Talk:Hentai/Archive 2
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
Archives
Posts/sections no longer being replied to have been moved to the Archive 1 page in order to keep this page more manageable in size. It was beginning to get too long. --nihon 20:47, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
Please also check the Archive page for any precious discussions, especially if you want to start discussing something that may have already been discussed. --nihon 20:20, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
Recent definition change
Anon editor (139.55.232.124) changed
- words, "hen" meaning unusual or strange and "tai" meaning desire or wish.
to
- kanji characters "hen" meaning unusual or strange and "tai" meaning form or object.
I reverted this, but let me make it clear why I did so, so that we can discuss. I'm not claiming to be certain of the correctness of the definition, and I won't block consensus.
As per my edit summary when I put that text in:
- This meaning info is based on my reading of "A Japanese and English Dictionary With an English and Japanese Index" , Hepburn, 1983. If you disagree, please cite a source.
The definitions that I used are directly from that source.
As for "word" vs "kanji", the english word is based on the Japanese words, not on the kanji characters for those words, so I would think that we separate discussion of kanji from the words they represent, no? -Harmil 12:24, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
-tai does mean 'want to' when attached to the end of a verb, and this particular meaning has no kanji associated with it. Japanese is notorious for having homonyms (words that sound the same but have different meanings). This is one such word. The particular kanji in question has as its core meaning 'appearance'. My source is the freely available kanjinfo.dat file, maintained by professor Jim Breen of Monash University. Of course, all this is pretty hokey anyway, as kanji compound words often have meanings unrelated to the individual kanji. Rhialto
I reverted the last change of "tai" meaning "desire or wish" to the correct meaning: "attitude or appearance". The kanji for "hentai" are 変態, and 態 does not mean "desire or wish". You can check it out at WWWJDIC: [1]. nihon 16:03, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
- Very good, and thank you for clearing this up. As I said when I reverted you, I don't disagree (hey, I'm just a guy with a copy of Hepburn, not a language expert), but unless people cite their sources, there's no way to distinguish trolls injecting random noise from folks who are trying to contribute real information. -Harmil 21:12, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
-
- I never troll. It's a waste of time. (^_^) nihon 23:40, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
I reverted the changes by anonymous user "130.232.31.109" because they were incorrect information. The user indicated that sources should be cited, so I'm citing them: me. I lived in Japan for several years, and am very familiar with how these words are and were used there. To user "130.232.31.109": please don't change things unless you can provide good reasons for the change. It's also recommended that you register and create a username. You will be taken much more seriously if you aren't hiding behind an anonymous IP address. nihon 21:24, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
- I again reverted the changes by anonymous user "130.232.85.15" (who I think is the same as the anonymous user in the paragraph above) because s/he changed it back again. This is almost becoming vandalism by someone who refuses to register as a regular user. I don't know of any dictionaries that even have the word. As I lived in Japan for several years, I think I have a pretty good idea of the meaning of this word. As "erotic" means "1. Of or concerning sexual love and desire; amatory. 2. Tending to arouse sexual desire. 3. Dominated by sexual love or desire.", using "erotic" instead of "porn" is a more precise definition of the meaning of エロアニメ in my humble opinion. All porn is erotic in nature. --nihon 15:18, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
-
- Silly arguments about anonymity aside (is "130.232.31.109" any more or less anonymous than "Nihonjoe"?), please provide a single reference that supports your assertion that the word "hentai" has ever been used to mean "anime porn". I have never seen one, and I have seen plenty of support for the fact that it never has. For instance, [2], which is linked from the article itself.
-
-
- "Hentai" is used to refer to anything "perverse" or "perverted," including anime porn. However, the word has come to be used less and less as a noun, and is currently used mostly as an adjective (i.e., "Kono hentai jiji"). That's why it should remain "rarely" instead of "never" in the first paragraph. --nihon 16:51, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- I said, show a single example where it's used like that. Here are lots of examples of Japanese people who don't think it makes any sense to call anime porn "hentai": [3]
-
-
-
-
-
-
- As I already said multiple times, I'm going by my experience while living in Japan. How do you propose I show you that? Also, I said: "Hentai" is used to refer to anything "perverse" or "perverted," including anime porn. However, the word has come to be used less and less as a noun, and is currently used mostly as an adjective (i.e., "Kono hentai jiji"). That's why it should remain "rarely" instead of "never" in the first paragraph." --nihon 15:20, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- "Your experience while living in Japan" is not exactly something to base an encyclopedic entry on, is it? We have no idea what you experienced there, and how representative it was of anything. You're also referring to events that obviously happened outside your stay there. You say "has come to be used less and less as a noun", but I don't really think this happened while you were there, did it? In fact, I've been saying from the start that "hentai" was never used as a noun referring to anime porn, which is what this article is about. I never said it wasn't used as an adjective to call something perverted, but that has no bearing on whether it was ever used as a noun, which is what this article is about.--130.232.31.109 18:54, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
- Furthermore, what use is citing the english definition for "erotic" when we're talking about Japanese words? The Japanese usage does not reflect the English one - in English, "erotica" is mostly used to refer to something more tasteful and refined than "porn", but in Japanese, it does not have this connotations at all - a porn mag is "erohon", a porn site is "erosaito". Nobody but the biggest prudes would call those "erotic magazine" or "erotic website" in English. For all intents and purposes "ero" is directly translatable to "porn", but NOT to "erotica".
