[deleted]

"Sample" is NOT a valid deletion reason if the original is not up yet. Don't flag a sample unless a superior of it is already active.

That being said this might be an md5 mismatch since the resolution is same as the picture on Pixiv and has higher file size. @RaisingK @BrokenEagle98

The above is a filesize and MD5 match to...

https://i.pximg.net/img-master/img/2014/10/03/02/39/13/46318121_p2_master1200.jpg

...original at...

http://i2.pixiv.net/img-original/img/2014/10/03/02/39/13/46318121_p2.jpg

@sweetpeɐ ^

Mind uploading the original?

EDIT: And as I've said before, I flag samples based on if I think they should belong. If I don't (quality check), I flag them with the intention for another approver to upload the original instead.

@Mikaeri said:

@sweetpeɐ ^

Mind uploading the original?

EDIT: And as I've said before, I flag samples based on if I think they should belong. If I don't (quality check), I flag them with the intention for another approver to upload the original instead.

That image on Pixiv is a lower file size and has the same file dimensions. I believe the version we have is the right one and not a sample. Do you want me to upload the lower quality one on Pixiv?

For reasons I've already explained I think that's a really wrongheaded way of approaching image sample flagging, although it seems you don't intend to stop doing it. The wiki even explains the non-sample needs to be active before a sample may be flagged.

If you flag for something based in it not belonging as opposed to being a sample isn't that enough reason? Tacking on the fact it's a sample doesn't just needless confuse things it actually could lead to a deletion for the wrong reasons. Why perhaps would you append a totally unrelated flag reason to a potentially valid one ? I don't think just wanting something gone is a reason to stack the deck. Anyway regarding message to approvers I think you could make a comment or make a message in the flag reason (i.e., append "Other approvers: If you think this is sufficient quality, upload the original rather than approve this post" to the flag reason so it's separated out) However this case is not a sample. Notice in tag history it was added as pixiv manga sample over two years ago so it doesn't seem the same.

@sweetpeɐ

Because you're severely misunderstanding something. Filesize is absolutely NO indicator of a post's original quality, whether it is sampled or not.

This is inarguably a sample. BrokenEagle98 and I have both checked the MD5, it's the absolute same. Samples don't always have to be lower filesize, they just have to express resampling of the image (particularly around areas of high color difference and the like). So you'll find that sometimes if not often, a sample with the same resolution as the original will have the worst of both: a higher filesize and lower bit-by-bit quality.

You might be right, it's fortunate that we get highlighting in the mod queue now for image samples. But I tend to be as explicit as I think necessary when I think an image should be replaced, but I don't like it enough to approve or upload it myself.

But hmm, I guess that was misunderstood. This was how I usually write them:
quality check: blablabla; sample, upload original if acceptable

Latter part indicates my intention for them to approve the original.

And no, pixiv manga samples are pixiv samples. That was the old name for it (moved over b/c of an alias), because the only way you could get a pixiv sample is by only viewing in pixiv with the mode=manga parameter (not expanding with arrows button). You can also get one through not being logged in, but that's a rare case in and of itself because pixiv, like seiga and nijie, literally pesters you to log in to see the work (unlike deviantart and other sites that don't).

So yes, this is a pixiv sample. You can compare the MD5 yourself if you want (f9b1c7f01227ec71519454cd51172259) but it is the exact same as the hotlinked image BrokenEagle98 linked.

EDIT: From howto:pixiv

http://i1.pixiv.net/c/1200x1200/img-master/img/2014/09/30/21/22/44/1498651_p0_master1200.jpg (current sample URL, DO NOT UPLOAD)

EDIT 2: diff