Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga

Template:Fiction notice

CSE milestone

In an interesting milestone, the anime/manga reliable sources search engine has today passed 2000 blacklisted domains and 300 whitelisted domains. (Specifically, 2128/302.) The search which had the dubious distinction of adding so much to the blacklist was Sexfriend.

As ever, editors are encouraged to use the CSE to find sources for articles; I encourage everyone also to report junk-filled searches or suggest additional domains/URLs for the black/whitelists. --Gwern (contribs) 21:39 24 January 2011 (GMT)

Yumekui Merry translation check

Will someone be willing to do a translation check at Yumekui Merry for the episode titles

LineColor

An editor first suggested to change the default color of |LineColor=, then completely eliminate it citing WP:Deviations. Please contribute to the discussion at Template talk:Episode list#LineColor. —Farix (t | c) 00:34, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

FLRC for List of YuYu Hakusho episodes (season 3)

I have nominated List of YuYu Hakusho episodes (season 3) for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 09:30, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Avatar usage under discussion again

See Talk:Avatar_(Hinduism)#Requested_move_2 where it is requested that the move done by 2010 move request be undone, moving the Hindu concept to primary in place of the disambiguation page. 64.229.101.183 (talk) 03:15, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Lolicon delisted as GA

Jezhotwells, in his infinite wisdom and lack of knowledge on the topic, has delisted Lolicon as a GA. Just FYI... ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 17:02, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

I've asked for clarification as to how the article still fails the GA criteria. I'd be happier if the MTCG entry was being used as a post-lolicon-boom source, but I think the article has improved a lot. Perhaps a peer review would be a good next step? --Malkinann (talk) 23:15, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

If sources are an issue, I spent some time today cleaning up CSE hits for lolicon. As of the instant I write this, all 15 pages of results are free of porn links. --Gwern (contribs) 02:05 17 February 2011 (GMT)

Endless arguments... why don't people just improve the article, add new material, delete old stuff, and then bring it up again after a few months of concerted effort? Anything else starts to waste time, don't you think? Timothy Perper (talk) 07:34, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

It's also about the way the editor handled the review since he's done this in the past, ie delisted without giving any help after an initial review and without departing commentary as to why something was delisted.陣内_Jinnai 03:13, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Think of Wikipe-tan! up for deletion

Just a heads up, think of Wikipe-tan and please reply to this AfD. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:38, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

At this point its likely to be deleted. Political correctness seems to be the ultimate trumpcard over a bit of humor anymore. I'd suggest userfying.陣内_Jinnai 18:22, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Yep everything has to be politically correct now, this goes against WP:NOTCENSORED and WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Personally with everything going on in the world from Miley Cirus bein ga role model for kids and doing drugs to Child porn why people target things liek thsi is beyond me as it does not promoste anything and peopel (not all) find it funny. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:15, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

There's a lot more going on in this discussion of Wikipetan than mere "political correctness." The question is whether or not you want Wikipedia to include "humor" for its own sake, for its own jokey purposes, when that "humor" offends people. It doesn't matter one tiny bit if you think it's hilarious -- some people are offended. Is that the public image you want for Wikipedia? Is that the tone and demeanor you want Wikipedia to put before the public? Do you want Wikipedia to appear to say that no one here cares if YOU, reader or visitor, are offended; WE don't care about YOU, reader or visitor, not one tiny little bit we don't? As my old grandma used to say, "Keep your jokes in the street. Don't bring 'em home." Timothy Perper (talk) 02:00, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

WP:NOTCENSORED: "Wikipedia may contain content that some readers consider objectionable or offensive, even exceedingly so (see Wikipedia:Content disclaimer). Wikipedia cannot guarantee that articles or images will always be acceptable to all readers, or that they will adhere to general social or religious norms." Wikipedia already doesn't care about offending the reader. Why start now?--十八 02:05, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

That's only work if you manage to define Wikipedia. By Wikipedia do you go by just the editors who share the same opinions than you ? Sure there is a lot of editors would happy to learn that they are not part of Wikipedia. One side of the discussion cannot have the monopoly over the word "Wikipedia". I would not argument using the "we" of Wikipedia in such discussions like this one because there is no consensus before hand within its community on the subject. --KrebMarkt (talk) 20:54, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

That is meant for articles that are read by the casual reader looking for an article on wikipedia. Still, it's stupid to even keep it.Bread Ninja (talk) 03:05, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

