Here is the link to the poster I scanned - Jinki Extend Poster by fluke

This is the message I recieved from botchii -

Quote: The image you submitted entitled Jinki Extend Poster was removed from Minitokyo, because it violated one or more of the following policies:

- It featured hentai or pornography, which is not allowed in any form or shape. This includes, but is not limited to: nudity, sexually inclined pictures or explicit sexual pictures, bondage, sado masochism. Nude defines itself as exposing nipples and/or genitals.
- Offensive contents, including racistical utterance, in any form or shape.
-Characters can not be seen in a state of undressing, or be posed provocatively.

I didn't think this was breaking any of these rules. She's not nude, sexually posed, no bondage, she's not undressed (probably has on more than most bikini pictures we have) nor is she posed provocatively to me.
Being scanned from a magazine suitable for all ages (I base this upon the fact there is no age warning on the cover or in the mag) like Newtype I certainly thought it would have been acceptable.

Well by the way you gave evidence of this it shouldnt of...thats why I hate bots because they delete things almost randomly for some reason. Here here! It should be reposted again! You got my support m8.

-Jason-

I would also vote for restoration

hi, mind to share the picture? like give a link to a photosharing site.
about deletion its probably that the administration gets exessively strict when it comes to a slightly etchi pictures. some people have already complained. i hope it settles

I wouldn't say she's very dressed, more than half her clothes are torn/burning off.

In continuance of my argument, I'd show this scan in our gallery - tamaki k by koken
that bears a similiar stance and equal amount of clothing that is allowed in the gallery.

*sigh* You should certainly know by now that if you find inappropriate things in the gallery you should report them. Just because it hasn't been deleted (yet) doesn't mean we approve of it.

I did not find that image inappropriate or offending in any way, which is why I never reported it and also used it to make a point. Is this not stretching the definition of what Google said was innappropriate? I understand some, but this to me is just taking it to another level.

I'm not suggesting we go and quarantine all the To Heart 2 scans now, but if the last one is to be inappropriate then the entire category should be found the same way, as most scans of a similiar nature and content. In fact I could go through several categories in the gallery and find the same, none of which cross the line of what I thought was considered inappropriate.

The simple fact that her clothes appear to be disintegrating should have shown it wasn't appropriate to be posted here.

I believe the bot message should be updated if that is the reason.

Quote: - It featured hentai or pornography, which is not allowed in any form or shape. This includes, but is not limited to: nudity, sexually inclined pictures or explicit sexual pictures, bondage, sado masochism. Nude defines itself as exposing nipples and/or genitals.
- Offensive contents, including racistical utterance, in any form or shape.
-Characters can not be seen in a state of undressing, or be posed provocatively.

The way I read that message, my scan did not infract up on any of those conditions. I clearly see I am not going to win in this situation, again I believe that "inappropriate" line is being stretched far beyond what it started out as. I'd also say again, that I find it hard to understand that a magazine designed for all ages can show such a poster in it, yet this gallery can not.

Feel free to close the thread.