Talk:Sailor Moon (English adaptations)

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.
Sailor Moon
 Sailor Moon (English adaptations) is part of WikiProject Sailor Moon, a project to present information on Sailor Moon and related articles. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page (see Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ), or visit our Project page for more information!
Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 10 April 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.
Archive
Archives
Archive 1


Contents

[edit] Toei Poll-Sailor Moon All Seasons

http://www.genvid.com/News/Vote-Sailor-Moon.html here is the link that verfies from Genvid that all fives seasons were included, but I'll leave it up to you guys whether or not it's a reliable source. Gamloverks (talk) 15:43, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Alternate Means?

Should we state somewhere in the article that people generally have downloaded english/japanese (w/subtitles) from miscellaneous sites? or is this irrelevant? Gamloverks (talk) 15:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Do you mean, should we expand on what "alternative means" implies? I'm not sure. Probably we should at least mention the very popular Stars bootleg that sells on Amazon, though. I know that's in one of our other articles... --Masamage ♫ 17:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I mean how you can go to miscellaneous websites and pick up these episodes since they no longer air on TV. I can verify and provide several instances of where websites have put these episodes up. Gamloverks (talk) 15:53, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
The problem is, we can't actually link to those websites, according to this policy, because then we would actually be contributing to their copyright infringement. :/ So that makes it really hard to source, even though it's obviously true. Maybe we can just say that people do provide illegal downloads, link to the Wikipedia article that discusses that, and call it good? --Masamage ♫ 16:56, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm sure that would work. Gamloverks (talk) 17:10, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
It should not be discussed or put in any article at all. Doing so violates the very spirit of WP:COPYVIO just as linking violates the letter. We do not discuss fansubs in any anime article, nor bootlegs. If people are interested in obtaining illegal copies, they will find them on their own. Collectonian (talk) 16:45, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
What's all this "we do not" stuff? Is it considered totally unimportant to the history of a series' release? (What about the fact that supposedly-reputable sites are selling this stuff? Is that only important if there's a lawsuit over it?) --Masamage ♫ 16:58, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
We as in the project and as in Wikipedia as a whole. Bootleg and fansub releases are completely unimportant the history of a series unless they have received significant coverage in reliable sources. We all know you can go to Amazon.com's Marketplace, eBay, etc to find illegal bootlegs. Unless its covered in a reliable source, however, it does not belong in a Wikipedia article. Remember, the goal of Wikipedia is not truth (i.e., not just because we "know" it), but verifiable information from reliable sources. Collectonian (talk) 17:02, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, so the question becomes, has this been covered in any sources? Malkinann, you've read the most of the academic stuff. :) Anything helpful? --Masamage ♫ 17:12, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

SM fandom is briefly used as an example in this paper, but IIRC, that talks about fansubbing as a whole, so it's kind of blink-and-you'll-miss-it. It cites the fansite Sailor Moon Uncensored about the ethics of fansubbing (the page they cited from SM Uncensored talked about the VKLL fansubs). Most of the academic papers were written in the days where everyone was convinced that SM was taking everything by storm (so, no need for illegal distribution), and the current situation (of everything being out of print) was probably unthinkable.-Malkinann (talk) 20:01, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] They're back!

http://www.moonkitty.net/ is reporting that ToonAttik is airing the show on it's Sat1 morning block at 7:05a.m. so the show is airing again. That's good news ^_^ Gamloverks (talk) 10:21, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Genvid is now reporting this is false, so I don't know anymore. Gamloverks (talk) 16:11, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
Where is that report? --Masamage ♫ 00:29, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
Look under the history of news for Genvid's site. I can't access at this moment because of my school's blocking policy, so unless you don't feel like waiting, I can post the link later in the afternoon. Gamloverks (talk) 14:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
http://moon-chase.blogspot.com/2008/04/more-definite-proof-sailor-moon-is-not.html this is the link Moon Chase provided. http://www.genvid.com/News/UK-Rumor-Squashed.html for the genvid link. The video was immediately taken down. Gamloverks (talk) 21:39, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Interesting, no?

I stumbled across this. http://www.animenation.net/news/index.php?id=11799 It looks like FUNimation is interested in Sailor Moon too. Here is the other one for a closer to today date. http://www.icv2.com/articles/home/12043.html Gamloverks (talk) 10:34, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Not quite. Funimation is interested in Geneon licenses, but since Geneon didn't own the Sailor Moon license anymore when it shut down, to acquire it Funimation would have to deal with Toei. Collectonian (talk) 16:41, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
The fact that they would have to go through Toei would probably be a problem yes, but the fact that companies like FUNimation is still interested in the series is a plus. Gamloverks (talk) 14:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Notability

This article is obviously notable based on being a subpage of the Sailor Moon main article. WP:MOS-AM states "Articles should be self-contained, only referring to subpages for additional information or details if the main article or a section becomes too long." Well, that's certainly true for the English-adaptation section.

And can we have that section at all? Yes, under Production, after "Topics that can reasonably be included" we find "issues arising from the transition from...one language to another (such as alterations to storylines, international voice actors, air dates or dates of publication)." --Masamage ♫ 16:36, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

And that proves my point from our earlier discussion. This is not a notable topic nor an appropriate subpage at all. Clear out the OR, personal opinion, unreferenced statements, complaints, excessive details and unnecessary examples, and it would fit fine in the main article in a single paragraph, two at the most. Collectonian (talk) 16:40, 4 April 2008 (UTC)