Talk:List of Oh My Goddess! chapters
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. |
I'm not sure what this article needs, exactly, but it definitely needs something! Any ideas? It's a great idea, and I think we need to find a way of making it really work. Any way I can help, I'll do my best. --Dyplung 00:21, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Incorrect table
I'm pretty sure that the table is incorrect. It implies that there are some chapters that have different numbers in different editions. In fact, different editions include different numbers of chapters - the central column should have different rowspans, and the three numbering columns are useless. I'll make a start at this and hopefully other people can help out. DenisMoskowitz 01:38, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, I completed the re-spanning of the unflipped books. We still need to go through and remove the "DH#" and "DH2#" columns entirely, and rename "K#" to "#", but I'll let someone else do that. DenisMoskowitz 02:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- Or not - I just went ahead and did it myself. This table should be more maintainable going forward. Some of the chapter names are still unofficial translations rather than the Dark Horse names, but I'll put off fixing that for some other day. DenisMoskowitz 11:55, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
The flipped releases (called DH) did in fact have different chapters in the volumes, one of the main reason I started this article was to show the rather complicated order of the manga flipped version compared to the Japanese and unflipped version. As you might see the volumes wasn't even released in order by Dark Horse in the beginning, and they didn't want to split chapters with the same storyline, hence the different number of chapters compared to the original manga. Nomit84 07:18, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think we disagree. Do you think it's correct now? One thing that I think this article could use would be a brief explanation of the DH publishing history, perhaps above the table. There should probably also be a description of the original collection, "1-555-GODDESS", which was replaced by the first 3 volumes. It was published in November 1996, has an ISBN of 1-56971-207-7, and contains chapters 1, 14, 17, 18, 19, and 20. Also, would it be worth adding the collection names? DenisMoskowitz 11:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Format suggestion
Yeah this table you guys have going is kinda crazy so here is my suggestion...if you like it i'd be more than willing to help keep it maintained.
[edit] Kodansha / Dark Horse 2
[edit] Production
All your production type information here.
[edit] Manga Chapters
| Volume | Ch. # | Title | Release Information |
|---|---|---|---|
| Volume 1 | |||
| 1 | Wrong number | Kodansha: Sep 23, 1989 ISBN 4-06-321009-X Dark Horse 2: Dec 07, 2005 ISBN 1-59307-387-9 |
|
| 2 | Into the lair of the anime otaku | ||
| 3 | A man's home is his... Temple? | ||
| 4 | College exchange goddess | ||
| 5 | Those whom goddess has joined together let not woman put asunder | ||
| 6 | SLP camera - mission accomplished | ||
| 7 | The lullaby of love | ||
| 8 | The megumi problem | ||
| 9 | The apartment hunting blues | ||
| Volume 2 | |||
| Image:Omg v02.jpg | 10 | Naked victory | Kodansha: Mar 23, 1990 ISBN 4-06-321013-8 Dark Horse 2: Apr 12, 2006 ISBN 1-59307-457-3 |
| 11 | Let flowers bloom | ||
| 12 | Leader of the pack | ||
| 13 | Ultimate force down | ||
| 14 | Sexy sister | ||
| 15 | I'm the campus queen | ||
| 16 | What Belldandy wants most | ||
and then you repeat the above format for DH1--88wolfmaster 20:59, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- This would mean that every chapter would be listed twice - do you really think that would be preferable? DenisMoskowitz 22:24, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
- As strange as that sounds yes (it would not confuse me as much for sure). Or (in order to not repeat) you could just devote a section that explains that the DH1 release volumes covered different chapters. But i'm just making suggestions--88wolfmaster 20:26, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Hmm. For a start, what about changing the order of the columns to what you have above, minus the volume headers, and moving the DH1 column to after the combined K/DH2 column? That would make the whole thing skinnier and remove half of the wierd brick effect. (We could even make that last column colspan=2 after volume 20.) DenisMoskowitz 00:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- I went ahead and changed the column orders, merged the K & DH2 columns, and removed the gray cells. Do you think it's any less confusing now? DenisMoskowitz 00:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah that is less confusing.--88wolfmaster 04:41, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- As strange as that sounds yes (it would not confuse me as much for sure). Or (in order to not repeat) you could just devote a section that explains that the DH1 release volumes covered different chapters. But i'm just making suggestions--88wolfmaster 20:26, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Question: For release dates, are they the publication dates? If so, please look through the Dark Horse site. I caught the date for Volume 5 set for Feb 07. when it was actually for June 07. KyuuA4 04:54, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
- Well it's not said anywhere on here. Seeing as publication dates can be easily checked, and release dates can't, makes sense to use only publication dates. Keep in mind, DH do push back publication dates, so Volume 5 was probably correct at the time of writting. I'm going to go through and confirm all the DH ones now anyway. --Zeal Vurte 21:03, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Above Images
Gotta love wikipedia and it's backwards policies and mass use of automated bots that aren't capabale of making descisions for it ;) Several of these were updated versions of the same source image so new rationale should not be needed. Irregardless a non-template rationale was already included with the correct liscene template which they all complied with.
To satisfy the stupidity of this, i've added a templated rationale and will see where it goes. But none of the previous images under the same rationale were effected by this, so seems like a bias to new images/users more than anything.
I knew there was a good reason i never wanted to contribute to another wiki again.. -_- --Zeal Vurte 04:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- I went through and added full page-specific rationales to each image - hopefully that will be the end of it. DenisMoskowitz 18:44, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
-
- Well i already added them on the talk page (why wikipedia's policy would be to add them to a page, thus needless pushing down the more important and relveant license and file information with every usage, i don't know. Backwards policies strike again..), and hell what i provided original along with the license gave more details of a rationale than what the rationale template gives. Hence backwards policies..
I added some extra info along with the rationale to images i didn't upload and that were marked for deletion. Also put up the original lower res images from darkhorse for them if they were uploaded from elsewhere at a higher resolution. --Zeal Vurte 19:04, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
- Well i already added them on the talk page (why wikipedia's policy would be to add them to a page, thus needless pushing down the more important and relveant license and file information with every usage, i don't know. Backwards policies strike again..), and hell what i provided original along with the license gave more details of a rationale than what the rationale template gives. Hence backwards policies..
