Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lolicon

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was SPEEDY KEEP, nominator withdrew, no other delete votes. Crotalus horridus (TALK • CONTRIBS) 20:32, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lolicon

I believe that the descriptions on the page are wholly inaccurate of the scale of Lolicon. Basically put, this is drawn, simulated Child Pornography. The links on this page go directly to sites where immense amounts of this stuff are available. Lolicon can also be used in the process of grooming children over the net for Sexual Contact by Pædophiles. Whilst I appreciate that Wikipedia is not censored for minors, and is subject to the US First Amendment (Freedom of the Press), there is a line which can be crossed in my opinion, and this article totally crosses it. How would Wikipedia react if someone created an article which linked directly to a site depicting genuine pædophilia? There would be hell to pay, I suspect. I nominate this article to be deleted. Thor Malmjursson 17:19, 14 January 2006 (UTC) Talk to me

• Strong keep for notable material. Clearly, you don't appreciate that Wikipedia is not censored. // paroxysm (n) 17:21, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy keep First off, this is a significant part of Japanese culture, and it's becoming an issue around the world as well, as recent legislation and arrests over the issue-- sourced in the article-- show.
  Secondly, this nomination is in bad faith. WP:NOT censored, especially not the articles. You can't nominate an article because you find it disgusting or "crosses a line"; if you don't like the links, clean them up or discuss it on the Talk page. You might as well delete Pedophilia. Ashibaka tock 17:22, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
• Comment If you don't like the article, work on it, don't burn it. silsor 17:24, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy keep as above --Heah ^talk 17:25, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep This article discusses a real and acknowledged phenomenon in Japanese culture; the deletion proposer does not cite any reason why it should be deleted other than, fundamentally, "I don't like the topic discussed". There is a different debate on the opportunity to link to sites displaying such content, though. David.Monniaux 17:32, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy keep as per Ashibaka... Mikkerpikker 17:33, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, WP doesn't sweep things under carpets. Paul Carpenter 17:40, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
• Closed, I have discussed my point with Paroxysm on their talk page and I have seen clear consensus to close this debate. I accept the article will be kept on the wikipedia, and understand & accept all your views. I withdraw this article from the AFD system. Thanks for voting. Thor Malmjursson 18:10, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.