I did a major overhaul of the page and took out alot of the offensive stuff people were complaining about. Hey what can you do thats life. I would rather have an article that has something funny to do with wikipe-tan than no article at all though. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:12, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Seems inoffensive. Timothy Perper (talk) 11:58, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

People who are intrested in our project mascot might want to pay attention to this AfD, a number of editors are asking why wikipe-tan is even on wikipedia and what images of her (If any) should be used where outside our project. I am not going to be the one who makes that topic here just a heads up. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 20:47, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Don't know if this is related somehow, but IvoryMeerkat removed her from the Moe anthropomorphism article ([1]).--十八 22:30, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes I noticed that too and left "The image is essentially original work generated for Wikipedia. It was removed as a WP:SELFREF but there are also no reliable sources which identify Wikipe-tan as a moe anthropomorphism of Wikipedia" can images be made to help out wikipedia thoug hto give examples? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:30, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

WP:OR does not apply to images that are made to meet NFCC. It is explicitly stated as such per WP:OI. Feel free to revert any an all attempts to remove them because of OR violations except in very extreme circumstances, ie someone comes out with a new form of artwork that isn't verified.陣内_Jinnai 00:12, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

More to comment I also see Tarc attacking people in the AfD. Is there really going to be a battle over a mascot here? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:32, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

In spite calls for there not to be, that's what it appears to be devolving into.陣内_Jinnai 00:17, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Voice actor Mónica Villaseñor

The article on voice actress Mónica Villaseñor is a long-term unreferenced biography of a living person. I have tried, and failed, to find any reliable sources to support the article. There is a list of roles at ANN] but I'm assuming from your guidelines that this does not count as a WP:RS. She does not appear to have an entry at Behind the Voice Actors and es.wikipedia has deleted articles on this actor three times for lack of notability. I know articles on voice actors can be difficult to source so I thought I would post here in the hope that someone with better knowledge of the area might like to take an interest. If it remains unsourced for much longer, it may be nominated for deletion.--Plad2 (talk) 21:05, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

• Article now at AfD--CharlieDelta (talk) 21:16, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Someone here would likely have to have a translation copy of those versions. Maybe the Cowboy Bebop one could be used if someone has the international version. That's the only one I think that might be possible.陣内_Jinnai 22:13, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Spring 2011 anime premiers

I've started compiling a list of the Spring 2011 anime premiers and my eyes boggle at the shear number. Of the 33 premiers next April that I've so far learned about, 13 currently don't have articles and at least 2 are games that probably need a separate anime article. It seems that we have a lot of work to do in the next month. —Farix (t | c) 02:47, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

A few naming issues:

• Should [C] The Money of Soul and Possibility Control be located at C: The Money of Soul and Possibility Control or (C) The Money of Soul and Possibility Control? Do to technical limitations, the square brackets cannot be included in the title. My preference is the first one.
• Ano Hi Mita Hana no Namae o Bokutachi wa Mada Shiranai. (あの日見た花の名前を僕達はまだ知らない。) included the period? Using Bakuman as an example, I would believe no.
• Should Appleseed XIII have its own article like the rest of the Appleseed series?
• Should Steins;Gate get a separate article from the video game? The game article is already well developed and it wouldn't be a good idea to included a bunch of stuff about the anime adaptation, which will require significant changes.
• Should タイガー＆バニー be located at Tiger and Bunny or Tiger & Bunny. I'm not sure how WP:MOS affects ampersands in official titles.

—Farix (t | c) 00:20, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Official ampersands should be used, yes. And agree about no period. No opinion on the others. —Quasirandom (talk) 03:14, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I still find it funny that we include exclamation and question marks in titles, but refuse to put periods when they're in the original title.--十八 09:26, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I find it odd too. Are periods not equal to exclamation marks? I think there should be a deeper discussion than the one in bakuman for this. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 09:56, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

I dont think it should be a matter of wikipedia standards against the period in general, it's just more english sources won't put the period in unlike exclamation points and question marks that will more effectively change the structure of the sentence. Which is why there was so much dispute with Oh My Goddess! title. so yes, periods aren't as equal to exclamation points or question marks in general because the main usage is being used at the end of the title. Periods have made itself in titles many times but just to place a decimal. I think they can be added if more sources add them in and not at the end of the title.

