Talk:Kodomo no Jikan

message: OK... I don't know how much time it has been there and who put it there, but... why is the article categorized as Child Porn?! I mean, come on, that's obviously biased... so, I deleted the category markup.
Guille ^.~ 21:42, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Child pornography" tag was added again by a random individual and removed again by Juhachi. Lunar Archivist (talk) 14:39, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

text: No, there isn't. You can add in a hidden note asking to not include the category though.--十八 01:44, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I have a "better" idea. Why don't we request that this article be semi-protected, as I have seen numerous vandalisms being done on the article page. --Animeronin 07:13, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't exactly agree with that. Looking at the last 50 edits in the history, only today was there a single IP who vandalized the page several times before being blocked, and aside from that, there really isn't much else recent vandalism, so I doubt an admin would protect the page at this moment in time.--十八 07:28, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While I personally wish we could do what Animeronin suggested, Juhachi's technically correct. But it's extremely annoying to have random people like 194.83.68.131 put the "child pornography" classification back in, reversing the "deneutralization" of the Lolicon as a storytelling device section by 4.180.36.76, and then the article's vandalism by 83.19.45.10. All these changes for the worse did take place within the last 50 edits or so. Is there any kind of middle ground for protecting sections of this article or making it harder to edit by just anyone? Lunar Archivist 00:21, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it works like that. If a page gets semi-protected, then IPs and newly-made accounts cannot edit a page for the time being. If it gets fully protected, no one can edit it; there's no specifics for sections.--十八 00:41, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, 83.19.45.10 is back vandalizing the page again. Can we get protected status now or at least get his IP address permanently banned? Lunar Archivist (talk) 14:14, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Well that anonymous seems to have a skewed or rather trollish behavior. I second the IP ban and the protected status. --Animeronin (talk) 19:47, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, I'll keep my fingers crossed. But when someone replaces the sum content of the article with the phrase "FUCKIN PEDO ANIME", I think his opinion of the series is pretty clear... ^_^; Lunar Archivist (talk) 14:45, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  CP as a category 

message: i was just wondering and wanted to ask the kind  people who update the character bio, that knowing that the teacher and Rin are like main - main characters, but how come there is not much information about them, while the others who are less shown have a bit more, to way more one them. i mean if there is a rule to this king of thing let me know so i learn something new,anyways was just wondering. Chimasternmay 22:19, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Users have just contributed more to some characters and little to none; if you read/watch the series, feel free to add in the bios.--十八 22:30, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A nobody wondering?

message: there is no Censoring on the DVD version as seen [] here and  []here --Blue-EyesGold Dragon 10:19, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Censoring  on dvd version 

message: I think that sentence is a bit ungrammatical as 'whom' is the objective case of the nominative 'who' and in this case it is clearly the subject of the sentence and of the verb finite verb 'has'.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.84.222.243 (talk) 14:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Whom has lung cancer

message: I realize this isn't quite what the talk page was intended for, but this was too good to pass up:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v407/lunar_archivist/snh02mf9.png
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v407/lunar_archivist/snh03dn4.png
Kaworu Watashiya decided to parody herself by creating a reversed-gender version of the series as a (very) short story. Enjoy! :) Lunar Archivist (talk) 05:57, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Haha oh wow :) You just made my day! --Koheiman (talk) 11:17, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gender-Reversed "Kodomo no Jikan" Parody 

message: I removed "Lolicon as a storytelling device" as it is nothing more than original research and POV. As stated by its writer in a post above, it was made to counterbalance the "Controversy" section. But it's against wikipedia policy (and also unencyclopedic) to counterbalance statements from third-party sources with editors' own analysis. It doesn't matter if examples from the series itself have been used, this is still OR, and POV. Want this section back? Then write a proper one, with statements from third-party sources. But without such sources this kind of thing has no place here. Kazu-kun (talk) 22:43, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You could be more polite about it, quite frankly. If you feel it's Original Research, that's one thing. And if you feel it needs removal, also fine. But don't talk down to me like I'm a six-year-old that needs lecturing. 76.67.207.97 (talk) 04:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, you'd like talking down to a six year old, wouldn't you? 76.66.124.145 (talk) 20:04, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Lolicon as a storytelling device

message: What's this? Second season is an OVA series? Please check AnimeNewsNetwork and the official website to confirm (or not), and then update this article based on your findings. Also, I believe there may have been a video release that has not been mentioned. Please check the official website and likewise update the article on any required updates. Animeresearcher (talk) 06:52, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Season Two / 2nd Term Distribution Medium 

message: Right turn only vol 1 review --KrebMarkt 17:35, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  ANN right turn only 

message: The article looks like a lot of them do: a good amount of content, but somewhat unorganized, lacking as a coherent explanation of the subject. It doesn't really give the readers a good idea of what it's all about. I haven't seen Kodomo no Jikan, so with the various references to controversy, censored shots, and a cancelled release, permit me to be direct:
Does either the manga or the anime depict fucking kids, kids in other, overtly sexual situations, kids being presented as fuckable whether in-story or to the audience, or an expressed desire to fuck kids? --Kizor 23:06, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The answer is yes, The main characher Rin makes sexual advances to her teacher to the point of rubbing up against his you know what to having milk (?) poured into a condom and saying "You came so much sensei". What is intresting to note is that the anime is not about some perv and it is Rin the girl who does the sexual advances. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 04:27, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: That much is clear from the article. Children going after adults is comedy, cringe or otherwise. What is not clear from the article is whether Kodomo no Jikan also has adults going after children, or kids depicted in sexualized, erotic, arousing or other disgusting ways. While I am not an expert on either anime or child molestation, I assume that this is a crucial property. The article needs to get this right, and say so clearly.So does Komodo no Jikan depict kids as fuckable, arousing, desirable or otherwise sexually attractive, either from the point of view of in-story characters or for the audience? Signs point to "yes" (check the image of the DVD: I see London, I see France, I see pre-teen underpants), but the article needs more concrete data.Less importantly, does anyone know an equally unambiguous synonym so that I can stop using "fuck" so much? --Kizor 23:46, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  This should be established clearly 

