find something sexually arousing (which is what you are essentially saying) it is offensive and meant to cause controversy. I am not sure that I can follow your logic. -- Dront (talk) 10:12, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

"As Offkilter said above, 'Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia, not a pornographic magazine.' The examples before were good enough examples for the purposes of Misplaced Pages. If someone wants to see the explicit images, all they have to do is search Google."

This is a source that many teachers recommend, and many schools keep open, for learning, not for pornographic content. I find the image used tasteless, but more important, inappropriate for an encyclopedia that should pride itself on content, not porn. Heck, there isn't even a way around seeing it!

-- 198.150.224.3 (talk) 19:44, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm! If you don't like the image in this article, then I certainly don't want to point you to some of our other articles. The only way you are going to replace that image is to offer a 'free' image that a consensus of interested editors can agree is better. -- Donald Albury 22:12, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

According to the Image Use Policy and the discussion you point at, it's a controversial and sensationalized image. Smack-dab on the front of an article of an encyclopedia that prides itself in being what, offensive? This isn't Dramatica here. -- 198.150.224.3 (talk) 22:57, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

A question out of curiosity: In which way is this image "sesationalized" (main point) or "controversial" (second point)? Please exaplain it to me in clear words. (Im from germany and not an native English speaker. Just to avoid misunderstandings.) --Niabot (talk) 20:29, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

In this case, "sensationalized" meaning it's too... shiny for public viewing, I suppose. There's nudity or even explicit material here, but it's done in either historical context, or in very toned-down, clinical illustrations when entirely unavoidable (like pictures of different kinds of sexual intercourse: One would only expect a picture.

The second, "Controversial," in regards to how many people have talked about getting a proper image, have been offended by this one and have requested a better one, how many people want more pornographic pictures (for dubious reasons), and how universally, immediately accessible the image is. Due to its quality, content blockers almost never so much as brush Misplaced Pages, sometimes to the blockers' willing users' detriment. --198.150.224.111 (talk) 18:30, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Once again, being offended is not an argument against inclusion. Misplaced Pages provides voluntary censorship to remove offensive pictures. The bottom line is that we can not deem what others will find offensive and we shall not censor. If content blockers are inadequate it is hardly our job to improve them. Let me again link to WP:CENSOR, this is the main reason why I am even active in this discussion. -- Dront (talk) 10:12, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Keep reading, Dront. Sexual content (in this case, a pornographic picture) must be notable. WP:NOT

Also, "Multiplication of images and informational content beyond a rational need for information is inappropriate."

"Misplaced Pages is not an amateur pornography site." Misplaced Pages:Sexual contentI believe this says it best; again, Misplaced Pages is not a place to sensationalize with pornography. That's what sites like, well... I suppose I can't post them here, but that's why those sites exist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.150.224.3 (talk) 19:09, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Sexual content is neither policy or a guideline and given the comments on its talk page, it is unlike to to gain a consensus to become either. It probably should be tagged with {{Rejected}}. —Farix (t | c) 20:31, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Pages about mature/pornographic things that don't have porn on them:

• Pornography
• Sasha Grey
• Snuff Film
• Rape pornography (Can we get a picture of that?)

I imagine that's because Misplaced Pages editors have the power to exercise couth. 198.150.224.3 (talk) 23:04, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

All right, what the Image use policy states is "Shocking or explicit pictures should not be used simply to bring attention to an article". This is an article on an explicit subject, just like the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy is controversial due to the very fact that the article exist, this article is going to be somewhat sexually explicit due to the very nature of the article. This is not because of the picture itself trying to be more explicit or more controversial or attract more attention to the article.

It is simply as we have re-iterated "The best that we have got", I for one would whole-heartedly support a merely suggestive picture (perhaps less controversial than our current picture which involves a sexual act) similar to the ones for Pornography but we do not have such a picture and from what I understand you (or anyone else) is not suggesting or have not been able to suggest another picture. As it stands, a picture, even if it is "too" explicit or controversial beats no picture and this will always be the case.