Anyways, (C) would be problematic as we use "()" to distinguish other articles. And "C:" would have to be verified. I dont think theres too much problem naming the article as it's intended name. I support a split for Steins;Gate and Appleseed XIII. Tiger & Bunny would be the most likely choice, but not so sure if you verified the name in english.Bread Ninja (talk) 10:54, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Nice work on this list Farix. Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 04:58, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, but it shows that we are going to be very busy come March/April with almost 40 premiers and growing. —Farix (t | c) 05:11, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, I'll be editting again since the thorns in my side (IMHO) have decreased by two of late. I'm looking forward to more God Only Knows, Aria the Scarlet Ammo and Lotte.... I'll try to look at some of the older articles too. Hopefully I'll stay away from Israel-Palestine for a while too. Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 05:16, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

IP Editor check

Would someone like to double check the contributions of 114.79.54.210 (talk). After reverting the editor twice at Air Gear for adding dubious information and given that the IP is from Indonesia, I have a nagging feeling that the other edits may also be dubious. —Farix (t | c) 11:41, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

I haven't reverted any edits yet but I would like to add 67.205.251.109 (talk). – Allen4names 04:06, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Allcinema RS check

Allcinema online - it appears to be a database info and could help especially with for Japanese episode date listings as a centralized locationsince ANN is no longer an option. Their about us page doesn't give too much info, but the 2nd related company appears to be a marketing research company similar to Media Create. I found 1 press release by them [prtimes.jp/data/corp/0/06b01ef4a1a4832876112566d917397d.pdf] which doesn't tell too much more. It doesn't appear to be user contribued database like IMDB from what I can tell, but my Japanese isn't good enough to tell for certain where their info comes from.陣内_Jinnai 19:55, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikipe-tan

I hesitated posting this here because theirs been attempts to stip the discussion, but it seems to be ongoing. Looks like an admin finally closed it. User:IvoryMeerkat claims at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Wikipedia:Wikipe-tan conflict that by the nature of moe (slang) all images of Wikipe-tan are lolicon and thus should be removed. In addition to that he been removing images of her from our pages and templates.

This is very likely to result in an RfC on her existance here at Wikipedia as claims have been leveled that her existance creates a hostile enviroment to women.陣内_Jinnai 04:36, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes there have been numopurs editors that want wikipe-tan removed and those who support the mascot we have here, I encourage all of you who care to join in any discussion that is made reguarding our mascot. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 04:37, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

The discussion was closed. I would suggest, if the RfC or VP discussion is created to post here as this is not only an attack on her, but they've also some have leveled an attack on this WikiProject by extension.陣内_Jinnai 04:41, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Apparently, according to Tarc's expert opinion, Wikipe-tan is cartoon porn. I miss the wild old days where we could use fair use images and didn't have to deal with shit like this.... Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 04:47, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Tarc tactic, which has also been adopted by IvoryMeerkat, is to associate everyone who defends Wikipe-tan with pedophilia by calling Wikipe-tan lolicon or child pornography. It's really nothing more than an indirect personal attack and, given Wikipedia's policy of indefinitely banning all identified pedophiles, he should be called out on it every time he does it. —Farix (t | c) 05:06, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

to me, the character resembles a simpler version of hatsune miku. a different hairstyle (and personally better drawn) along with a male level of equal value to Wikipe-tan (like a brother) could be added. That way, it can promote in someway kin-ship and unity. i know this might be asking alot though. So if it would take too much time, i understand. Also remove the lolicon style. I don't really see it as porn, but i could see some people thinking so.Bread Ninja (talk) 04:49, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I do not know if much of a case could be made against wikipe-tan yes images not related to the encyclopedia and are just on userpages could be removed from the gallery at WP:Wikipe-tan but other than that is there really concrete proof that this turns women away? Wikipe-tan violates no rules and actully helps much more than hurts wikipedia from the article examples used to being a mascot for our project. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 04:51, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I think the "it drives women away" is overdramatic responses by Wikipe-tan haters. I don't see any reason to remove images from the gallery, they may have future use. I don't believe the much hated bikini image was originally created for the fanservice page, but found a home there eventually. Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 04:57, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I also don't think it drives women away. but i could see it to rage so much. Which is propose a male character alongside.Bread Ninja (talk) 04:59, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I notified Kasuga as he should be aware of this as her creator.陣内_Jinnai 05:00, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Sadly, I do not think that is going to do any good over at his talk page on Japan's wiki it seems that Kasuga is no longer an admin there or even active. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 05:14, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Heh. Genderswap her! Wikipe-oniichan! (Zomg) Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 05:02, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

NO, it would be too time consuming. we just add a male version. but doing so, i would also propose possibly changing her default appearance too. and for the sake of creativity, possibly make Wikipe-tan older and wiki-kun younger since he will obviously be newer than her.Bread Ninja (talk) 05:05, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

We should also look through wiki-tan's archives on her page it seems that the idea of making her older and giving her a male counterpart are not new. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 05:10, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Eh, I don't think we should "age" her at least physically. The moe has become rather iconic with her if you look not only here, but beyond wikipedia; changing it now may very much have a worse backlash than doing nothing and may cause even more unwanted attention.