-
-
- That's why I'm using the word "erotic" as opposed to "erotica". There is a difference. I haven't once used "erotica" in that paragraph. "Porn" is erotic, however, and therefore the use of erotic in the description is very accurate. Also, if you go look up the prefix "ero" in WWWJDIC, you'll get the following: "エロ (adj-na,n) erotic; eroticism." Directly below it is a definition for eroanime: "エロアニメ (n) (abbr) erotic animation; pornographic animation; animation containing explicit sexual content." Use the "Word Search" page [4] and make sure you check the "Check if the keyword is romanized Japanese" box. --nihon 16:51, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- I don't disagree that "erotic" is literally correct. I mean that it has the wrong connotations, and is an awkward translation. It's technically correct to talk about "erotic magazines" and "erotic websites", but nobody calls them that. Calling it "erotic anime" also sounds stilted and unnatural, when "porn" is the word most people would use.
-
-
-
-
-
-
- How can it have the wrong connotations, based on the definitions I gave you? Porn is, by definition, erotic. I even gave you the "It's not erotica" argument, even though that's just semantics. If some people want to think there's such a thing as "high class" porn, and call it "erotica," more power to them. But that doesn't change the fact that it's porn, and porn, by definition, is erotic. "Erotic" is a more precise definition. Check out the link I gave you:[5] and search for エロアニメ. --nihon 15:20, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Please re-read my previous replies, which address your points. Summary: "Erotic anime" is not incorrect, but "porn anime" is much closer to how the Japanese use the word "ero". --130.232.31.109 18:54, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
Some comments from a third party:
- Requesting people to log in is not silly. We can reasonably assume that all edits by Nihonjoe were made by the same editor, but all bets are off in the case of IP addresses, where multiple editors may share an address, or one editor may use multiple addresses. That's why it's helpful to log in. Also, please sign all your comments, regardless of whether you're logged in or not.
- The anonymous user asks for 'a single reference that supports [the] assertion that the word "hentai" has ever been used to mean "anime porn"'. By itself, of course, it doesn't, and I don't see Nihonjoe claiming that, either. Meanwhile, Google shows 26,700 hits[6] for the phrase 変態アニメ. Yes, the range of things described as 変態 is smaller than the range of things described as エロ; but 変態 is "rarely used", not "never".
- If you add a -"変態アニメの世界" (to remove "hentai anime society", which seems to be a site a lot of pages mention or link to) to that search, it seems nearly every page is a list of keywords to lure in search engines. I suspect this is to lure in westerners who try to translate "hentai anime" into Japanese, but that's just speculation. --130.232.31.109 18:54, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
- The anonymous user argues that English definitions are useless in determining the meaning of エロ. He is correct. How about Japanese definitions, then? 大辞林 simply refers the reader to エロチック and エロチシズム.
To my eye, those definitions are closer to the English definition of "erotic" than to "porn", but I can see how some might disagree.
- Neither of those words are the short-hand "ero", which is much more slangy, and therefore a dictionary is not a good source for insight into its meaning. Sadly I can't give any better references myself, except for the usage examples mentioned earlier.--130.232.31.109 18:54, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
In conclusion:
- It is misleading to say that hentai is "never" used to talk about pornographic anime in Japan. It might, possibly, be correct to say that it is "never used as a noun" (though it's really very hard to prove a negative), but it's surely simpler for everyone involved if we just say that it is "rarely used".
- And I think it's misleading to imply it has ever been used to as a noun referring to pornographic anime, when as far as I know this is not the case, and furthermore, the Japanese (well, those Japanese who'd spend any time thinking about pornographic anime) dislike this usage. I think it is better to clearly state that it should never be used this way in actual Japanese, if nothing else then as a warning for those who will ever discuss these matters with a native speaker. --130.232.31.109 18:54, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
- The question of whether to translate エロ as "erotic" or "porn" is largely subjective. Given that the nature of the product can easily be determined from the rest of the article, I see no reason to use "porn" when the Japanese themselves have decided to say エロ rather than ポルノ. If the anonymous user is genuinely unhappy with this, there are compromises: for example, we could say "eroanime (エロアニメ; an abbreviation of erotic animation)" instead, as this is an indisputable fact.
