Board Thread:Clean up Concerns/@comment-30861466-20171119001139/@comment-14660436-20171121003912

Jumping into this discussion due to some fussing over the mature template on the Rabbit of Caerbannog.

Really, having the Mature template be restricted to specific ratings is a flawed system in my opinion, because different countries give different age restrictions to different sources of media (e.g. The Holy Grail is PG in the US, but a BBFC 15 in the UK, The Outlaw Josey Wales is a PG, but a BBFC 18 in the UK), which makes adding the template to certain pages very subjective. And really, whoever added that rating list thing to the page really contradicts other points made on the category itself:


 * "However, keep in mind that coming from a work with that rating is not an instant qualifier for the Mature template; the subject matter surrounding them has to be explicit".
 * "...the subject or character is mature and often controversial"

Point is, the Mature template shouldn't be strictly about ratings to determine whether something is mature or not. It's moreso about the page's contents (which should qualify the mature template for the Rabbit of Caerbannog's page due to the images).

For more newer and popular examples, see Jerome Valeska. That mature template has been on his page for a while now, yet Gotham is a TV-14 show. However, he gets his face skinned off (with obviously bloody results), staples it back on and ends up losing it again, as well as murdering his own father by stabbing him in the eye among other things. Once again, the mature template is there because of the content, not because of the rating.