I would also prefer not to do a mere gender flip of Wikipe-tan, but actually make a new character who is visually about the same age. Making one older than the other is likely to cause more headaches in the future as people complain about stereotyping one way or another. As for style, I'm not sure what we should do.陣内_Jinnai 05:17, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I am also against making her older as people complain either way, Does someone on our project want to make a same age male counterpart for wikipe-tan, I suggest brother and sister as we do not want more complaints about a relationship. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 05:20, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Yea, there was someone complaining about the adult bikini version.

As for a male counterpart, I might try something. Maybe Kasuga will.陣内_Jinnai 05:22, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

unless it's provocative, i don't think it would matter, and i do believe we shouldn't make swimsuit versions of the characters. and i doubt it will be that big of a change as there are other artwork that shows her older, and some with a more elaborate style. But i guess they both have to be at an equal age, in order to avoid those problems.Bread Ninja (talk) 05:27, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I believe the bikini image was created to fill a gap where we could no longer use a non-free image in the fanservice article. It was intended to serve a particular purpose but once pandora's box is opened, a CC liscensed work can be hard to stop metamorphing. Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 05:32, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

the bathing suit for wikipe-tan is quite censored, and i don't personally see a problem with it, though it still can be done a lil less around the top. And if anyone who doesn't know. I'm female. Anyways...it's good to use wikipe-tan in areas where free-content is difficult to use, but we still need to control certain things. i just think an older version will have more restrictions.Bread Ninja (talk) 05:35, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Glad to see we're getting somewhere here. Disclaimer: I closed the discussion at WP:ANI, and to be clear, I am NOT an admin (yet?). I closed it per WP:IAR because the discussion was degenerating into pure WP:DRAMA and was way out of scope for ANI. A couple ideas: A brother for Wikipe-tan is an excellent idea. I'd be in favor of a little brother since the same age could lead to interpretation issues. I'd also suggest updating Wikipe-tan's attire to a more academic type (we are an encyclopedia after all). The bikini image should probably be deleted, it's out of scope. The article it's used on should get a new image without the wikipe-tan connotation. Just my ideas. Anyone who can want to start drawing? I'm not much good except for stick figures... N419BH 05:37, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I disagree that its out of scope. The bikini image was, to my recollection, created for the fanservice article. It adequately displays what is considered fanservice. Although, I would not have included the underboob... but I didn't create the image. Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 06:08, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

The main issue with that image is that it's of wikipe-tan. If we made it of a generic female that would solve that. N419BH 06:11, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't see that as a problem. Its all part of the moe anthropomorphism thing. Wikipedia isn't precisely a safe place and having that reflected by our "mascot" seems rather ironically fitting. (You should see some of the old Imac"-tan" images....) Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 06:25, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

All one would need to do is have a generic anime-looking character in a swimsuit to talk about fan service. Just not "older Wikipe-tan" to avoid the issue that is being contested. --MASEM (t) 05:37, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I have to agree that the issue here is being blown out of proportion by a rally call of political correctness. The average character from anime or manga is a teenaged girl, hence the whole basis of moe/-tans. I can appreciate that if said character is aimed to be of a certain innocence and age, we shouldn't, on WP, promote artwork of her in more tasteful-yet-alluring outfits, teenaged or adult. I can appreciate a teenaged male counterpart, possibly representing meta.wikipedia.org or the like (since, presumably, that would be a school uniform, suit and tie, ergo more formal looking), to be used as similar artwork as the Wikipe-tan character. --MASEM (t) 05:37, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I do not think the bikini images of wikipe-tan should be deleted as long as they are confined to userpages or talk pages if that is the case I do not see a problem with it (It is already confined there anyways for one or two of the images). -Knowledgekid87 (talk) 05:39, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I actully do not think wikipe-tan should be changed in any way, she is become notable (See her page) on how she looks and was even featured in a newspaper and cosplayed. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 05:41, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