Haeleth 20:33, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
- I'm fine with changing it to be "eroanime (エロアニメ; an abbreviation of erotic animation)." --nihon 20:49, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
- That is a better formulation, yes. I'd maybe say "derived from" instead of "for" or something, though, but that's a pretty minor detail. --130.232.31.109 18:54, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
I've changed it to say "very rarely," since even if they are using it to lure in westerners looking for Japanese sites, it's still used, so "never" should not be used when describing it. "Very rarely" gives enough indication that it's not even remotely common. I also added the "derived from" to the description of エロアニメ. --nihon 19:06, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
- Then at least remove the "anymore", because that still makes no sense. Porn sites importing "hentai" from English is a very recent occurance. --130.232.31.109 01:12, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
I rewrote the first paragraph to incorporate all of the previous content, but presenting it in a much more concise manner. I moved a couple of the links to the "See also" section. --nihon 05:55, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
- That's much better, except for the "seinen" bit. "Seinen" is used to refer to manga published for an older audience, and it may very well contain sexually explicity material, but that is not what the term refers to. It simply means "published for an older audience". A lot of seinen manga is not sexual in nature at all. --130.232.31.109 19:51, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- Oh, right, missed the kanji. Might want to put in a note about that for everyone else, too. --130.232.85.15 10:44, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
-
HENTAI!!!>:D
this is a good article for Hentai, but TOO MANY DAMN INFORMATION! Why is there so many information on "Meaning of the word", just 2 or 3 paragraphs are enough, and why so many big deal on Background? i know you all work hard on them both come on,.. some one will enter wiki and read this article, just to find A LOT OF info on Background Meaning of the word
Yes this article needs PICTURES! to stand out
and i swear there was some links to some hentai pages, for example there was a link to Hentia Lovers Club, WHAT HAPPEN TO IT!?,
There should be a header on "Differences of Hentai" it suppose to be about, hentai found on Interent and the Home Video, the differences about them
by the way, there was some more info on this Hentai page, WHAT HAPPEN TO THEM!? lets get to work><ino 03:56, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
- This is an encyclopedia. You may wish to read What Wikipedia Is Not. -Harmil 10:19, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
read em,...you said it is an encyclopedia, and at the What Wiki Is Not, it says Wikipedia isn't an encyclopeida... anyway that talk i did,....and the one you just gave me has nothing to do with it>:(
- all i am just asking is...if people come in and read Hentai article, they will see to many information, and they won't be botherd to read it...havn't you heard of persentations? do not pack to many information on one page...expend them
><ino 03:06, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
Removed Hentai Link
Wether or not this was intent of vandilism or wrong assumption, there should not be links to hentai. --FlareNUKE 08:28, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
? wats going on? everytime i check this Hentai article page, information are aways gone and changed, why?
- can someone put the changes they will do here before actually doing it!
thanks
yes there shouldn't be a link to Hentai, only links that are not acctaully ment for porn, for example a H-anime/Hentai review wesbite, can be acceptd, but ones that actually shows movies, pictures, links to other hardcore are not accepted! >x<ino 13:46, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
-
- Yes, lol I remember when there was a hentai link on this page before, but I dont remember when lol, I was doing a school report when i got bored and asked myself "I wonder if.... they have concise information of...." and I got side tracked. I do agree that there shouldn't be any hentai links, bad for children's minds. But the theory that a link could used to lure people to the site as an "advertisment" is incredibly insidious and very evasive... poor sick little minds :P. --------Reeves 01:59, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
Image needed
Pictures
I am a photographer in Currently in Japan with some free time. Is there any specific suggestions as to what photographs would suit the page without being deemed as pornographic. If anyone has any other image requests that they wish to me to fulfill while in Japan (time will be limited) let me know.
Mark 13:54, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Get a pic, with a woman, blending over, and her thong showing JOKING! Get a pic, with ...hmmm..lets see... with a pervet man taking pics of girls in a beach, but girls not naked
- >x<ino 02:32, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
Image deletion, and why they are not needed
Though hentai is a form of pornography, this does not give wikipedia a license to post pornographic images when other images are available. Wikipedia is not, and should not be, a pornographic site.When I edit wikipedia, I always think of the seventh grader whose doing a research report (though I understand that a research report on hentai is unlikely) and images that are not safe for work/school/parental consent should not be placed on the article. If you have to place an image, make sure it is appropriate and not overly explicit. I know that there are images that fit this category, people. (For example, the second image, the Ren'ai Consultant one, is fine.) --Offkilter 05:33, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not censored for the protection of minors. But nonetheless I agree we don't need any pictures of hentai itself. Pornography doesn't have any, for example, except a few mild ancient examples. Anyone who wants to know what a naked body looks like can either go to nudity or vulva, penis etc. Besides, I bet the images that have been posted aren't uncopyrighted or fair use. --Malthusian (talk) 10:39, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- Well, technically most articles DO have genitalia pictures and such... I think pornography is bit un-needed though, so that "seventh-grader" should look at a more minor-safe site for info --FlareNUKE 11:19, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Yes we do need pictures, to show and support the information for the article. But we don't really need a nudity picture.
