Talk:InuYasha

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the InuYasha article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Article policies
InuYasha is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of anime and manga. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page (Talk). See our portal to learn more.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
InuYasha is part of WikiProject Japan, a project to improve all Japan-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Japan-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Japan To-do:
Former FA This article is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Peer review InuYasha has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
This article was Anime and Manga Collaboration of the Week for the week of 27 August 2006. See how it improved – Before – After

Archives:

Contents

[edit] Are we a cult?

216.248.74.134 (talk • contribs) added this article to Category:Cult television series, effectively claiming that we are a cult. I doubt that. What do you think? JRSpriggs 03:17, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

No. A cult television series is a series that was unpopular (financial income typically being the indicator) among much of mainstream society but that has a devoted fanbase. Since Inuyasha was a commercial success both domestically and abroad, it is not a cult series. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.241.141.42 (talk) 10:12, 17 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] An Inquiry

Perhaps this is something of a strange entry to this article's many talk pages, but hear me out. As is, this article and the many articles under it are extremely extensive (I shudder to think what might happen when the Wiki purists get a hold of this and start nominating half of the lot for deletion as "non-notable"), however, I have noticed a glaring debacle. As a casual watcher of the anime since its run commenced some years ago in the States, gleaning information from relevant informational pages is difficult since little or no distinction separates instances and happenings in the animation from those in the manga, which I, and I imagine many other Wiki perusers, have not read. This makes many of the current articles, especially those on the main characters, slightly confusing to read, nevermind foiling plot aspects of the illustrated books (though that's mostly just whining on my part). Since this series, or rather, franchise, has two diverging continuities depending on the presented media, would it be unreasonable to suggest an initiative to split this article and the articles under it into continuity-specific versions of their current selves? You may wish to peruse the Fullmetal Alchemist series of articles for an example. Minor tangent, I also happen to believe those articles are better written, but we'll save that for another discussion. MalikCarr 11:00, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, for what its worth, I think the Fullmetal alchemists articles are actually a really bad example to point to. They are written for die-hard fanatical followers of the series who care about every tiny detail of difference between the anime and the manga to the point where they are almost impossible for a casual reader to understand or even find useful. They mostly seem to be useful for the people who wrote them or who already know the content in them. The same information is endlessly duplicated in an absurd level of detail.
Its also going to be difficult to apply that sort of model to these articles because of the difference in scale. There are 167 anime episodes and probably near 500 chapters of manga out there. The plot of both are roughly the same for the casual reader. Rewriting every single article to follow an anime/manga split will blow up the content to many times its current size. It will also introduce the fullmetal articles flaw of producing "summaries" so extensive that they summarize nothing.
The style in the fullmetal alchemist articles is also often terrible. example: "Small wonder, then, that Edward is known as The Fullmetal Alchemist." or "He’s not about to surrender it to a representative of the State Military". Rather than giving facts, the fullmetal articles seem (as per the examples) seem to be wanting to do something else. Articles are not supposed to be platform for amatures to create dramatic narratives. 12.96.162.45 18:59, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] End of Series?

Does anyone know exactly why the series ended? All that's offered in the article about it is an anecdote, since it is missing a citation. What happened? Why was it discontinued? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AJFederation (talk • contribs) 14:11, 21 January 2007 (UTC).

The best answer is probably declining ratings in Japan. Not bad ratings, but a trend toward decline that made the people in charge think they could do better with something new.
I'll also offer some opinion. The show ended when it did because it kind of burned itself out. If the rate of episode production had been a little slower at certain points in the life of the series or the manga had been further ahead, I think it would have gone on longer. 12.96.162.45 18:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)


i thought it ended because the producer died and the staff didnt want to continue with out them--Zetsuie 23:22, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I just want to to know if they will resuming making episodes for the anime series since it ended on what I feel was a really lousy note. It calls to mind Brian's description of the Blair Witch Project in Family Guy: "Its over. A lot of people in the audience look pissed." TomStar81 (Talk) 23:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Inclusion of external links

I received a message that the link I added to the external links section was not appropriate. I had submitted http://www.inuyasha-fan.com to the list because it contains a good deal of information on the subject, and has an active user base. I am not sure if the addition was somehow considered spam, but that was not the intention. I consider it a good site in terms of what it contains, and it seems to be popular. Could someone tell me why it, in particular, is innapropriate, while the others are not? Thank you. 68.107.186.31 00:35, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Where does the anime end in the manga story

hey does any body know what manga chapters does the last episdoe cover --Zetsuie 23:29, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

The anime ended at Chapter(s) 353-355.
  • 353 16 Ogre's Rock
  • 354 17 Unbreakable Wall
  • 355 18 Using the Fragment —The preceding unsigned comment was added by YATAnshin! (talk • contribs) 18:40, 13 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Should we semi-protect this article?

