Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Archive 8

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
← Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 →

Contents

Case Closed/Detective Conan Naming Convention Problems

The article has been created in 2004. But, even up to now, there is no consensus on the names used in the series's articles-- should we use Case Closed, Jimmy Kudo etc., or Detective Conan, Shinichi Kudō etc.? I read those naming conventions on the site but those didn't even enlighten me a bit. May I ask the people here to give issue, since I think among DC/CC fans this issue has the probability of being un-NPOV.

Reference: Talk:Case Closed#Moved to "Case Closed"?

Samuel Curtis 16:33, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia's naming convention is to use the English titles unless the work is better known by a different title. When in doubt, go with the English title and names. --TheFarix (Talk) 17:29, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
The problem is, Detective Conan is also English, (The Japanese form in romaji is Meitantei Konan.) so it also qualify as an "English" title. Also, English useds outside of US and Canada (mainly), plus some of the US/UK fans, tend to use the Japanese set of names, and the usage of Case Closed etc probabily would have an Anglo-American worldview, which might have a NPOV issue here. Samuel Curtis 18:30, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
When in doubt, use the official English title. You cannot really verify that the series is known better as Detective Conan then Case Closed among Anglophone so you should go with Case Close. --TheFarix (Talk) 19:10, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Let me also stress one more point, it's about whether Anglophone will know the serious under the Case Closed title, not about which title they prefer to use. --TheFarix (Talk) 19:27, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
What is official anyway? Case Closed is the official English name in US/UK/Canada, no doubt; but Detective Conan is considered the official English name elsewhere. Also, WP:NC say only English speakers not Anglophones. Samuel Curtis 01:30, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
We don't have to abide by an "official" name anyway. The official US name for Utena was Ursula's Kiss ... We should establish the most common form of the name as used by speakers of English and use this for our name. We should also mention name variation and create redirects from the for articles. --Kunzite 02:49, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
I have a full set of Utena DVDs - official US release - that says otherwise. Ursula's Kiss was the title the original licensor WANTED used, but the OFFICIAL US title is whatever's on the actual DVD (or VHS or LD, where applicable) that is released. Snarfies 20:01, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
It seems a google test says that more people use "Detective conan" over "Case closed" --Kunzite 02:12, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
"Case Closed" seemed short lived on TV, my money's on "Detective Conan" for most recognized title. I've only seen the show on TV, when it was called Case Closed, but even now when I hear the title I hardly remember what show it is. When I hear "Detective Conan" I know exactly what show it is. -- Ned Scott 02:26, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I'd go with "Detective Conan" for two reasons: 1) Case Closed is the official English title in North America only. In Singapore for example, the official English title is Detective Conan. As a result, there cannot be an agreement for an "official English" title. 2) More people use Detective Conan, given a search on google. Using Case Closed may cause more confusion.

Rules on wikipedia are not Civil Law cases - they are more like common law cases, which in this interpretation means that they are subject to the condition and case. Karn-b 05:29, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

If this is a common law case, we need caselaw from a reliable source... Samuel Curtis 09:58, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I'd personally recommend using Detective Conan but in italics mention the alternative names either in the intro paragraph or a header note (though those are normally avoided if possible) and also setup redirects from all the names both Japanese and English to the main article. Thygard - Talk - Contribs - Email ---- 06:44, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Refer to the Talk:Case Closed#Moved to "Case Closed"? link above, User:WhisperToMe seemed to have an interesting find...

Since currently we have no concensus, we have to keep the status quo (CC Names), but now I have see some DC-purist uproar lately... Give me ways to placant them till the matter is resolved. Samuel Curtis 06:53, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Since we've shown both titles to be acceptable, I'd point them to Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Disputes over style issues. Although this really isn't a "style" issue, but a naming convention issue, the same idea and logic still applies. -- Ned Scott 06:58, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
I wonder if I should refer this to one of the talk pages on naming conventions-- Even I know people here should know pretty much about WP:NAME and WP:UE already? Samuel Curtis 11:35, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
"1) Case Closed is the official English title in North America only. In Singapore for example, the official English title is Detective Conan. As a result, there cannot be an agreement for an "official English" title." - Not true, by the way. Case Closed is also in use in Canada and the United Kingdom. Also, are the Singapore editions of "DC" in English? WhisperToMe 18:06, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
This has since made a RfC on Talk:Case Closed, but for completion, I have to reply WhusperToMe's contention that SG does not use English. Yes, he is true; I happen to have a SG-version manga on hand and it's Chinese. The title on the copyright page is merely the romaji of the title, Meitantei Konan.

