Talk:Howl's Moving Castle

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Novels
Literature Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
B This article has been rated as B-Class.
Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by the Fantasy task force. (with unknown importance)
Assessment comments
This article is part of WikiProject Children's literature, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to children's and young adult literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project.
Children and Young Adult Literature Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Article Grading:
The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
Tasks you can do:

What does cheeking a witch mean? RickK 06:33, 4 Oct 2003 (UTC)

To "cheek" someone is to treat them in an impertinent and disrespectful manner. This being a fantasy novel, the witch is a witch.
(Memo to self: Must pay more attention to what I write in Wikipedia, esp. wrt slang...) —Paul A 06:57, 4 Oct 2003 (UTC)
This reminds me of what my english teacher once said. She is American, once we ecountered the phrase "and you have the cheek to tell me that", she said that no American would know what that means, she commented with "Oh, that's so British!" ^_^ . Federico Pistono ✆ ✍ 09:56, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] See also that becomes external

Can anyone explain to me how this text:

* [[DWJWiki:Howl's Moving Castle|Howl's Moving Castle on the DWJ Wiki]]

turns into this external link?

-- Samuel Wantman 9 July 2005 03:30 (UTC)

It's a way to do interwiki linking. The link I just made was another example. Cmouse 9 July 2005 06:10 (UTC)

[edit] Poster vandalized

Can someone please fix the poster?-65.87.32.138
Fixed. --nihon 08:08, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Steampunk? I think not.

Someone listed this show as steampunk. Being someone who has watched the film and a follower of Japanime I must disagree. Never has it been stated in the film or by it's creators that Howl's Moving Castle is Steampunk. Whoever is listing these anime series under the steampunk category needs to prove that this movie has been recognised or made with the genre in mind, otherwise I think it is a gross misjudgement to list it under the same categories as other affiliated Steampunk works. 82.155.15.197 17:53, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

There is certainly an element of steampunk in the film (and in Miyazaki films in general) in the design of the castle and the airships -- a feel of technology as spun off from Victorian or Edwardian design, replete with, well, steam. Whether or not the category is purist about its members or allows anything with a related vibe to be included is not for me to say, but it does seem to be to fit squarely in the category the steampunk page calls fantasy steampunk. I'd call it no less steampunk than Nausicaa and the Brothers Grimm, which are both listed on that page as examples of the genre. (The book, on the other hand, is not steampunk at all.) Deborah-jl 13:53, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you that perhaps there should be some re-evaluation in terms of what types of works of fiction should be listed as steampunk. In my belief both the steampunk and cyberpunk articles are in a disarray, mainly due to the listing of the fictional works (primarily the media listings). Howl's Moing Castle may possess items of a steam-punk nature such as the castle, but with that in mind we may as well ass everything under the sun that possesses an element of some mechanical construct which is either steam-driven as steampunk. I think there needs to further clarity on the genre itself, because as you have indicated yourself the book is definitely not steampunk - the film is based on the book and may have added imrpovement by Miyazaki, however I am sure Miyazaki along with other anime producers only add elements of "fantasy" to these stories. And even though there is fantastic technology it still does not constitute this film being listed as steampunk simply because it is incorrect to define the movie as such. Rememeber that the book and the movie are if anything, categorised as fantasy whereas steampunk is science-fiction. There is a difference. 82.155.82.215 18:47, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, you make good points. I think before we change this category the right thing to do is get some consensus on the steampunk article. That article clearly allows for fantasy steampunk; after all, it dedicates an entire section to the concept. Under the current wikipedia definition of steampunk, the HMC film (and most Miyazaki) qualifies. Perhaps if you get some bckup for your assertions -- I think the Mamoth Encyclopedia of Science Fiction has steampunk entries, though I don't know what they say -- and bring them to the steampunk page, you can form a new consensus over there? Deborah-jl 15:26, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Separation?

Does anyone think it would be a good idea if we separated the "Howl's Moving Castle Studio Ghibli film" and the "Castle in the Air" article, from the "Howl's Moving Castle Novel" article? Alus 23:13, 20 January, 2006 (UTC)

So turn it into three articles? --nihon 07:46, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Yeah that is what I mean but I want to see what everyone else thinks. It seems to be rather smashed in to one article. Alus 10:13, 21 January, 2006 (UTC)
Hmm...I think the article works fine as it is, though if it was expanded quite a bit, Castle in the Air could be it's own article. --nihon 18:33, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Castle in the Air could certainly be its own article. Right now I feel the film and book having one article works, Deborah-jl Talk 17:34, 22 January 2006 (UTC)


I'm working on an article for Castle in the Air. I haven't quite finished it yet. I'll post it soon. Hope it's okay. Blue Socked Llama 08:12, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Castle Series Template

In an attempt to organize the growing number of Castle Series related pages (Ingary, Howl, Calcifer, etc.) I have created a "Castle Series" template to interconnect these articles. It's kind of rough, but this is my first attempt at creating a template. If there are any adept coders reading this than please feel free to streamline it a bit. Eventually I'd like both characters and places to have their own sub-section.

S. Luke 22:34, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Caharacters/ Setting spoliers

I'm rewording the character and setting sections to eliminate any possible spoliers, which I believe should be kept to the Plot Summary section.

S. Luke 22:11, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I personally think it is difficult to explain the characters' personalities without mentioning their actions. I am following the wikiproject template which encourages us to elaborate on Character sketch, Biographical summary and Relationship with other characters. There are 3 sections that require a spoiler warning (plot summary, characters and major themes). The only way to circumvent this would be to create an article for each character, which I don't think is necessary. Mfavre 23:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Now don't get me wrong, I think that it's wonderful that we're expanding on the characters section, after all only a couple of weeks ago that section was just a list of names and links. However, I think it's relatively common for people to come to Wikipedia and learn about a book they've heard about before they actually read it. If we make half the article contain spolier warnings then the article will only be useful to people who've already read the book, and honestly those people wouldn't need the character summaries to begin with. My suggestion would be to re-insert some of the bigger spoilers, for instance about Sulliman and Prince Justin, into the plot summary instead. If we mention the information there we really don't need to mention it again in the character summaries. Plus a good of the information on Sulliman isn't even about his own actions it's about what the witch has done to him, which being the case, I don't think really sheds any light on his character. So to me, at least, it seems that information would be better suited for the Plot Summary. Could that be an agreeable solution? S. Luke 02:20, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ingary Article Deletion

The article for Ingary was recently deleted and now re-dericts here. The entire discussion regarding the article's fate involved five people and took less than a week. Not a single person who regularly contributes to a "Castle Series" article was asked to participate in this discussion and no notice of this debate was ever mentioned at any of the relevant talk pages. The page deleted was the setting for two novels, and an academy award winning movie I believe it's safe to say that if some of those familiar with the books were made aware that the article's fate was uncertain we could have provided sufficient references to prove its notability. 4.255.43.217 23:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Department Of Overdone Jokes Department

But seriously, this article has SO much redundancy. So very much. Lots42 (talk) 12:21, 31 March 2008 (UTC)