Talk:The Mysterious Cities of Gold

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓    Skip to table of contents    ↓

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Mysterious Cities of Gold article.
Article policies
Archives: 1
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.
TV
Television Portal
This article is part of WikiProject Television, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to television programs and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
Low This article has been rated as low-Importance on the importance scale.
Assessment comments


Contents

[edit] Picture

Incidentally, if someone can find a better image than the one at the top I'd be quite pleased. --Ross UK (talk) 21:39, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

whats wrong with the one at the top?? I love it. --Acidburn24m (talk) 04:08, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
It's a matter of taste I suppose. I don't feel that it portrays the characters clearly enough, having small images of them scattered around the frame and the Condor viewed at a strange angle. I always thought it curious that it was used for some official releases. OK if people want to keep it, but I would prefer something else. --Ross UK (talk) 18:35, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Maybe the upcomming English DVD relases would have a better cover (I doubt it). Acidburn24m (talk) 19:02, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
I hope to include that image lower down in the article in the DVD section. --Ross UK (talk) 19:14, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
great.. we still have a couple of months till the release though. Acidburn24m (talk) 19:20, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Image now added. I think it's better than the one we used previously at the top of the article. --Ross UK (talk) 20:07, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
What's the source for that image? The URL doesn't work and, as so far the only artwork that I know of that has been releases is not official. Collectonian (talk) 20:29, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
The image is published by Fabulous Films, and is located at the Yahoo! group mcog-list, as shown by the text of the URL. --Ross UK (talk) 01:03, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
A Yahoo group is not a reliable source for content, nor for DVDs. I can not find that image on either of the Fabulous Films sites. Did whoever post it give the origin? If not, it needs to be removed as it can not be shown to be accurate. Collectonian (talk) 01:11, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
It was posted by Tim Skutt, certainly a good authority in these matters, his having received it from Richard Walker at Fabulous Films. --Ross UK (talk) 01:09, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Again, a Yahoo Group is not a reliable source, nor is an email (presuming that's how he got it). Anyone can claim anything they want in a Yahoo group, that doesn't make it real or valid. Until an official image is release, I've removed that one from the article. If Fabulous Films has actually released an image, I'm sure it will appear in a legitimate source soon enough. Collectonian (talk) 01:15, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
That image is the same as the one on the HMV site you know, minus the wossnim across it. Shiroi Hane (talk) 00:30, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
But it didn't come FROM the site, so the sourcing is invalid. It's already been noted above that the image was posted on a board. When a more official source for the image can be found, which would confirm that the art work is correct and finalized, then it can be added back with proper sourcing.Collectonian (talk) 00:36, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
There are DVD covers on an old site of mine that I received directly from the managing director of Contender Ltd via email. Some later covers I received direct from Aitch Creative. Would that be an invalid source also? Shiroi Hane (talk) 00:48, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, because we as editors can not be sources, nor can a personal web site or email be used as a source per WP:RS. Additionally, those images are from 1999, and we don't know that Fabulous Films will be using the same covers or doing their own. We need to wait until Fabulous Films releases their official cover art for the series. Since the first release is due in March, it is likely that the cover art will be forthcoming fairly soon. There isn't any need to rush and accidentally publish false information. Collectonian (talk) 01:01, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
(Collapsing, as the indent is getting silly) The link I provided was just an example and the images there are unrelated. The guideline you reference is for information, not images. Shiroi Hane (talk) 01:13, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
The same guidelines apply, though. As Fabulous Films themselves have not published a cover of the image, we can not verify that any one image is the official one. We can't claim the image is official, and we don't want to post the wrong image as that would be providing incorrect information in a visual form.Collectonian (talk) 01:15, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] BBC masters