Also, allow me to remind you that we need an image which also satisfies the requirements of the GFDL, this is a huge problem since most Hentai material is commercial, thus no one has simply walked down to a porn shop and taken a picture of a suggestive cover. If you want to try digging for a new picture there are links in the previous discussions (now archived) and also suggestions on where we may find an artist that can produce a more "suitable" image (or preferably a range of them to put up for discussion). -- Dront (talk) 10:41, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I want to mention some further things: Most available works aren't even legal itself, even if (wrongly) licensed under CC-BY. The reason for this is simple: Most of this images are Dōjinshi, that are already violating copyright laws (even if mostly not persucated). Just walking to an manga-shop is also not possible. The author or licence holder itself has to publish this image. A permission by the store owner would not be sufficent. --Niabot (talk) 16:44, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Is doujinshi really copyright-violating if it's a parody? Oh well, that's a totally different discussion. But there are several hentai that are both well-known and have clean(er) covers than the picture that's on the homepage right now. Mezzo Forte would be one example: It's an original hentai, with enough storyline to exist in two forms, pornographic and public-release. The DVD cover is already available on Misplaced Pages so it probably conforms to the requirements already. --198.150.224.111 (talk) 18:25, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

It doesn't, because it is available due to fair use, which has it's tight restrictions. --Niabot (talk) 01:11, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Alternatives

In accordance with Japanese copyright law, no, I suspect the same is true for the US but I am not an expert. Now, that cover from Mezzo Forte is exactly what I have been asking for, an alternative, reading up on fair use it is at least my impression that we can use covers like that.

Mining the List of hentai anime I have found:

• Aki sora
• Angel (manga)
• Angel Blade
• Angel of Darkness
• Beat Angel Escalayer
• Bible Black
• Boin
• Boku no Pico
• Cream Lemon
• Crimson Climax
• Discipline: Record of a Crusade
• Djibril – The Devil Angel
• Dragon Pink
• Futari Ecchi
• Harukoi Otome
• Hatsuinu
• Heartwork: Symphony of Destruction
• Imōto Jiru
• Kamasutra (manga)
• Kite (film)
• Koihime Musō
• La Blue Girl
• Magic Woman M
• Marine a Go Go
• Mezzo Forte
• Mystery of the Necronomicon
• New Angel
• Night Shift Nurses
• No Money
• Ogenki Clinic
• Perverted Thomas
• Private Psycho Lesson
• Resort Boin
• Sensitive Pornograph
• Slave Doll
• The Rapeman
• Venus 5
• Weather Report Girl
• Welcome to Pia Carrot

All of these articles have images that could be used in the Hentai article. Now, I suggest picking a few of these from various time periods (the earliest I saw I think was early 80;s) and try to get a spread over sub-categories, formats (game, video, etc.), maybe even some of them are more famous (I am in no position to judge that), etc. Judging by the size of the article we should have room for a few, if necessary we should maybe have an image block at the bottom if we really can't provide a coverage by in-lining images.

I want to point out that I still would prefer an artist to try to produce an image somehow encompassing the whole genre, this is due to copyright concerns and not all countries have fair use policies. For these versions of Misplaced Pages they will be unable to do what we are suggesting here and properly licensed content should if of equal and/or comparable quality and relevance be preferred over what can be provided by arguing for fair-use. -- Dront (talk) 10:12, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

None of these images can be used in the article as they would violate WP:NFCC #1. They are all fair-use images and a free image is either available or can be created. —Farix (t | c) 11:42, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

If that's true, why does Pornography not have a free equivalent? I'm betting there are plenty of people with video cameras more than willing to offer some; it's due to accuracy. Hentai is, in its barest form, non-parody video. It's an encompassing term but each subcategory has its own name: (H-)CG, Doujinshi, ecchi, etc. --198.150.224.3 (talk) 19:15, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Don't know why it is handled this way inside Pornography. In comparison to other languages it looks way different (de:Pornographie, ru:Порнография, ...) and there would be absolutly no reason to use images by fair use. --Niabot (talk) 20:21, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Based on the description pages of File:AN Penny Flame 1.jpg and File:Holly Sampson - My First Sex Teacher Vol. 18 cover original.jpg, both have been released under CCA-SA 3.0 with c:COM:OTRS checked out, so they are free images. It's a rare case and one that the article takes advantage of. However, that is not the case for the DVD and manga covers listed above. —Farix (t | c) 20:36, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Offered alternative

Oh why not. High-resolution, well-sourced, infamous anime. Here ya go.

