Forum:Toplessness

Intro
There are various anime with topless scenes. It appears that we can show this with males, but with females it isn't allowed because Wikia finds female nipples offensive or 'more nude' or something like that?

I am wondering if anyone knows any discussions on the main Wikia about this, or if it's actually just a rule or a bias enforced by the image review?

since March, has been up since March and shows n illustrated nipple. has been around since February and shows a live one. since June 2011 though in this case it is 'nudity' from the back.

http://www.wikia.com/Terms_of_use is what I want to get educated about, but there really is nothing there. We agree to not "Post or transmit any content that is obscene, pornographic, abusive, offensive, profane" ...

But nudity is not abusive. Much of what is denied has artistic merit so it is not obscene. Profanity is a term that applies to language, not images.

So I can only think that nipples or nudity is 'offensive' to some staff who delete them? I don't even understand this because in theory ANY content on ANY wikia project could be 'offensive' to any given person.

It's really a criteria that should get removed since it's so broad it allows the power to delete anything. By what justice is it applied here without actually going out of the way to explain that interpretation to us? +Yc 05:08, August 4, 2012 (UTC)

Responses
It's possible to get away with it, ecchi anime Wikis such as this one shows females naked breasts. http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s145/urbancowgurl777/White_Flash.png  15:15, August 4, 2012 (UTC)
 * I guess my mindset is I don't so much want to 'get away with' anything. Issues like this may just be a case of the image reviewers not getting around to censoring them yet. Ideally, I want them to know of and defend such images. They talk about it not being family-friendly or some nonsense, well not all wikis are about family-friendly topics. Pro wrestling for example had many plotlines not suitable for young children to be seeing, yet we have an extensive wiki about that. +Yc 19:06, August 18, 2012 (UTC)
 * I notice that w:c:HotD:File:Ch06 title.jpg is the only image in the section which White Flash Linked to. A good example. 99.250.152.225 05:31, September 12, 2012 (UTC)
 * I guess it would be alright for other Anime wikis to have naked pics. if the site have this:

"The wiki at .wikia.com contains objectionable content such as depictions of sexually suggestive images, and mainly artwork depicting females in arousing positions, which is generally not appropriate for general audiences. However, this is only limited to the images, and therefore anything else on the wiki does pertain to a mostly general audience.

In general, Wikia does not review nor do we endorse the content of this or any wiki. For more information about our policies, please visit Wikia's Terms of Use.

For more in depth information about  rules, visit Guidelines"-- http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s145/urbancowgurl777/White_Flash.png   16:50, September 12, 2012 (UTC)

Terminology
Also due to the biasedness of the 'topless' adjective, should I change this topic to topfree? Topfreeness? Topfreedom? Barechestedness? +Yc 19:36, August 18, 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't think the image reviewers are going to be used much in the future, and no need to change the topic.--Sxerks (talk) 21:01, August 19, 2012 (UTC)

Height of hypocrisy
User:Sannse has been involved in some censorship of scenes from manga (feel free to check out the deletion logs) calling the content inappropriate. Some things she's said:
 * "Some of the images were clearly of sex, and some were nude characters"
 * "It is against Wikia's Terms of Use to upload explicit content."
 * "Please remove all images showing nudity or sex acts."

In the meanwhile, let's check out her more extensive user page over at community:User:Sannse. It's been around since 2005. Here is a snippet:
 * I'm also a big fan of Uncyclopedia, and love to contribute photoshopped images to the site. My user page there is at Uncyclopedia:User:Sannse.

So hey, let's take a look at w:c:Uncyc:User:Sannse/Gallery, that she links to. If you happen to see a gallery 6 columns wide as I do, check out the third row, 4th column. To save trouble, if anyone has any trouble finding it, I'll link it directly. Warning: NSFW! Not work safe. is an image of 'porn' as it is labelled.

She added this image in 2006, and has not taken it down since. This image not only depicts the ever-forbidden nipple, but a woman's buttox too! Beyond that, there is heavily implied (verbally and visually) sexual intercourse between two nude individuals (not counting jewels).

The content added to AnimatedFeet (a wiki that includes scenes from anime and manga as well as other cartoons) led to a block for 'vandalism or other disruption'. The note that this was 'Inappropriate Content' was reiterated in the block summary.

I am hoping that this protest will serve if the block is not rescinded, if she or others continue to unfairly censor manga and anime while giving special treatment to Uncyclopedia. This proves that this is merely no matter of erotica slipping through the cracks. This is an example of Staff adding porn (regardless of parody) to a site which they have claimed we must keep nudity and sexuality from.

My guess is these double standards result from making more advertisement dollars off of Uncyc. That or some kind of especial hate on for manga, I don't know. It just glares to me that this is a clear contrast.

I still have copies of every one of the images I uploaded which were removed out of that list. Not a single one of them, IMO, depicts sexuality as explicitly as that image added by staff.

In such cases where something were hypothetically more extreme, it should be possible to contact the uploader or a SysOp on a wiki to censor it appropriately without removing it outright, much less banning the uploader.

If someone makes an attempt to censor, they have demonstrated good will, and I think they should be allowed to build on that if further censorship is needed. People should not be lumped in with vandals for not telepathically understanding the extreme limits people want censorship to build up to.

Thoughts? 99.250.152.225 05:24, September 12, 2012 (UTC)