- 2 images are enough, but they seem old.
We need one more picture, which is quite modern, like new, from 2000-2005, I suggest we need an image of Black Bible, the most famous and know Hentia, but no nudity picture
- ">x<ino and out!" >x<ino 18:29, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
I agree. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a pornographic magazine. If someone wants to look up anatomy, let them look up that respective article and not have to see blatant nudity. I don't think that censorship is as much an issue here as appropriateness. The pictures that are up right now are good examples of what is good for the article.--Offkilter 19:57, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
The Offkilter speaks! By the way we still need a picture of Bible Black:P Best HENTAI!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!(but no nude)
- "xINO OVER!" >x<ino 23:47, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I added another pic that's not "old". --nihon 03:20, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
What Pic!?
- I don't see any pic, accept for the same two
I told you weaklings to get a picture of Bible Black >:@
- >x<ino 03:49, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
-
- For some reason it didn't take the first time. It's there now. --nihon 04:07, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
lol on the pic:P
- Where is the Bible Black!?
- >x<ino 04:33, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
- The pic I added makes the article more balanced, showing another side of hentai. Bible Black is hardly the most well known hentai anime ever. --nihon 21:45, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
Something
- Type EPs Year Award Rating Revs - Akiko OVA 2 1996 - 5.99 (83) - - (0) - - Angelium OVA 2 2004 - 6.91 (204) - - (0) - - Bakunyuu Shimai OVA 2 2005 - - (0) - - (0) - - Bible Black OVA 6 2001-2003 - 7.90 (865) - 8.08 (2) - - Bible Black Gaiden OVA 2 2002 - 7.61 (500) - 7.16 (2) - - Bishoujo Comic Lolikon Angel ~Mitsu no Aji~ OVA 1 1985 - 5.26 (43) - - (0) - - Black Gate OVA 2 2004 - 6.78 (84) - 4.50 (1) - - Blood Royal OVA 2 2002 - 6.42 (153) - - (0) - - Bondage Game - Shinsou no Reijoutachi OVA 2 2003 - 6.27 (118) - 7.91 (2) - - Call Me Tonight OVA 1 1986 - 6.10 (22) - 7.00 (1) - - Cambrian OVA - 2005 - - (0) - - (0) - - Choukou Tenshi Escalayer OVA 3 2002-2003 - 7.57 (254) - - (0) - - Cool Devices OVA 11 1995-1997 - 6.44 (253) - 4.50 (1) - - Dorei Kaigo OVA 3 2003 - 7.12 (113) - 7.00 (1) - - Ebenbourg no Kaze OVA 2 2003 - 6.39 (108) - 5.50 (1) - - El OVA 2 2001 - 6.26 (98) - - (0) - - Elfen Lied TV 13 2004 8.61 (4409) - 7.77 (40) - - Enzai OVA 2 2004 - 5.89 (50) - 5.49 (2) - - Flashback Game OVA 3 2001-2002 - 6.27 (92) - - (0) - - Futago no Haha Seihonnou OVA 2 2005 - 7.94 (15) - - (0) - - Gibomai OVA 2 2002-2003 - 7.12 (213) - 7.66 (1) - - Gravitation (2000) TV 13 2000-2001 - 7.63 (354) - 7.49 (6) - - Hana Dorei OVA 2 2001 - 6.25 (57) - - (0) - - Heisa Byouin OVA 2 2003-2004 - 6.62 (63) - 6.16 (1) - - Henbou Moral Hazard OVA 1 2001 - 4.36 (43) - - (0) - - Hinadori no Saezuri OVA 2 2000-2001 - 6.34 (52) - - (0) - - Hitozuma Ryoujoku Sankanbi OVA 2 2005 - 7.45 (33) - - (0) - - Hyakki OVA 3 2003 - 6.64 (64) - - (0) - - Ima, Soko ni Iru Boku TV 13 1999-2000 - 8.18 (928) - 7.89 (10) - - Ingoku Byoutou - Type EPs Year Award Rating Revs - Injuu Alien OVA 1 1997 - 5.59 (101) - - (0) - - Injuu Gakuen La Blue Girl OVA 6 1992-1993 - 6.40 (184) - - (0) - - Injuu vs Onna Spy OVA 1 1997 - 6.38 (48) - 4.83 (1) - - Inmu OVA 2 2000 - 5.95 (36) - - (0) - - Kanariya wa Kago no Naka OVA 2 2003-2004 - 6.93 (72) - - (0) - - Keraku-no-oh OVA 3 2002 - 5.95 (72) - - (0) - - Kininaru Kimochi OVA 3 2004 - 6.82 (14) - - (0) - - Kisaku OVA 6 2002-2003 - 7.89 (77) - - (0) - - Kite OVA 2 1998 - 7.01 (657) - 8.00 (2) - - Korashime OVA 2 2001 - 6.81 (90) - - (0) - - Kunoichi Bakumatsu Kitan OVA 2 2003-2004 - 7.58 (25) - - (0) - - Kurohime OVA 2 2002-2003 - 6.43 (122) - - (0) - - Luv Wave OVA 3 2000 - 6.46 (81) - - (0) - - Mahou Shoujo Ai OVA 5 2003-2005 - 8.68 (115) - 8.00 (1) - - Makai Tenshi Jibril OVA 4 2004-2005 - 7.47 (103) - 7.16 (1) - - Mi-da-ra OVA 3 2002 - 7.02 (43) - - (0) - - Miboujin OVA 2 2004 - 6.90 (59) - 5.16 (1) - - Moke Moke Taishou Dendo Musume Arisa OVA 2 2005 - 6.48 (51) - - (0) - - Mugen no Kyokai OVA 4 2000-2001 - 6.11 (66) - - (0) - - Narutaru TV 13 2003 - 7.01 (518) - 7.64 (9) - - Ningyo Tsukai OVA 1 1996 - 6.08 (31) - - (0) - - Pure Mail OVA 2 2001 - 6.89 (115) - - (0) - - Rejuvenation OVA 2 2000 - 5.66 (49) - - (0) - - SEXFRIEND OVA 2 2004 - 7.44 (517) - 7.24 (2) - - Shintaisou (Kari) The Animation ~Yousei-tachi no Rondo~ OVA 4 2002-2003 - 6.94 (179) - 8.00 (1) - - Shokuzai no Kyoushitsu OVA 2 2002 - 5.93 (81) - - (0) - - Shuukaku no Yoru OVA 2 2002 - 6.47 (92) - 8.50 (1) - - Stainless Night OVA 2 1995-1996 - 6.52 (156) - - (0) - - Stratosphera no Yousei OVA 3 2002 - 6.03 (113) - 7.16 (2) - - Utsukushiki Emono-tachi no Gakuen —This unsigned comment was added by 138.89.97.102 (talk • contribs) .
What da hell is this!?
- >x<ino 04:04, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
-
- That was my question. I deleted it once as patent nonsense, but the anon editor added it back, still without an explanation. I posted a warning to the anon editor's talk page. --日本穣 04:38, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
It suppose to be some ceremony thing, where they rated all some known Hentai movies. Apparently those ratings are stupid, 6.52/10!?
That annon suker, copied & pasted the notes...anon did not add the star (*)
- Anyway...we really don't need a rating system in this article...
- >x<ino 06:20, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
Non-Pornographic images
As Offkilter said above, "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a pornographic magazine." The examples before were good enough examples for the purposes of Wikipedia. If someone wants to see the explicit images, all they have to do is search Google. --日本穣 22:58, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
-
- These are drawings, not photographs. grow upKaraveks voice 00:50, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- Drawings can be pornographic just as easily as a photo. Please keep a civil tone when making comments here. There's no need to be rude. --日本穣 00:58, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- good point, but no one ever said wiki needs a censor.Karaveks voice 01:03, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- This has nothing to do with censorship. This is about whether or not the images add anything of value to the article. I don't believe they add anything other than eye candy to the article, and are therefore not appropriate for an encyclopedic article. --日本穣 01:10-ish, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- actually, censoring the images will make the article dishonest , in spirit, and in fact, peole will geth e wrong idea, hence, the images HAVE value.Karaveks voice 01:15, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- This has nothing to do with censorship. This is about whether or not the images add anything of value to the article. I don't believe they add anything other than eye candy to the article, and are therefore not appropriate for an encyclopedic article. --日本穣 01:51, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- im sorry, but if its eye candy your looking for, there are MANY MUCH worse things to put there then such rather mild images. serieously, check out legend of hte overfiend and youll see what i mean. hence, since they are true to form and NOT excessive, they belong. btw, repeating youreslf and bolding statements doenst make your argument any better.Karaveks voice 01:53, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- I only did that because you were ignoring what I said and using the same "That's censorship!" argument. Nothing about the previous three images was dishonest in the least. You don't need explicit images in the article in order to explain the topic. If people want explicit images, there are plenty of sources for them available by using a simple Google search. The article is not dishonest if it doesn't use explicit images. In fact, it would likely get more respect from the academic side of things (which is more what Wikipedia is aiming to be, rather than a resource for salaciously-minded individuals) if it didn't use explicit images when discussing it.
