File talk:Lolicon Sample.png

Purpose
This picture "has has a legitimate purpose related to the administration of justice or to science, medicine, education or art" and "does not pose an undue risk of harm to persons under the age of eighteen years", right?--65.1.26.229 (talk) 01:52, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Education? - (unsigned message by 64.106.83.140 at 08:48, 3 December 2008)
 * It seems the purpose would be related primarily to art, secondarily to education, and if one considers psychology a science or psychiatry a medicine, those have dealt with topics related to the art and it also influences the administration of justice. No risk has been demonstrated. 174.115.134.69 (talk) 08:12, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Bullet points? Nevermind... this image is useful. Firstly, it is a free media image, created for Wikipedia. Secondly, it does not have any serious sexual undertones, at least not ones that would immediately be offensive. Thirdly, we are sort of hosing ourselves because this implies that Wikipedia editors enjoy viewing sexually suggestive images of personifications of Wikipedia-related websites. Fourthly, there is no good replacement, and even though Wikipedia is not censored, it is not a good idea to put anything that resembles child pornography on a public website, due to severe legal monstrosities put in place by various governments. --Carrot Lord (talk) 14:58, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Where's the original picture?
There had been one with an anime girl eating a Popsicle. But I can't find the picture now. Where did it go? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.104.145.19 (talk) 09:27, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe that was removed due to a lack of being able to ascertain the copyright status. This image replaced it because the origin is known, it was created by the one who donated Wikipe-tan. 174.115.134.69 (talk) 08:12, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Specifically, that being Kasuga. Nym (talk) 06:34, 22 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I believe that it is actually not owned by a company. I found image again someone's personal photobucket account. Individuals who draw art don't usually copyright their work like companies do, so if they don't spcifically display the circle-c simbol on the image, it can be assumed to not have a copyright I believe. I may be wrong with this. Though even if one assumes it IS copyrighted, it was being used for commentary/annalysis, and thus falls under fair use. And while Wikimedia-commons doesn't allow fair use images, Wikipedia DOES host such images. In fact I prefer that image, as it more accurately depicts what lolicon is than the current image does. It is clearly more suggestive, which is part of what makes lolicon what it is. But the current image isn't very suggestive, and thus is a poor example of lolicon. Remember I said I found it again on photobucket. To make it more easy for me to find at any point in the future if I ever needed to answer anyone's question if they asked "what's lolicon", I've rehoste the image to my own imageshack account. You can find the image at http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/6435/finalsolutionchan.jpg. Animedude5555 (talk) 07:55, 24 February 2011 (UTC)


 * You are very definitely wrong. Copyright exists even if no C-in-circle sign is used, and the creator still owns his or her work, despite widespread piracy on the Internet. 86.139.166.113 (talk) 16:43, 11 August 2013 (UTC)


 * For reference, the original picture still exists on Dramatica (http s://encyclopedia dramatica.se/File:Final_Solution-chan.jpg). --Florian Blaschke (talk) 01:16, 2 March 2017 (UTC)