Naming Conventions

There is a discussion going on in the article Kimi_ga_Nozomu_Eien about wether/when it should be moved to the title it is being officially released in the US as, Rumbling Hearts. I thought the official practice was to move articles to official US titles, using the one that is the most accurate translation of the original where more than one official English release exists (see Talk:Saint Seiya for an example of this). But I just checked the actual Anime Project page, and no such guideline exists. Should we have such a guideline? It would avoid arguments like "Case Closed" vs "Detective Conan," as an example. I am of the feeling that we ought to. Snarfies 20:27, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I added a line under Article Structure → Article name. I don't think we need to replicate the policy, so I just linked to it. --Squilibob 00:19, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
I must add that I don't like the idea of changing the name of a Japanese program to an English name if the anime hasn't been dubbed and released yet, but once it has I'm fine with changing the name. --Squilibob 06:23, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
I think that we should clarify this. We should use what most English speakers use. Isn't that another MOS rule? I just can't imagine Nerima Radish Brothers or Dog Deamon, Fang, Baked Fresh!! Japan Bread, etc, etc, etc.... --Kunzite 00:36, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I've already fought the battle at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles)/Fictional characters. The official practice is to use the most commonly used name, which is not necessarily the official name. Someone changed the guideline over there to always use the official name and after everyone else disagreed, it finally got changed back. If the anime becomes popular under the English name, you can *then* change the name of the article. Don't do it ahead of time. Ken Arromdee 19:07, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Bulbasaur

Bulbasaur is a featured article and was on the main page a few days ago. I think we should claim it as an anime and manga FA :D --Squilibob 06:23, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

By all means, do so. :D _dk 23:09, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
I object. The Pokemon characters themselves should not be considered part of this project. They are, first and foremost, video game characters. There are 10 Good Pokemon articles and 2 featured Pokemon articles, more than twice as many articles we have on the list as it is. If we include them all of them, the actual "true" articles we've raised to those levels are going to be drowned out. The only Pokemon articles that should be included in our scope are the show, film, and manga Pokemon articles. Let's not stretch for articles to include just to make ourselves look better... Unless everyone else objects, I'm going to go ahead and remove it.--SeizureDog 02:43, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Plus, we've got a link to this project on the front page of the Pokémon Wikiproject. We (try to) use the anime/manga style guidelines as the basis for our guidelines anyway, and, hey, any help is always appreciated. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:05, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Object? Bulbasaur is an article that clearly can fall under more than one project. This isn't an owership issue, or even giving credit to one group or another. -- Ned Scott 03:47, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
I also object to the removal. Although this project may not have contributed to this project, it still falls within it's scope and should be included. --Miss Ethereal 16:58, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
I seperated the Pokemon articles from the normal ones, is this a suitable enough compromise for everybody?--SeizureDog 01:27, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Looks good to me. The basic idea is that we're saying "this is a good way to do this", and as long as we're saying that then it should be fine. -- Ned Scott 06:21, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Actually I wish that Bishōjo game had more than four references. Also some of the prose in that article is badly worded. I guess the criteria for Featured Articles has changed a bit since 2004. --Squilibob 10:21, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
It has. Previously, references weren't even required. --SeizureDog 16:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipe-tan for Featured Picture!

Can I be featured? kana, kana?
Can I be featured? kana, kana?