like i said as long as we keep things restricted, giving an older appearance wouldn't be that big of an issue. And i do believe a more academic appearance could be taken care of. the bikini is used more for the fan service. But it could've taken a different approach. And wikipe-tan at the moment doesn't look anything like a teenage girl, more like just a girl. Still, in order to solve this completely, wikipe-tan also needs some remodeling. Despite her notability, i dont think that would affect much, we could put a history and show earlier appearance and explain why it has changed.Bread Ninja (talk) 05:44, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Very true. I'm not suggesting we delete the current wikipe-tan. I'm suggesting we update her. A brother is a great idea though. The main issues expressed with wikipe-tan were her outfit and the images of her in a swimsuit, particularly the older one in the bikini. I don't have a problem with the swimsuit one. The bikini would be fine if it wasn't wikipe-tan, but I can see how people would have issue with that image being of her and not a generic person. As for the outfit it is a valid point. We do need to remember that we're the number 1 or 2 google result for a huge number of topics. Shouldn't our unofficial mascot reflect an academic endeavor? N419BH 05:47, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Seeing that wikipe-tan is a product of Moe anthropomorphism will she retain those features? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 05:55, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

the current older version isn't so bad. but a different wardrobe needs to be done in order to avoid this problem again. she's dressed up as a french maid.Bread Ninja (talk) 06:00, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps she should be made a bit older as the thing she represents (wikipedia) is older now too. As long as it's done tactfully that is. N419BH 06:03, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

i really don't want to push older unless she were to have a more formal look.Bread Ninja (talk) 06:13, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I think an agre change is going to far. A wardrobe change, might be better, but I'd prefer to not jump the gun. There seems to be some who want her to stay like she is, some who want her to be older, some who want a wardrobe change and some both.I, myself would prefer her to stay like she is, though her wardobe could be diversified somewhat.

On the other hand there seems to be near universal consensus that a male counterpart, likely a brother, would be benifical. I suggest we start where there is consensus.陣内_Jinnai 06:17, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Just here to point out. While I have no objection for update her, Western-drawing anime character is usually missing some kind of...essence (not bias or anything, just observation). I can't explan it well, but there seem to be subtle cultural-level differrent between Western's "cuteness" and Japanese's "moe" (hard to descript, but I think people here understand what I'm talking). Not that it's impossible to make Wikipe-tan older while retain her moe appeal, but it's hard work. Then again, even Nanoha got some critism when she growth up. L-Zwei (talk) 06:19, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I don't think anyone is talking about changing and replacing the current representation of Wikipe-tan. I think we're talking about providing alternate forms so it doesn't appear (even though I'm sure its no way intentional) we're promoting loli around the younger Wikipe-tan figure. Create a equivalent male character, that removes the sexism, and create older versions to remove the age issue so that no single version is favored. Heck, add other outfits to these other forms to round it out. But nothing about any of the existing young girl Wikipe-tan images need to be removed. --MASEM (t) 06:22, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Even the school swimsuit image is quite tame. I don't see any basis for a suggestion that we're promoting loli except from two users with rather unique viewpoints. Kyaa the Catlord (talk) 06:27, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

well i would like her to be older if they update her outfit for formal and academic to fit more of wikipedia's style. But moe in general is a vague term used a lot in japan, and has also been used in different situation where wikipe-tan doesn't (but can) fit into. "stay as she is" is a problem at this moment and has to be fixed. no questions about that. She is a little girl wearing a french maid outfit, that in japan have certain cafe's wear women wear these as a uniform that males often enjoy for the very reason. I can also also agree we need a brother, but adding a brother without updating the current may cause problems when we do eventually agree to update her (and not match the brother). it is not a unique viewpoint, it's practically everywhere with wikipe-tan.Bread Ninja (talk) 06:29, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

It's another cultural differrent. We known that Doraemon is family-friendly show, yet whoever readed or watched most of it would known that the nudity isn't uncommon in this title. Yet you must be crazy to think that Fujiko Fujio promote lolicon. L-Zwei (talk) 10:43, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Sorry Masem, but I don't think that will get us anywhere by changing Wikipe-tan's design. First, those complaining about Wikipe-tan being or promoting lolicon or "child porn" are either using that as a shield to attack other editors or simply clueless as to what lolicon or child porn actually is. To them, any girl, regardless of how much clothing she has on, is going to be lolicon or child porn. The simple matter is they don't like Wikipe-tan and will use any argument to remove her. This is clearly evident during the ANI discussion and the MfD.

