(meanwhile the english page says "yuri is typically not sexual" while showing a page from a morinaga milk manga, the artist who notably did a ton of explicit porn early on. and only cites extremely outdated articles and some eng speaking college student's paper about it. it is honestly atrocious as a resource)

It's often the case, if something an English Wikipedia article described doesn't originate from, and/or hold less significance in an English speaking environment.

Last page gave me the creeps

Me too...

Damn. That last panel gave a little frisson of horror..very cool

Ayy lmao

A lot of these comments feel like they don't understand how Venn Diagrams work. Yuri and wlw/sapphic/lesbian works have a lot of overlap, maybe even more than 75% overlap, but they're not the same. That's it. A work can easily be sapphic and yuri, it can also just be sapphic, or just be yuri. And genres evolve and their conventions change, they're not static so it's also likely that the definition of yuri is changing to be more exclusively sapphic content as more explicit works become more mainstream. All of these things can be true.

What would a sapphic but not yuri manga be?

What would a sapphic but not yuri manga be?

The example has already been given. "The Guy She Was Interested In Wasn't a Guy At All". The author in an interview talks about it not being yuri in her mind because it's not following typical yuri conventions. That's pretty much all that's necessary. Of course, colloquially we all call it yuri, which is fine. Genres are kind of nebulous terms, but that's the point. The author wouldn't put it in yuri because she sees the genre in a specific way, similarly to how most of us readers would put it in yuri because we see the genre differently.