Should we semi-protect this article? There are too many edits, some of them are useless, some of them are not discussed beforehand. Yesterday there was a useless edit, I believe. By useless I mean things that don't contribute or vandalism. --Oakwhiz 00:29, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spelling of Tetsusaiga

It's Tetsusaiga people, the "u" is a whisper vowel, so the sound kind of disappears, but they spelled it that way on the English anime, and that way translates into something in Japanese (I talked to someone who had just returned from living in Japan for 5 years about this, he's certain). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.133.169.234 (talk • contribs). 04:56, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Huh? The current article (Tessaiga) provides a believable explanation, I don't think there's any confusion. てつさいが　("te-tsu-sai-ga") (Viz) vs. てっさいが ("te-ssai-ga") (original), silly mistake, but we do have two different spellings because of it... Sergei Klink 03:30, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

It's T-e-s-s-a-i-g-a, trust me. Viz used Tetsusaiga because that's what THEY thought it was, as that's what it came out as when translated. Later, they discovered that this was a serious mistake, but that was the offical name they had already chosen. It was too late to change it to it's proper spelling, T-e-s-s-a-i-g-a. Most die hard InuYasha fans use this spelling, as it IS correct, as opposed to T-e-t-s-u-s-a-i-g-a.

[edit] Shonen or Shojo?

To raise this topic again. InuYasha is very similar to shonen stories in its content. However, it is written by a woman, Rumiko Takahashi, and has a female main character, Kagome Higurashi. InuYasha (character) is clearly less sympathetic than Kagome and is forced to obey her. Thus I think that this is a woman's fantasy about how she would like to relate to a man. (InuYasha's paradoxical behavior is due to the mixed motivations of women — they want a powerful, uncaring, and domineering man, but they want to control him.) JRSpriggs 06:11, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

While that maybe be true, Inuyasha is published in a shounen magazine, and Takahashi refers to Inuyasha as a shounen series in interviews. Shoujo series are also drawn differently and have a different feel to them than Inuyasha. It has more to do with how story is presented than the actual plot.--Slotedpig 16:56, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

That's right. Plus, every manga she has drawn is for boys. Urusei Yatsura and Ranma 1\2 are both boys series, thus they were published in Shonen Sunday. Maison Ikkoku, despite it's romantic girly feel, is also a manga for males, a seinen manga, as it was published in a magazine targeted at male adults 20-25 years of age. (A seinen magazine) That magazine was Big Comic Spirits. (Just for reference) And InuYasha, while containing romance, is a shonen manga, published, like Takahashi-sensei's first and third manga series, in Shonen Sunday. The romance is not really that important to the plot, it's simply a side story, generated to help keep readers interested. The main plot of killing Naraku is the central storyline. Therfore, InuYasha is NOT a shojo manga. (Otherwise, it would've been serialized, of course, in a shojo magazine)

[edit] Birthday

when is inuyasha and kagome's birthday? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.178.67.155 (talk • contribs).

Takahashi-sensei has never explicitly stated when their birthdays are. But since Kagome turned 15 in 1997, which is when the manga takes place (in the present dimension), we can conclude that she was born in 1982. (Which would make her around 24 now!) When, it hasn't been made clear. As for InuYasha, since Takhashi-sensei hasn't made clear WHEN in the Feudal Era the manga takes place (in the past dimension of course), we really can't tell when InuYasha was born. But since he's 500 years old, he had to have been born a long, long, long, long time ago. :P

[edit] Setting Section

I think we should add a settings section. what does everyone think?--88wolfmaster 05:32, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I am not sure what you mean. Are you talking about: modern time (Kagome's home and school), normal existence in Feudal Japan, and the after-life? Or what? JRSpriggs 08:31, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm talking about a section briefly describing common settings in the series (both in modern time and in Feudal Japan). if your still not sure check out Bleach--88wolfmaster 16:07, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
I don't think InuYasha needs a settings section like Bleach. The settings in Bleach need a lot of explanation. The places in the modern age and Sengoku Jidai are pretty straight forward.--Slotedpig 18:03, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
well we have articles about settings so obviously someone thought they were important enough. I just thought a brief descrition of the settings would make this article more complete. I'll work on an example so everyone could see what i'm proposing.--88wolfmaster 19:40, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Plot or Introduction

we have a love recap of the first episode plot but I think we would be better off with a brief introduction to the story. If someone wants to know exactly what happened then they can look up episode summaries.--88wolfmaster 02:22, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Seek protection

ok I've noticed quite a bit of vandalism from anonymous IP addresses. so the question is do we keep undoing the edits or seek protection--88wolfmaster 02:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I am all for using semi-protection on high profile articles like this one since they attract vandalism like rotting meat attracts flies. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to persuade the people at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection to grant it. And then, they tend to withdraw it after a while. JRSpriggs 08:59, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Declined – There is not enough recent activity to justify protection at this time.--Húsönd 03:33, 30 March 2007 (UTC) --88wolfmaster 18:50, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../i/n/u/Talk%7EInuYasha_39e7.html"