The only real issue here is use of Wikipe-tan in article space (beyond the portal and stub templates) as it relates to WP:SELF (i.e. referring to Wikipedia in a non-neutral fashion). It would be better if we conduct a survey of where Wikipe-tan images are used in articles and determine if (a) the image is really necessary and (b) is there another free use image available as a replacement. So far, I only see the image at moe anthropomorphism should be kept to maintain WP:NPOV for much the same reasons we use a snapshot of Wikipedia's main page for browser articles. In part because there are very few moe anthropomorphic caricatures (MAC) that are free use and using a different moe anthropomorphic caricature would be promoting the thing the MAC is suppose to represent. Though in the other cases, I don't see how the images are referring to Wikipedia in a non-neutral fashion. —Farix (t | c) 12:36, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure that the NPOV argument for having the image on moe anthropomorphism is necessarily correct; it could equally be argued that we should select a (free) image based on the degree to which the associated mascot is widely used/recognized/etc., rather than defaulting to a Wikipedia mascot. Are the Mac mascots significantly better-known than ours, for example?

(There is not, I think, a shortage of free images per se—note that Uncyclopedia has a slew of them, for example—but many of them are not ideal for a similar reason: they are simply not recognized outside of a very small group.)

As far as the images in project-space are concerned, I think there are three distinct questions we might consider:

1. What images should exist?

   Given that most of the images are hosted on Commons, I think this issue is essentially out of our hands. If anyone dislikes a particular image so much that they want it deleted, they're welcome to head over there and nominate it; given Commons' fairly liberal attitude, I doubt they'll get very far.

2. What images should be showcased on the WP:TAN page?

   I do think that we should be slightly more selective in displaying images on what is essentially a public-facing showcase, particularly in the case of derivative images that have little to do with Wikipe-tan's role as a mascot. Merely because someone spends a few minutes doing basic image editing (cf. File:Wikipe-tan (burqa).png) is not sufficient reason to guarantee them placement on a high-profile page, in my opinion.

3. What images should be used for project templates/pages/etc.?

   I generally agree with the suggestions above to add some more variety (different outfits, adding a male counterpart, etc.) to the current selection of images. While I doubt that anyone who finds the basic image truly offensive would be comfortable with Wikipedia anyways, given the plethora of offensive material in other articles, I do think it would be worthwhile to try and appeal to a broader audience if we can do so without compromising the spirit of the mascot.

It's worth pointing out that we do have images of Wikipe-tan both in "academic" contexts (e.g. File:Wikipe-tan the Library of Babel.png, File:Wikipe-tan sailor fuku.png, File:Kasuga s Wikipedia Submission by cult50contests.jpg) as well as as an adult (e.g. File:Adult Wikipe-tan.png, File:Wikipe-tan in navy uniform.png); these might be more suitable in some contexts than the default image. Kirill ^{[talk] [prof]} 13:02, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

@Farix, to be clear, I see no reason why we need to change the base Wikipe-tan design - my idea is to only augment what images already exist at commons with alternate clothing, the male counterpart, etc. to simply dispel the far-fetched idea that WP is obsessed with loli around this girl figure. --MASEM (t) 13:25, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Actually he does have a point about being NPOV. The issue came up with taking screenshots to have Wikipedia. First and foremost, we are not here to promote anyone candidate over another, even if they are the more prominence. Since wikipe-tan is clearly more neutral than anything else (she isn't promoting anything by Wikipedia itself) there cannot be anyone more neutral than her in anime/manga and similarly related articles.

I do think a male version would be helpful, not only to show we aren't sexist, but to use in certain article spaces where having Wikipe-tan would be inappropriate (other than shotacon where given Wikipe-tan's history any "mascot" would be inappropriate) or where having a female only character could be constued as biased.陣内_Jinnai 14:16, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Why'd you all choose a moe girl for you mascot?

It was an unfortuante choice, folks. There are many other types of anime that would not be so fraught. You guys could come up with a great anime mascot, I'm sure of it. That you chose to embrace the otaki moe culture necessarily brings with it the controversy that surrounds said culture (and there certainly is a lot of controversy surrounding it). IvoryMeerkat (talk) 16:34, 25 February 2011 (UTC)