- Not using explicit images is not censorship. Rather, it's a carefully thought out choice that makes the article more accessible so anyone interested in learning exactly what hentai is can do so without being driven away by explicit images. Whether you believe it or not, not everyone who would be interested in reading the article is interested in viewing such images. The whole point of Wikipedia is to help as many people as possible learn about as much as they want to, and adding those images hinders that goal. I'll say again: those images have no place on Wikipedia as they serve no other purpose than titilation. They do not improve the article, or make it more relevant. --日本穣 17:14, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- you have made your case, but frankly its not good enough, you come off as sounding, no matter how much you say otherwise , as someone whos offended and wants the offense to go away, most other people arent nearly so sensitive.Karaveks voice 22:26, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- Since you've only recently started doing anything with this article, I'd prefer to hear the opinions of others first (outside of you and SlashDot, who has only had an account for 3 days (compared to your 5 or 6 days of existence)—are you the same person using two accounts?). --日本穣 22:43, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- when ive been editing the article and my opinions are unrelated. you dont seem to like losing arguments. oh and feel free to check for socks or whatever, but i still think youll find yourself red faced.Karaveks voice 22:48, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- I don't really care one way or the other, though I do have my opinion on the matter (as I've expressed above). If the interested editors decide that explicit images are fine for the article, I'll go along with that. I don't think, however, that you or I should be making that decision based only on our two opinions. We need others to offer input on the matter as well. Some opinions on the matter have already been expressed in another section, above, but we need more opinions on the matter. --日本穣 22:54, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- when ive been editing the article and my opinions are unrelated. you dont seem to like losing arguments. oh and feel free to check for socks or whatever, but i still think youll find yourself red faced.Karaveks voice 22:48, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- Since you've only recently started doing anything with this article, I'd prefer to hear the opinions of others first (outside of you and SlashDot, who has only had an account for 3 days (compared to your 5 or 6 days of existence)—are you the same person using two accounts?). --日本穣 22:43, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- you have made your case, but frankly its not good enough, you come off as sounding, no matter how much you say otherwise , as someone whos offended and wants the offense to go away, most other people arent nearly so sensitive.Karaveks voice 22:26, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- im sorry, but if its eye candy your looking for, there are MANY MUCH worse things to put there then such rather mild images. serieously, check out legend of hte overfiend and youll see what i mean. hence, since they are true to form and NOT excessive, they belong. btw, repeating youreslf and bolding statements doenst make your argument any better.Karaveks voice 01:53, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- This has nothing to do with censorship. This is about whether or not the images add anything of value to the article. I don't believe they add anything other than eye candy to the article, and are therefore not appropriate for an encyclopedic article. --日本穣 01:51, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- actually, censoring the images will make the article dishonest , in spirit, and in fact, peole will geth e wrong idea, hence, the images HAVE value.Karaveks voice 01:15, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- This has nothing to do with censorship. This is about whether or not the images add anything of value to the article. I don't believe they add anything other than eye candy to the article, and are therefore not appropriate for an encyclopedic article. --日本穣 01:10-ish, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- good point, but no one ever said wiki needs a censor.Karaveks voice 01:03, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- Drawings can be pornographic just as easily as a photo. Please keep a civil tone when making comments here. There's no need to be rude. --日本穣 00:58, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- These are drawings, not photographs. grow upKaraveks voice 00:50, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- Someone else is going to have to deal with this, at least until tomorrow as I don't want to violate WP:3RR. I do not think the articel needs explicit pictures in order to explain about hentai. The text does that perfectly well, and the previous pictures illustrated the article well enough. --日本穣 23:21, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
there are explicit images all over the site. this is no differentKaraveks voice 22:56, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- I hate when jokers like this add images for simple shock value, then argue some anti-censorship thing when you try to tell them it hurts the article more than it helps. -- Ned Scott 06:52, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
Before it's even determined if the images should be there, they require a source. Do not include images until proper source information is stated on the images' pages. This is not optional. -- Ned Scott 23:26, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
- Just realized something else, fair use can only be used when a free alternative is not available. There are plenty of alternative hentai images to illustrate the topic at hand. Even with source information, these images might not qualify as fair use. -- Ned Scott 23:29, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
I thought I should note the discussion of images being used on Lolicon, on Talk:Lolicon, a similar, more extreme situation to the one happening now. -- Ned Scott 09:27, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
its still just easily offended people trying to get thier way.Karaveks voice 20:35, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
- An issue is an issue, no matter how you spin it, we have to deal with this issue. This isn't us vs you, this is all of us trying to make articles better. Please keep that in mind. -- Ned Scott 22:08, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
I can see that, and thanks for not assuming me to be a vandal. but my point above about how those images, if sourced will be fine is this. there are much, much worse images out there in the hentai field. just look at legend of the overfiend to see what i mean, these imges in question are actually quite tame. Thus i would thik they would be preferable, in thier honest, but tame state, too images that are , well, rather loathesome in compairison.Karaveks voice 00:04, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
- The only one of those images that could be considered "tame" is Image:Boku 83.jpg. Image:Yuna q28.jpg is suggestive, but would likely be fine as it isn't explicit. Image:Fuusen q21.jpg is unecessarily explicit for the article. As there are plenty of images (such as the three that were previously used) that can be used to illustrate the article without being explicit, this one should not be used. Articles on Wikipedia need to be written for the widest possible audience, and that one image will keep quite a few people away from the article due to its graphic nature. Wikipedia should be a resource that anyone can use, and illustrations and photos used in other sex-related articles are generally academic in nature (designed to academically illustrate the point rather than be pornographic). There is no need to break the accepted norm with this article. --日本穣 Nihonjoe 00:30, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
if you think that the pictures that were there arent tame, then you dont really know anything about the gendre. seriouslyKaraveks voice 02:18, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
Locked!?