message: So I've come to realize no where online is there an answer to "Is this legal to read in the US online?" It seems like something most people that come across this would wonder.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.89.96.113 (talk) 02:34, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question not Adressed anywhere 

message: I must wonder why you added lolicon as a genre. So far i have read every chapter and the work itself could be hardly considered as belonging to the "lolicon genre". The story is based around the lolicon scenario, having it as a main topic, but at the same time it isn't comparable to works that really belong to the "lolicon genre". I doubt that the author of the source (can we call it a source?) had the intention to put Kodomo no Jikan in the same group as other lolicon works. In short: It discusses the genre, but it is not part of the genre itself. For example: YuruYuri has yuri as the main topic, but does not follow the path of a typical yuri story. It is more or less a parody on yuri. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼ 署名の宣言 07:23, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: If there was not controversy surrounding it I would agree with you. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 11:25, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Which controversy? Or better said. Why would a controversy turn a work about lolicon into a work of lolicon? --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼ 署名の宣言 14:15, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I would go with the common name here as used by sources is what it comes down to. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:39, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: We have exactly one source and it contradicts itself. I don't call that a reliable source. If it even includes Ichigo Mashimaro, then this would easily apply to Papa no Iu Koto wo Kikinasai!, Mitsudomoe, Kyō no Go no Ni or even Usagi Drop as well. From that i have to conclude that the author of the source called every work with children in the main role a "lolicon anime", which is in conflict with the definitions sourced in lolicon. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼ 署名の宣言 21:43, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, is not a lolicon manga at all, is a normal romantic comedy. 87.19.32.242 (talk) 11:56, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your opinion, however, this genre has been sourced to a reliable source. —Farix (t | c) 12:21, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I wouldn't call it a „reliable source“. The used definitions are questionable and inconsistent throughout the entire text. --／人◕ ‿‿ ◕人＼ 署名の宣言 02:41, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

text:  Is only an opinion of a random website and not an absolutely reliable source. An reliable source is the original classification of the manga, is published in comic high that is a seinen magazine. I never see this manga classified as lolicon, also the same animenation has made another article that stated that is more a loli manga than a lolicon in this specific case. Lot of opinions here point out that kojikan is not a lolicon manga and i agree with them. 79.26.242.164 (talk) 13:13, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

text: To clarify more: http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2012-11-21/kaworu-watashiya/kodomo-no-jikan-manga-to-end-soon and here https://twitter.com/watashiya/status/271268730732965889 refer about it as "manga comedy", never read or mentioned the term "lolicon" nor from the original author nor from other websites that review it. If animenation is considered a reliable source then ann is too, but they are only opinions like ours here, however the original twitter of the creator is 100% reliable, so if author refer to his creature as comedy then the manga is a comedy and not a lolicon. Simple as that.79.26.242.164 (talk) 13:24, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lolicon as genre 

message: Thinking we should include a disambiguation statement for this series from 2000. It was a 6 OVA hentai anime series also called 'Kodomo no Jikan' which came out 5 years before this KnJ was even a manga. It seems the 'forbidden time' might've just been an American retitle (probably to avoid problems with something called 'a child's time' being a title for a hentai OVA? Ranze (talk) 21:25, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Forbidden Time

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Kodomo no Jikan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://zepy.momotato.com/2007/10/05/tv-saitama-kodomo-no-jikan-and-axe-girl-stuff/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:15, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Kodomo no Jikan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071014015307/http://dbeat.bandaivisual.co.jp/netradio/kojika.php to http://dbeat.bandaivisual.co.jp/netradio/kojika.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071228180639/http://www.alafista.com:80/2007/10/11/teletama-reply-for-pulling-kodomo-no-jikan/ to http://www.alafista.com/2007/10/11/teletama-reply-for-pulling-kodomo-no-jikan/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:36, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Kodomo no Jikan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://homepage2.nifty.com/WATASHIYAKAWORU/nikki/nikki.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140720140341/http://mrcaxton.livejournal.com/26421.html to http://mrcaxton.livejournal.com/26421.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:39, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Kodomo no Jikan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303231314/http://www.e-hon.ne.jp/bec/SA/DetailZasshi?refShinCode=0900000004910244090537&Action_id=101&Sza_id=RR to http://www.e-hon.ne.jp/bec/SA/DetailZasshi?refShinCode=0900000004910244090537&Action_id=101&Sza_id=RR
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:30, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Why? Filip Mutapčić (talk) 13:41, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  About that wiki 

message: I'm wondering what is the source for Kodomo no Jikan having a light novel - I've looked through the WWW far and wide, even using Japanese words and nothing came up for a LN. 
No stores sell it, there is no external website referencing it. I think I'm not mistaken and this is a piece of media different than the manga itself, as it is listed as published apart from the main series on a different date (2012). I was just curious about who added this entry to the Wiki page and where did they get knowledge of it from. Thanks for your attention. 193.207.200.164 (talk) 18:04, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It does exist. Here's the Amazon JP listing for it. Harushiga (talk) 18:19, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Light novel of KnJ, does it even exist?