The recent edit by Fabinfo claims that the masters used by Fabulous Films were not supplied by the BBC, and that the BBC destroyed the masters in "early 2007". I am somewhat sceptical about the second claim, which is unsourced, and doesn't seem to fit with the timing. The first claim, which is also unsourced, does not rule out the entirety of the paragraph in question. I am therefore restoring the paragraph with the exception of the BBC claim, though Tim Skutt, who has been in contact with Richard Walker, has twice said that the tapes were obtained from the BBC (or at least that they had belonged to the BBC in the past). I accept however that the sources for the claim could be better. I propose that the BBC claim should stand, and invite any interested views. --Ross UK (talk) 04:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] English Voice Actors

I understand that this is from someone's personal site, but he seems to have worked out (and confirmed, by talking to some of the voice actors) the English cast. This is the one. Is this useful to the article, or does it need a first-hand source (of which there are unfortunately very few for MCoG)? If it is, do you think it's worth putting up one of those funky voice actors tables as seen in so many other anime pages?

Additionally, I think the many sections about production and dubbing can be cut down and merged together. I'm off to London for the next couple of days though so I don't have time to do a massive revision until Monday. AeolusStorm (talk) 21:02, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

A reliable source would be needed, which precludes fan sites. A voice actor table would not be appropriate (and isn't the preferred format for anime pages either, just stuff we have to clean up as we find). The proper format for an in article list would be:
  • English name (kanji name romanji name?), short description. Voiced by: Voiced by: Japanese (Japanese), English (English)

For the actual cast, hopefully the list will be in the DVD release. Otherwise, it will have to just be noted that many are unknown. I agree some of the sections need to be merged, and the article as a whole needs cleaned up and reformatted to comply with the anime and manga MOS. Collectonian (talk) 21:13, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

That's fine. I just wanted to check ^_^ I'm fairly new to Wikipedia anyway and those tables look like a nightmare to try and format.AeolusStorm (talk) 21:30, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
No prob...and trust me, they are a nightmare to undo too :-P This is the anime and manga MOS, Wikipedia:Manual of Style (anime- and manga-related articles), if you'd like to see what sections we are aiming for and how to structure stuff. :) Collectonian (talk) 22:07, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for that. It'll be much easier to redefine with those guidelines in mind. Mmm, fun ^_^ AeolusStorm (talk) 17:57, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Since I have it on DVD should I list the english voice actors as its listed on the extras. Dwanyewest (talk) 00:33, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
That would be great. Please use the format noted above. I also found the series listed in my Anime Encyc so I'll try to find time to encorporate any info from there into relevant sections of the article. Collectonian (talk) 00:48, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Incorrect cover

I've removed the cover because it was updated before release. The correct one can be seen on the main retailer's site (direct link to image), as well as Amazon UK. The update was "announced" in an email from Fabulous Films a couple of weeks ago, though I suppose such an update wouldn't be citable here. Their own site isn't particularly up to date, given that the MCOG DVD came with a leaflet of current and upcoming releases, of which few are listed on their site. Of course, the DVD sitting in front of me right now isn't, unfortunately, citable either!!!--Thetriangleguy (talk) 18:56, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Why not do that the first time it was questioned? :P BTW, instead of deleting the image, why didn't you just replace it with the right one? Collectonian (talk) 19:00, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Yeah sorry about that. Should've provided suitable citations. On the replacement issue, does the article really need the image of the dvd cover? Seems like unnecessary advertising to me. Surely if other images are needed on the article, more character pictures would be more appropriate. If it does need the dvd cover, at the moment the quality of the images available on the web of the actual cover aren't particulary great. --Thetriangleguy (talk) 19:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
"at the moment the quality of the images available on the web of the actual cover aren't particulary great." ...at which point I look and see you've replace the image with one of sufficient quality! Good work! Thanks.--Thetriangleguy (talk) 19:10, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
No prob. Now...if it would just hurry up and get released HERE so I can get my copy! :P Collectonian (talk) 19:17, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
Don't know whether or not it's relevant but it appears they are changing the cover AGAIN! This time for the non-exclusive release in June [1]. Given there's two different covers on that one page (both completely different from what's been before) I'm presuming they've not confirmed anything. Still, I thought I'd mention it in case anyone was confused.--Thetriangleguy (talk) 14:08, 17 April 2008 (UTC)