I don't know why this article is locked!?
Why did you lock my Hentai article:P
- I understand you fools are arguging about the pictures.
WHy was the old picture deleted!? They were better, not like this new one. Where the girl is nearly naked, we/I can see her nipple!
Please change the picture!
- >x<ino 00:37, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
-
- The article is locked because two editors were trying to force pictures into the article without consulting the rest of us. It will remain locked until this mess is sorted out. We requested that the picture be removed while we discuss this, but that request has not yet been granted. --日本穣 Nihonjoe 00:55, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
please do not be dishonest, the only one trying to force the edit, which in this case was away from mild, reasonabe images (especially since the subject CAN be used to make very nasty images appear) is you, nihonjoe. heres a thought, if other people revert your edits, and in this case it is multiple editors, why not try having a real discussion, instead of just stating your viewpoint over and over without any room for negociation.... otherwise youll just get reverted some more, everyone gets three, remember? and if more then two people arein a coflict, then the one who has less supporters( sides of an issue, not users) will lose. so far it looks like, as the content issue goes, your side lost.Karaveks voice 02:16, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
- Hold on...this is not about 3>2 or who is around to "out-revert" the other side. This needs to be worked out on this talk page. If you guys can't agree, consider WP:DR to solve the issue. Perhaps the image can be like the one at autofellatio, where it is a link and does not show imediatly. I do see a problem with its copyrights in that the "no other adequate and free image can be found" clause certainly is questionable here. It certainly is not the worst of henatai, so it does not look like a "shock" attempt though. I don't know, but try to work out something and use dispute resoluton if that fails.Voice-of-AllT|@|ESP 04:16, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
You need to learn how to count. But it still doesn't matter because voting is evil on Wikipedia. -- Ned Scott 04:40, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
I kindly ask of Mr Karaveks voice, please don't be a dick. -- Ned Scott 06:42, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
- Karaveks voice, would you please quit stating your viewpoints over and over? The images you and SlashDot are trying to work into the page are unsourced and not really necessary. Second, Nihonjoe has been posting on this article a little longer than you have; indeed, he was the one who first added the images. Perhaps if you had come to disscuss first, you would have had a better reception. As it is... you've been called a dick. -- David Souther
Looking through the history, it seems that none of the images are overly "Pornographic" in nature; the problem to me is a. the... overabundance and b. the lack of sources for many of the images. Karaveks voice, you yourself were trying to force your and SlashDot's pictures in to the article. I don't see them as being necessarily required; the point of an encyclopedia is to provide textual information that is accented or higlighted with pictures. More than one picture/page (of browser, not page of HTML) is in my opinion excessive, unless it has good reason. The current image is in my opinion tasteful of hentai, both capturing the art and the stereotypical image. While the previous yaoi/yuri images also accented the page, together they were too much and one alone would rather slant the perceived view of the article. I believe the best example for photos would be the current image (Fuusen q21.jpg) in it's current place, and perhaps a SOURCED alternative image for the Hentai Media section (CG render, picture of a carving...). -- David Souther
New images for article
Clearly we need new images we can all agree on. Something that is more hentai than the old ones, but maybe not as in your face.
In all honesty this is not about shocking, or what is tame, since those are both just POV. But there is something to be said about this article's usefulness going down if as soon as you see it you have to close the window so grandma doesn't see it. Or the poor soul who gets kicked out of the public library because he pulled this article up, and they thought he was downloading porn. This is not a case of saying "tough luck, buddy, deal with it". This is a situation in which we can accommodate, reasonably, and we should. There is a major difference in censorship and accommodation.
