Commons:Deletion requests/File:Sanny and Tess nude.png

File:Sanny and Tess nude.png

I don't see any educational value in this 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 16:59, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

 Keep represents w:futanari, fanart of notable Wikimedia artist. Commons is not censored, there is nothing wrong with the image. Dronebogus (talk) 17:03, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

 Keep Good quality art --Trade (talk) 17:30, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

 Keep I agree with Dronebogus. Magatsu62 (talk) 23:32, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Kept per consensus Dronebogus (talk) 05:15, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

File:Sanny and Tess nude.png

Out of scope homemade cartoon porn...again. Commons is not a personal fap stash. Just Step Sideways (talk) 20:44, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

 Speedy keep frivolous nomination; was already nominated and kept once (albeit by me but consensus was obvious) and is COM:INUSE. If you don’t care about how Commons works please refrain from editing it; you aren’t given a free pass for incompetence because you’re an admin on another wiki. Dronebogus (talk) 22:11, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Per @JPxG: ”For the record, it may be noted that Just Step Sideways announced he was opening this DR in a Wikipediocracy thread expressly dedicated to catty whining about Dronebogus, which may go some way to explaining the bizarrely vituperative tone of his contributions to it.” Dronebogus (talk) 11:05, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

•  Process note Per my closing of this Administrators' noticeboard thread, I have asked the nominator (Just Step Sideways) and the uploader (Dronebogus) to stop interacting with each other. As such, one or both of them may stop participating in this DR. The closing admin should take this into consideration if any questions are unanswered by one or the other, etc. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 22:19, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
•  Speedy keep It's INUSE, therefore in scope.--Prosfilaes (talk) 01:35, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
  • At and ; while the first was added by Dronebogus, the second was added by local user Iruka13.--Prosfilaes (talk) 01:39, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
• How is this not cartoon child porn? All of these images. In what way are they "educational"? By the way, I wasn't canvassed from some discussion board, but I did come here because of a thread Dronebogus started on ANI on the English Wikipedia. Liz (talk) 05:05, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

  @Liz: I don’t know how it is child porn. They don’t look like children. There is zero implication they’re children. I’d highly recommend you redact that immediately. Dronebogus (talk) 09:52, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

  @Liz This is a fairly common misunderstanding of these types of illustrations. These are not children, just child-like characters. Think of Wikipe-tan, for example. So these are sexualized versions of child-like characters, which is technically not kiddie porn even if some people find it disturbing. Sometimes when Wikipe-tan is shown in a sexual context, her proportions are made more adult-like, as in File:Wikipetan-minna-calm.png, which is part of a series of Wikipe-tan for the same strip poker game as the image under discussion. So the child character Wikipe-tan can be shown dressed up in the maid outfit, but they are at the same time an adult, so there's nothing wrong with seeing them strip and masturbate. You see? Counterfeit Purses (talk) 15:52, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

  For reference if these images are child porn then this and this would also have to be given they’re of the same characters. Dronebogus (talk) 20:40, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

  So, even if I buy your explanation, what is the educational value of images of "child-like" cartoon women stripping and masturbating? How is that in line with the mission of Wikimedia Commons? I'm not against nudity but this just seems purient and the association with children seems obvious to me even if you disagree. Liz (talk) 02:49, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

  Dronebogus is temporarily blocked, so can't respond. Since Just Step Sideways insisted this DR is about this file alone, and you can see where it's in use on the Russian Wiktionary, which is part of the mission of Commons, to provide an image store for whatever free images the WMF projects feel they need.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:31, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

•  Keep; in use. Queen of Hearts (talk) 08:22, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
•  Delete this image is of no educational value, it is a highly sexualised image of clearly very youthful (they appear to be juvenile) fictional characters. This image seems to have been uploaded solely for the uploader's personal gratification. Further, the uploaded added this image to Wiktionary without an edit summary and has reverted attempts to remove it . 1.152.111.98 03:15, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
•  Delete someone used child style paper dolls to make some disturbing images. Not something wikimedia should be keeping. Please preserve records about the uploader for the FBI. 弥助は本物の忍者だった (talk) 04:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
•  Delete A group work put together using a software template; as such, only a 3rd-hand representation of Niabot's art, formulaic, and Commons has better examples of the genre, including Niabot's work and File:Futanari2020.jpg, which has similar content (cut off at the knees rather than full-body) and personalises the 2 characters more. This file is used on 2 versions of Wiktionary and in the uploader's comprehensive personal gallery; I count 31 uses of the other outside of that user's galleries (including the 2(!) Wikidata items for futanari), so I would say the editing community has chosen and demonstrated that this file is superfluous to Commons' educational needs. Category:Strip Poker Night at the Inventory demonstrates that Commons also has no shortage of examples of collective art from this source. Yngvadottir (talk) 09:46, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Which is bad policy IMO. Projects are independent, and don't have to accept the choice of the other projects, and INUSE respects that. Commons' needs is to support the other projects, and that includes not editorializing about which images they should be using.--Prosfilaes (talk) 10:36, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

•  Delete per Yngvadottir. There is clear issues with this content creator and we should think about cleaning house for similar images. We can hold ourselves to higher standards. It is possible. ජපස (talk) 15:52, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

• Jimbo Wales did clean house of all these images in 2010, and most of the images he deleted have been restored. Engaging in witch hunts against editors or Puritan purges are not something we need to do.--Prosfilaes (talk) 03:31, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

•  Delete. Not being used, of no apparent value, and questionable legality. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 03:36, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
  • "Not being used" is false.--Prosfilaes (talk) 19:51, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

    I guess there's some edit warring over this file happening on the wiktionaries. Whatever. The important issue is that this image makes these characters look like children, and such content is of dubious legality within the United States (and many other parts of the world). There are versions of this file that would serve just as well and aren't so infantilized. We don't need this file. We can do better than this. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 00:43, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

Deleted: per nomination; Dronebogus has made a request on my user talk page to delete this file. It is also no longer in use. Per Yng, there are many better files to use than this. —Matrix(!) {user - talk? - _uselesscontributions} 15:34, 26 July 2024 (UTC)