File:Bible Black Volume 4 DVD Cover.jpg

--Primetech 20:18, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

It is under the fair use rational, and so far, as i understand the rules, (WP:NFCC #1) not usable for anything else, then the article for Bible Black itself. Hentai images can be created by everyone. That way it would be possible to get an free alternative. --Niabot (talk) 20:24, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Hentai = not HCG --Primetech 21:17, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Please stop trying to drag out non-free images. If it is not a free images, it can't be used in this article per WP:NFCC #1. —Farix (t | c) 20:39, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

There is no free equivalent available. See my above comment for a brief reason why....

An actual hentai would be a screenshot or cover of animated pornography, per anime style, from Japan, since anime by definition has to be Japanese in origin. Makes it kinda hard to get a free image for something of that importance. --Primetech 21:17, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Any Japanese artist can create a hentai image and release it under a free license. So a non-free image cannot be used to illustrate the article. —Farix (t | c) 21:35, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is not amateur pornography. --198.150.224.3 (talk) 21:38, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict)You entirely missed the point of the Commons' policy, but it also only applies to Commons. The policy deals with poor quality images that are not used for an encyclopedic purpose. —Farix (t | c) 21:42, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

It wouldn't. Any Japanese could create Hentai, which is not limited to animations (anime), since it is the overall description for such "material". To be considered typical it should of course follow the usual style/style elements. Even if we limit the source to only japanese people, we would have to consider that alternative images could be created easily and be published under a free license. --Niabot (talk) 21:38, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

It's a matter of quality and taste. Any Japanese person can draw porn. I can draw porn. But this isn't a porn site, if you want to show off your stuff to go HentaiFoundry where everybody else does and post it there. The fact that this website contains an image that looks like it's smack-dab out of an amateur porno place, probably means amateur porn is what it is. --Primetech 21:49, 22 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Primetech (talk • contribs)

As I've said before, an article on a pornographic subject is going to contain pornographic illustrations to help convey the meaning of the topic. And one pornographic image on one article will not make Misplaced Pages a porno site. —Farix (t | c) 21:55, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Picture controversy

Misplaced Pages's images aren't supposed to be controversial for controversy's sake, but as you can see here there's plenty of controversy going into a purportedly un-controversial picture. --198.150.224.3 (talk) 21:36, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

One person who refuses to put down the stick is not a controversy, Primetech. And you are not hiding your identity by switching between your account and your IP address. —Farix (t | c) 21:47, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The people asking for more pictures, or no picture, aren't me. Sorry I move around a private network. A bunch of fappers isn't a democracy either. We all have our faults. --Primetech 21:55, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

You've been the only one who has been asking for the remove of the current image and wanting to add a bunch of non-free images. As for your "fappers" comment, I'll remind you that we take WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL very seriously and that you refrain from such comments in the future. —Farix (t | c) 23:33, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

srs bsns guise

becuz it's okay to offend people as long as it's not a user. Lol hypocrisy? But I get you, as long as people nod their heads (sic) up and down to what you want done, it's all well and good. Because I'm sure the only people who edit this page, already have a strong obsession with hentai anyway. Sorry to try to bring a little evenness on this in a so-called improper way. I'll be more... helpful in the near future. Primetech 13:30, 10 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Primetech (talk • contribs)