.....I've had this idea for quite a while now, seeing that Image:Piratey, vector version.svg and Image:Mad scientist.svg are both featured pictures, can our Wikipe-tan have a chance at it too?......or tell me I need sleep. _dk 01:27, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Go for it! Can we nominate her for the wikipedia board of trustees too? --Kunzite 01:37, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
I too would like to see her attain featured status, but does the image "add value to an article and help complete readers' understanding of an article in ways other pictures in the article do not?" (Criterion 5.) Villain and Mad scientist are benefited by the images, but Wikipe-tan's use in OS-tan seems gratuitous, and the OS-tans themsevles or Moezilla would probably be better for Moé anthropomorphism, since a careless glance could confuse Wikipe for a run-of-the-mill maid character. Perhaps I'm just being a hard-ass. Has there been any thought of proposing adopting her as an official mascot at the Village Pump?--Monocrat 02:12, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Funny, I wrote up the whole moé anthropomorphism mainly for that purpose.... :D *sweatdrop*
Well, I think Wikipe-tan's use on that page is better than OS-tan or Moezilla because Wikipe-tan is GDFL...and also if Wikipe-tan could be confused as the typical meido then the same thing could be said for the OS-tans and Firefox-ko (as a foxgirl). I believe the puzzle pieces on her clearly evokes the image of Wikipedia.
And she was nominated as Wikipedia's mascot on the meta some time ago...but I think the consensus is that there will be no mascot. _dk 02:26, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Ah, I hadn't thought of potential copyright concerns regarding Moe anthropomorphism. Good point. *embarassed blush* ;) --Monocrat 02:39, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, here goes nothing. Show your love! Discuss here: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Wikipe-tan -- _dk 02:55, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Even though the FPC doesn't appear to be over yet, Wikipe-tan is currently on the Main Page!! (just not as a POTD) She's under the "Did you know..." section with the text "...that in the otaku culture, it is common to see trains, computer operating systems, warplanes, and even home appliances anthropomorphized as girls (pictured)?" -- Ned Scott 23:20, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes...although I nomimated it (I don't know what I was drinking, but eh), seeing Wikipe-tan on the main page still gives me a field day XD _dk 02:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Oh, this was outside of the featured picture thing. Apparently she was just sort of chosen to go in because Moé anthropomorphism was being mentioned in the "Did you know..." box. -- Ned Scott 04:43, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I meant I nominated it for DYK too. _dk 01:20, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Ah, I see. -- Ned Scott 10:24, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipe-tan is now a featured picture. --GunnarRene 00:38, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Jo Jo's Bizarre Adventure

I was perusing to the list of fufilled requests that Ninja Neko so kindly moved to talk. I noticed that Dio Brando has got a sizable character profile, but very very little info on the series that the character belongs to. I was hoping someone who knew the series could expand it or clean it up. Thanks! --Kunzite 01:37, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Naruto character article titles

I'm sure this will get my throat ripped out by most of the Naruto fans here, but I'm rather bothered by this.

Why is it that Naruto character articles have titles in the Japanese order of naming (e.g., Uzumaki Naruto is the article about the character, while Naruto Uzumaki redirects to it)? Considering the style used for other animes' characters to use Western naming order (e.g., Ichigo Kurosaki, Usagi Tsukino), what exactly makes Naruto (the series) so special that it's characters have articles which are titled in a different order? This is English Wikipedia, and there's a guideline that recommends us to use English when naming articles. Heck, even the naming guidelines for Japanese-related articles say to use Western order first. The English dub of the Naruto anime also use Western naming order, and those names are probably ones that a good number of, if not most, English-speaking Naruto fans are also familiar with. Really, for the sake of consistency and following Wikipedia guidelines, the articles for Naruto characters should be in Western order, and the Japanese order names redirecting to those articles. --NeoChaosX 22:24, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

