Talk:Gorath
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Magma (Gorath) merge
Continuing the discussion from the AFD, let's discuss merging Magma (Gorath) here. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:53, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
- Support Merge Both articles are relatively short (per WP:SIZE) and contain much of the same information. They could be easily merged into one larger article as suggested in the fiction notability and style guidelines. Some in-line sources should also be offered. --Kunzite 03:44, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose Merge The kaiju is minor to a discussion of the film, since it was a last-minute addition, and is totally absent in the US version. It deserves a passing mention in the Gorath film article, but the film article shouldn't be bogged down in a discussion of the kaiju. Yet the kaiju has a life of its own in Toho kaiju literature and monster lore. Since Wikipedia is not a print encyclopedia with the space limitations that print has, and since printed kaiju encyclopedias do include an article on this kaiju character, I see no reason why Magma and Gorath shouldn't have their own articles. Rizzleboffin 17:45, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
- How is Magma minor to a discussion of the film? From Magma (Gorath): "The sequence featuring Magma only makes up approximately six minutes of the finished film, but is an integral part of its structure and played a key role in the film's advertising, being a centerpiece of the poster." - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:32, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
- Minor since it is a character that appears for only 6 minutes in a feature-length film. Sure, mention belongs in the film article, but just as he relate to the film-- his place in the plot, the advertising, etc. But every other kaiju, including 1-shot Ultraman monsters, also has its own stand-alone article which goes into more depth about the character than is appropriate in a film article. Why should Magma be different? Rizzleboffin 20:24, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Then the Ultraman one-shots should be merged, too. The fact that nobody has done the cleanup doesn't mean the cleanup shouldn't be done.
- As for only appearing for six minutes, screentime isn't all that matters; Magma was a major part of the advertising, and the main plot piece. The fact that he only appears in six minutes of screentime ever seems to be even more of an argument not to give him his own article, especially since every single word in his article is actually about Gorath. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:11, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not saying Magma should be removed from the film article. He belongs there inasmuch as he is relevant to the film, its plot, its production, etc. But further discussion of the character belongs in a separate article. I've seen many stand-alone articles on Magma in print sources. If the Magma article presently is only about the film, then the article needs to be worked on to be specifically about the character. In the same way, an article on the Ultraman series does not need a detailed discussion of every kaiju character, as that would make the article too large and fill it with extraneous digressions. One of the greatest strengths of Wikipedia, and the Internet in general, is the ability to link from one page to another. A user who just wants to find out what "Ultraman" was doesn't want to wade through a discussion of Bemular. But a user looking for information about specific Ultraman kaiju characters can click to articles on them. Merging all the information about each individual one-shot kaiju character into one huge article on the TV series would be inappropriate. And "cleaning up," by deleting those individual articles would be to remove valid information from Wikipedia. The Ultraman article should have a list of kaiju characters with links to separate articles on those characters. And that's what we have, at least last time I checked. Gorath should be the same. Rizzleboffin 00:07, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- I thought the Ultraman series was structured a bit more granularly than that. Obviously, the one-off kaiju cannot all be handled in the single Ultraman article. however, this is a dissimilar case; this is a single work and a single character that appears in that work. Anything being said about Magma is inherently talking about Gorath, even if it's only talk about Magma. Additionally, there's no great threat of Magma content overwhelming this article; if that happens, then we can talk about a future split. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:15, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- True, both these articles still need a lot of work. The film article doesn't even have a plot summary yet. However, I still think that the film and the character deserve stand-alone articles eventually. If it's your opinion that the information on Magma needs to be included here until it develops far enough to stand on its own, I'd agree to that. I would dig into the work myself, but I'm involved in a large '60s anime project at the moment. Anyway, it's been interesting discussing this with you, Man In Black. Rizzleboffin 17:28, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- Likewise. It's nice to discuss differing plans and ideas so civilly. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 21:49, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- True, both these articles still need a lot of work. The film article doesn't even have a plot summary yet. However, I still think that the film and the character deserve stand-alone articles eventually. If it's your opinion that the information on Magma needs to be included here until it develops far enough to stand on its own, I'd agree to that. I would dig into the work myself, but I'm involved in a large '60s anime project at the moment. Anyway, it's been interesting discussing this with you, Man In Black. Rizzleboffin 17:28, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- I thought the Ultraman series was structured a bit more granularly than that. Obviously, the one-off kaiju cannot all be handled in the single Ultraman article. however, this is a dissimilar case; this is a single work and a single character that appears in that work. Anything being said about Magma is inherently talking about Gorath, even if it's only talk about Magma. Additionally, there's no great threat of Magma content overwhelming this article; if that happens, then we can talk about a future split. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:15, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not saying Magma should be removed from the film article. He belongs there inasmuch as he is relevant to the film, its plot, its production, etc. But further discussion of the character belongs in a separate article. I've seen many stand-alone articles on Magma in print sources. If the Magma article presently is only about the film, then the article needs to be worked on to be specifically about the character. In the same way, an article on the Ultraman series does not need a detailed discussion of every kaiju character, as that would make the article too large and fill it with extraneous digressions. One of the greatest strengths of Wikipedia, and the Internet in general, is the ability to link from one page to another. A user who just wants to find out what "Ultraman" was doesn't want to wade through a discussion of Bemular. But a user looking for information about specific Ultraman kaiju characters can click to articles on them. Merging all the information about each individual one-shot kaiju character into one huge article on the TV series would be inappropriate. And "cleaning up," by deleting those individual articles would be to remove valid information from Wikipedia. The Ultraman article should have a list of kaiju characters with links to separate articles on those characters. And that's what we have, at least last time I checked. Gorath should be the same. Rizzleboffin 00:07, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- Minor since it is a character that appears for only 6 minutes in a feature-length film. Sure, mention belongs in the film article, but just as he relate to the film-- his place in the plot, the advertising, etc. But every other kaiju, including 1-shot Ultraman monsters, also has its own stand-alone article which goes into more depth about the character than is appropriate in a film article. Why should Magma be different? Rizzleboffin 20:24, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- How is Magma minor to a discussion of the film? From Magma (Gorath): "The sequence featuring Magma only makes up approximately six minutes of the finished film, but is an integral part of its structure and played a key role in the film's advertising, being a centerpiece of the poster." - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:32, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
- I created a draft article of a merge between the two articles. Please look at it at User:Tocharianne/Gorath and see if it makes everyone happy. Some notes:
-
- Ignore the imdb link--it says Tocharianne/Gorath because the template uses the article title
- There's a section called Problem English because I couldn't understand what the phrases in bold were trying to say.
Tocharianne 00:16, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