Misplaced Pages has a policy that editors should not engage in personal attacks on other editors. Calling other editors "flappers" and claiming they have a "strong obsession with hentai" because they support the existing image are a personal attacks. This has nothing to do with offense. —Farix (t | c) 13:58, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, the term was "fappers," meaning people who enjoy masturbating to said material. Flappers would suggest you're a bit dated and twenties-ish. Maybe instead I should say that undue bias is given to those who aren't offended by pornographic material to begin with. Showing this page to the "average person" generally elicits either offense or a general "I can't believe Misplaced Pages..." in most of the cases I show it to someone else. --Primetech 14:02, 10 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Primetech (talk • contribs)

The image is no more offensive than those on sexual intercourse and other topics relating to sex and pornography. It should not be any surprise that articles in this subject area will contain images that some may find offensive because of the prudish viewpoints. —Farix (t | c) 14:17, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Something like this

File:Wikipe-tan hentai.png

If the current picture is considered "good" a "great" version would be of Wikipe-tan herself, preferably in some sexual relationship with Jimbo Wales. Heck, it doesn't even have to be dirty, just a pretty good idea of what a cheap doujin (hentai) would look like if you saw one on a shelf in Japan.

Also, inb4 "your drawing sucks." I did it with a mouse in like a minute. Rather be that than some German laboring for hours with expensive CG programs to produce something equally bad. Not that I know anyone that would apply to, I'm just sayin'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Primetech (talk • contribs) 13:28, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Does this image illustrate anything about hentai? The image itself should be moved to another name, since there is not any direct relation between this scribble and hentai at all. By the way: Some German authors, like myself, utilizing free software. For example GIMP, Inkscape, Karbon, synfig, Blender, etc.

The only things that disturbs me: Why does it need to be Wikipe-tan or Jimbo? And why should this qualify as a cheap dōjinshi? This is way below any artistic mean. --Niabot (talk) 13:46, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

I use those, thanks. And his is more of a... prototype, lol. A good hentai example should have Wikipe-tan and Jimbo because it's more patriotic, of course. -- Primetech 13:58, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

The image doesn't even illustrate the subject. But an hentai image of Wikipe-tan will likely be deleted for trolling, especially since we already have a preexisting image illustrating the subject. —Farix (t | c) 14:01, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

So, basically defending a DeviantArt-quality artist in favor of maintaining the status quo? Now you're the one being backwards. This can fill the criterion of unoffending the conservative and illustrating a more common variation at the same time. And yes, I can draw better than that, thank you very much. --Primetech 14:05, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh, oh wait, even better yet: Touting your own art on this site is "good practice" but adding pictures of your sacred symbols is "trolling." What in the hell. They're both art. --Primetech 14:05, 10 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Primetech (talk • contribs)

Again, you image doesn't even illustrate the subject of the article in any way. So using it to illustrate the article is a complete misrepresentation. As for Wikpe-tan, many editors have attempted to upload sexual images of her, only to be deleted because the uploaders were clearly attempting to troll the community. Even Jimbo has deleted some images that portray Wikipe-tan in an overtly sexual way under WP:OFFICE. —Farix (t | c) 14:13, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Farix is resigned to defend this article to the death, because the status quo (making this article essentially worse than any other US-based article about similar material, at least at the very beginning before going onward) means that Farix is able to engage in a personal act of trolling. It offends immediately, at the very top, with no indication the article may be offensive beforehand, such as the classic example of "tentacle porn" has done before this page was...changed. --Primetech 14:18, 10 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Primetech (talk • contribs)

1. http://commons.wikimedia.org/Commons:What_Commons_is_not#Commons_is_not_an_amateur_porn_site

• Misplaced Pages objectionable content
• All unassessed articles
• Start-Class anime and manga articles
• Top-importance anime and manga articles
• All WikiProject Anime and manga pages
• Start-Class Pornography articles
• High-importance Pornography articles
• Start-Class High-importance Pornography articles
• WikiProject Pornography articles
• Start-Class Sexology and sexuality articles
• Mid-importance Sexology and sexuality articles
• WikiProject Sexology and sexuality articles