Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Lolita Anime (Nikkatsu)

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was:  keep. (non-admin closure) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:40, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Lolita Anime (Nikkatsu)

 * – (View MfD) &#8203;

This appears to be a draft about series of animated movies that are described as containing depictions of child sex abuse and nudity (possibly of children?). The creator of the article seems to have defined it as both "Hentai" and "Lolicon", as well as an "original erotic anime work". The description of the first episode seems to be a description of animated child sex abuse material, and the article notes that the Japanese authorities refused to evaluate it owing to its child abuse themes. It also doesn't appear to have solid sourcing, so I don't think it's notable, and I don't see that being a burden to deletion. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 20:51, 12 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep Though I'm against what is explained within it, the article draft is just about child pornography and isn't straightforward depictions. The only issue here is the sources. However, instead of rejecting, it would've been best to just decline it and request more sources first. If that has not been improved when submitted again, give it one or two more tries. If nothing has been improved then you should reject it, then let it go get G13'd. Waddles 🗩 🖉 04:45, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep do you have a proper reason to delete this draft or are you just objecting to the content (which is not outside of WP’s scope despite its general ickiness)? There’s no CSAM here, animated or otherwise, and no pro-pedophilia POV material either, so this isn’t a violation of WP’s anti-child sex abuse policies. Dronebogus (talk) 12:07, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep While I find this type of anime disgusting, this article is not advocating child porn or abuse so it doesn't violate any policies. Heck WP is also not censored. Link20XX (talk) 14:47, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - Rejected drafts seldom need immediate deletion after rejection unless they can be speedily deleted. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:16, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak keep and decline article for lack of sourcing and analysis. What makes this series any different from any others? If it's an unremarkable series, it can be added as a paragraph for In popular culture / Legacy section / Knockoffs.  AngusW🐶🐶F  ( bark  •  sniff ) 18:39, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.