We want this article to be the best it can be; to be useful to as many as it can be. But I do understand that the previous images really didn't represent hentai. (That being said, I only felt Image:Boku_83.jpg came close to an average representation. The other ones weren't even good hentai.) I suggest external links for our "candidates" before uploading new images to Wikipedia. -- Ned Scott 04:40, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
- The only image I have any major objection to (as far as being in the article) is Image:Fuusen q21.jpg. The others (including the original three) would be fine and give a decent range of styles and content, IMHO. I included Image:CreamLemonMakoSexySymphonyPart1manga.jpg because Cream Lemon is arguably the most famous hentai anime series ever (and apparently has something for everyone in one episode or another); Image:LevelC-DVDcover.jpg to give representation to the shōnen-ai sub-genre; and Image:RenaiConsultant.jpg because it shows the "cute" side of some hentai manga, and gives some representation to the shōjo-ai sub-genre. As I said above, I'm fine with Image:Boku_83.jpg and Image:Yuna q28.jpg being used, too. --日本穣 Nihonjoe 06:53, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
- I have only an objection with Image:Fuusen q21.jpg as well. I agree that the line between censorship and accomodation is not fine, but I don't believe that that image accommodates that much. There are other images that fit the profile while still being SFW (Image:Boku_83.jpg is an excellent example). In my opinion, this isn't a matter of censorship as it is a matter of making the article being used for research rather than a pornographic website. (There is a big, big difference between art and pornography. A look at a Rennaissance Art gallery proves it.) You could very well give external links to NSFW images at the bottom, or at the very least add a NSFW tag at the top if needed. The end goal is an article that is used for research on the subject, and I think that that image isn't necessary for that purpose.--Offkilter 08:16, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not censored, but nor is it a shock site. There are many, many people who enjoy reading/watching hentai products regularly and never once look at badly-drawn pictures of women writhing about smeared with semen. Therefore, there is no need to include an image like Image:Fuusen q21.jpg simply to be "representative", because it is only representative of one narrow corner of a very broad genre.
And since the covers of so many hentai products are largely worksafe, it doesn't even seem to be a given that we need to include any non-worksafe images. Of my own collection of erogames, I estimate that only about a quarter have anything on their covers that I wouldn't be comfortable with a minor seeing, and scarcely any have anything more explicit than a nipple - regardless of the content of the game itself. (I'm not claiming these figures can be extended to the genre as a whole, merely pointing out that a lack of pornographic content would not in and of itself make the article inaccurate or unrepresentative.)
Therefore, I concur with the posters who propose removing Image:Fuusen q21.jpg: since there are alternatives which a wider range of users find acceptable and which are no less representative of the genre, I don't see that there's any reason not to use those alternatives. Avoiding censorship is a noble cause, but we should avoid censorship by ensuring that we describe things accurately, not by actively trying to offend people.
BTW, WP:NPA please. Some of the comments in the discussions above, particularly the constantly aggressive and insulting tone adopted by one of the people arguing in favour of the contentious images, are totally unacceptable for Wikipedia. — Haeleth Talk 11:06, 2 April 2006 (UTC)- Amen to that.--Offkilter 01:07, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with the above. An image that is not poorly drawn (proportions and shading) and less extreme might be better. While hentai can get worse, this is still too one-sided. Hentai may just be two anime characters having sex, as opposed to one character being raped/and or humiliated.Voice-of-AllT|@|ESP 17:18, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
- Whoaaa...bukakke is even worse...Voice-of-AllT|@|ESP 17:20, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Leave my Hentai alone! >:@
And Image:Boku 83.jpg seem to be alright:P
- >x<ino 23:53, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
-
- That image is still unsourced, meaning that it can't use in the article until SlashDot says where it came from. But judging from the watermark, it probably came off of the J-List website. --TheFarix (Talk) 00:03, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
- Here is the source. Kotepho 09:08, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
- That image is still unsourced, meaning that it can't use in the article until SlashDot says where it came from. But judging from the watermark, it probably came off of the J-List website. --TheFarix (Talk) 00:03, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
Dammit, all this hentai talks and imagery, is making me want to go back to watching Hentai again:P When I have stopped:)
- >x<ino 01:55, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
BOKUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU:P
- >x<ino 14:39, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
- I'd still rather not use something that was just taken off jlist.com. -- Ned Scott 00:57, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
-
- I Agree that we need to get a new flippin picture. And to whoever posted the image titled boku, you got the Dokuro-chan theme stuck in my head. (Vance Clarend 10:36, 6 April 2006 (UTC))
Same here! The person that posted that image, got that name "BOKU" stuck in my head. >:@
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!:P
- >x<ino 15:17, 6 April 2006 (UTC)