Talk:Clow Cards
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, which aims to improve and expand anime and manga related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. |
 Archives |
| 1 |
Contents |
[edit] Storm Episode
I've only ever seen the dub, and I've seen the Storm episode. It may have been out of order, but I believe Meilin was there (all I can remember for sure is that Sakura was sick at the time). Can anyone explain what happened to me? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.228.69.187 (talk • contribs) .
That wasn't storm, it was 'Cloud' perfectblue97
[edit] Renaming of list
Why was the list renamed? It is a list and the title should reflect that. I felt that List of Cardcaptor Sakura Clow Cards was a sufficient name. This is not a standalone article, but a "character" list. The cards are completely unnotable on their own, so the article title needs to better reflect that it is a list branched off from the main Cardcaptor Sakura and to be more consistent with other such lists. Collectonian (talk) 03:07, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
- Not all lists say list in the article title, but if you really want to say it then we could easily go with List of Clow Cards. The other title just seemed way to long. The title of an article doesn't have to be completely descriptive. It just.. seemed off.. to me. -- Ned Scott 05:54, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- List of Clow Cards would be better, I think, than just Clow Cards. I put the CCS part in to identify it similar to what we do with List of Cardcaptor Sakura episodes, characters, media, etc, but it does read off. List of Cardcaptor Sakura cards could also work, since technically they do change from Clow Cards to Sakura Cards in the third season. :P Collectonian (talk) 06:07, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Deletion of Tables
Why were all of our tables on the order of the cards captures deleted and the information not replaced? I understand if you want to do some cleanup work, there were a lot of messy tables on the page, and that much of the information could easily covered in a pragraph, but if you delete information, you have to make sure that you replace it all. I'm restoring the solar/lunar card table because I believe it nescesary, but I'll leave the topic of how the capture and transformation of the cards should be re-organized up for discussion.3loodlust (talk) 19:43, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
One other thing. Why do some paragraphs say the signs Cards are under and some don't?70.23.186.132 (talk) 21:19, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
- I've removed them, again. The affiliations are already covered in the individual card descriptions. Collectonian (talk) 22:05, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- I think a sortable table might be in order. I'm not sure, but there might even be a way to make it work with section headings. -- Ned Scott 06:19, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- I hardly think that affiiations are clearly defined anywhere in the article, but I suppose that's up for debate. In my opinion it all really comes down to the need for the individual descriptions of the cards to recieve an update so that the information is more clear and consise. As for the re orginization of the information, I think Ned Scott has got the right idea, but I'm personaly unsure of how to go about such a large scale project. 3loodlust (talk) 17:46, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
-
[edit] Affiliations
Where did all of this information about what element each card is under come from? I don't think the information came from a reliable source, because some of it seems incorrect. For example, about the flower card, it says that she is under The Earthy, but I know for a fact that is not true. Does anyone know where this information came from? If no one can back it up with a reliable source, I suggest the information be deleted, or at least revised. 3loodlust (talk) 22:26, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- No where as far as I can tell. Only a select few cards have their elements mentioned within the manga or anime. The rest seems to be cruft and fan guesses and needs to go (which is one of many reasons I tagged this for having OR). I thought I'd gotten most out, but guess I missed some or its because a certainly editor keeps trying to add it back at the moment. Collectonian (talk) 22:30, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Edited Work
I was looking through some of the clow cards when I noticed some insufficient and false details, so I was much obliged to watch the episode and correct the detailing such as the bubble card which was used to wash kerobaros but Im not to sure why people use cerberus instead, any idea to why that is? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.169.37 (talk) 15:48, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
- Because it is currently what his article improperly uses. Its something that needs to be fixed as well. Collectonian (talk) 15:57, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
- Well I guess we could go with Kerberos, as that is what the Geneon sub uses. Cerberus was probably used as it's what CLAMP wanted it to be written as in the manga. I'll begin rewriting it ^_^. AjaaniSherisu (talk) 03:23, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
- If you change it to Kerberos, you may wish to keep in mind the disambiguation with the protocol. see also - R3ap3R
- (edit conflict) Actually, its been decided in the main article talk page that all the CCS articles will use Cerberus. Feel free the discussion there for the reasonings why. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 03:28, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
- Well I guess we could go with Kerberos, as that is what the Geneon sub uses. Cerberus was probably used as it's what CLAMP wanted it to be written as in the manga. I'll begin rewriting it ^_^. AjaaniSherisu (talk) 03:23, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
