Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Hentai yuuree

Hentai yuuree
Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2011 at 06:15:49 (UTC)
 * Images
 * File:Hentai - yuuree-redraw.jpg - Original - A male and female character in a hentai image having sex. There is a slight halo around the characters
 * File:Hentai - yuuree-redraw-no-halo.jpg - ALT: - No halo
 * Reason:The image is of a high technical quality and in a style reflective of things common to the genre (hentai). It has high EV and is used as the lead in the hentai article. Although it could never be used on the MP, the criteria do not preclude sexually explicit images. High quality hentai images that are free are few and far between, and this is one of the best images we have illustrating the genre. I am also including a version without the halo.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Hentai.
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Artwork/East Asian art, possibly Featured pictures/Artwork/Others
 * Creator:Original image by ゆーれー site. Redraw by Niabot


 * Support as nominator --Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:15, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose -- This forum has a strong educational component and used to be family and work-safe. Please keep it that way. Alvesgaspar (talk) 08:28, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose this is a bad example of the topic, and a rather unremarkable cartoon in terms of technique and positioning - if we are going to FP erotic art, it better be at least mildly arousing. I suggest however that the above be ignored as an "oppose" - erotic art and even entertainment is an educational topic and recognized as such by the most prestigious educational institutions. The other arguments on "family and work-safe" is in my view, contrary to the spirit of WP:NOTCENSORED - we do not shy from educational topics because they might offend you.--Cerejota (talk) 08:35, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Fair enough rationale. There is another large, free hentai image, but I consider it of inferior quality to this one. This replaced the old one. Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:12, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes this is a better illustration of the topic than the previous, but not FP material. Look at the works of List of hentai authors, and compare this work with theirs, and you will see what I mean. I know it will be hard to get license compatible hentai image of FP quality, but it is not impossible.--Cerejota (talk) 22:00, 13 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose Basically per Cerejota. Although this is a very relevant pic in the context of hardcore hentai, embodying a number of familiar tropes of that genre, and it's not bad (decent composition and colouring), and it's high res, it is not particularly remarkable. The art isn't especially detailed (e.g. see the man's face or the background) and it doesn't "stand out" - I realise this is a subjective assessment. Dcoetzee 08:48, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * True enough that it is standard in the context of hardcore hentai; however, FPs are for Wikipedia's best work, meaning free images. None of the award winning hentais have licensed their images under a free license, so this could be the best Wikipedia has to offer on the subject. Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:12, 13 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment I've linked to the images rather than put the thumbnails here. This page is most probably viewed in locations where such an image isn't appropriate (work for example). This is only because people go to FPC expecting it to be work safe, not that we shouldn't consider the image. JJ Harrison (talk) 09:16, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I didn't realize that we were allowed to do that. (Although I don't think there are many explicit FPs, if any). Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:12, 13 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose, per Cerejota's reasoning. This is a subject which, though it may make a lot of people queasy, I am not opposed to featuring per se. We just need something special- preferably by a notable, or at least noted, artist. J Milburn (talk) 12:35, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * What would special be, in your opinion? Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:57, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * A piece which has previously been published (as opposed to self-published), and is by a notable artist, would be a good start. Yes, this not an old style, so we don't have droves of public domain pictures, but, for comparison, we have sound files that have been released under free licenses by notable musical groups. For instance, our article on folk metal currently features a song by Balkandji. J Milburn (talk) 16:02, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I could make a request at WikiProject Japan (I don't speak Japanese so I'd have a few issues), but I am batting 0.000 when requesting OTRS permission. Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:36, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * This is not something that would be easy to get hold of, at all. But that's what I would support. Featured status isn't meant to be easy. J Milburn (talk) 11:09, 14 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose Notable published artist, maybe, this artist no. Also, it goes without saying I will strongly oppose this if it has ANY chance of being on the homepage regardless of notability. — raeky  t  15:38, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, maybe a more softcore hentai image might be in order for FP.--Cerejota (talk) 22:59, 14 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Support - extremely high resolution, suitable image for the article, adequately illustrates subject. Disagree that it is particularly obscene or poor in artistic quality. 82.27.132.19 (talk) 18:28, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey there- while your thoughts are most certainly welcome, please note that, as per the instructions above, "anonymous votes are generally disregarded". If you have an account, perhaps you'd like to log in? J Milburn (talk) 18:48, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose Aargh my eyes, my eyes! Only kidding. I do not oppose on the explicit subject matter per se, but as others have said, if we were to feature this, then it should be from a notable artist or other historical depictions of note. This is just a generic image from thousands of such illustrations. Nothing special here. SMasters (talk) 08:41, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose While I realise that the job here is mostly to compare the picture against the Featured picture criteria, for me this picture looks like children involved in a sex act. Maybe this is something that is intrinsic to this genre, but it makes me very uncomfortable. TehGrauniad (talk) 19:38, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
 * In Japan they'd probably be marketed as 16-17; in the US 18. It's common practice when localizing hentai. As this is not a commercial work, it wouldn't quite apply here. Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:09, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2011 (UTC)