The names should be changed to GN-SN order since Naruto is not a historical anime about pre-Meiji characters—which is the only excuse I can think of to justify using SN-GN. However, I fear you will have a fight on your hands with the Narutards over it. --TheFarix (Talk) 23:24, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
"Use English" doesn't really apply. WP:MOS-JA does. They should be changed, but you'll have to either get a friendly admin, or more likely propose a multiple mass move. If you want help listing them, make the initial page and I'll point WP:AWB at the category and 'em that way. --Kunzite 23:58, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
The English-language manga uses Japanese order. WhisperToMe 21:22, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
I've put up the proposal on WP:RM; I just need to add the move vote to the discussion of Uzumaki Naruto. --NeoChaosX 00:31, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
I've added discussion to Talk:Uzumaki Naruto. And yes, I could use some help on listing other Naurto articles that could use moving. --NeoChaosX 00:36, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Done, I think. (I like mail merge.)--Kunzite 02:25, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm presently surprised that there has only been one oppose vote in the less then 24hour the poll has been up. I figured we would see a bunch of Narutards hoping all over this like a ninja team on a bowl of hot ramen in opposition to the move. But there is still plenty of time before the end of the poll, so things can change. --TheFarix (Talk) 01:45, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
On that note, assuming there's relatively no problem with the moves, can I assume it would be a greenlight to do a similar switch for mentions of Naruto characters that don't have their own articles (such as the folks listed in List of Konoha Chūnin and List of Konoha Jōnin)? --NeoChaosX (talk | contribs) 02:31, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Theoretically, it should. It would be best to mention this in the comments section since this is not covered by the move. A semi-bot can do the name switcing with a series of regex replace entries. (I hope.) --Kunzite 03:06, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

The move request passed. Last few articles are being moved; apparently there was some trouble regarding redirects for a few characters. I'm right now reorganizing the introductions for the moved articles so they use the nihongo template and have the western order names first. --NeoChaosX (talk | contribs) 03:17, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

And now that I think about it, our job now is to switch mentions of those articles (as well as names of other Naruto characters) in articles that link to them. This is going to take awhile. --NeoChaosX (talk | contribs) 04:19, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Now that we've been working on the transition to Western naming order for a couple days, any of you think we should put notifications in all the talk pages of Naruto-related articles (not just individual character articles) notifying folks of the change and link to the closed debate? I know it's not going to stop the anon reverts to the names, but at least registered users would know what's going on. —NeoChaosX (talk | contribs) 01:30, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Amerimanga

Currently there is a dispute over renaming the article. The article was discussed briefly over a merge from Original English-language manga, and then the article was moved to Manga-influenced comics. Since then it has been reverted back to Amerimanga. A third opinion would be appreciated. --SevereTireDamage 05:36, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Is this a dispute between two terms? If so, then conduct a formal move request. --TheFarix (Talk) 11:06, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
I wish to find a strong consensus on the topic from other users over a week or so before taking it to WP:RM, if necessary. Currently it's only a few users debating the topic. --SevereTireDamage 20:10, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Article template

In case anyone may be interested, I have started constructing an article template for anime/manga articles, based on the WikiProject Novels' article template. It could probably use a few more things, but it is based on Excel Saga, with an obvious influence on how I work my own articles. If anyone has any suggestions for this, please feel free to add them. I intend to use this template on any future stubs I create/build over, so hopefully it could prove useful to others. Elric of Grans 04:42, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Two things: Although I used in Excel Saga, I'm not fond of the wording "X is a manga by Y and an anime directed by Z." It feels clunky, and I can't think of anything better. Any suggestions on how to improve it? Secondly, I can't seem to alphabetize the categories inserted by the Animanga infoboxes. The only way to get around this is to list the catgeories at the very top of the page (e.g., see the [code for Excel Saga]). This of course makes them a target for people hastily using Auto-Wiki Browser. Is there perhaps some way to change this?--Monocrat 16:17, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
For your first problem, you can use two sentences, one for the manga and the second for the anime. X is a manga written and illustrated by Y and serialized in Z. X was later adapted into an anime series produced by A and directed by B. The anime aired weekly on C from D to E. It may be longer, but it is also far more descriptive. As for sorting the categories in alphabetical order, I wouldn't worry about it. --TheFarix (Talk) 16:34, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
Aye, the lead could use some work. Part of the problem is that there is so much diversity in what we have. It may be a light novel adapted into a manga and an anime, it may have been a stand-alone movie, it may be an OVA adapted into... (ever tried explaining Tenchi Muyou! to someone?). I shall play around with things and see if I cannot come up with a better alternative. The Maburaho example below may be a good start. As for the categories, I have the same problem with Boogiepop series. Every time someone comes along with a bot, I have to revert the categories. Probably the only way to fix it would be to remove the categorisation from templates so we can put them on the bottom, but I would imagine that would be unpopular. Elric of Grans 23:19, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Let me give the opening paragraph for Maburaho as an example.

Maburaho (まぶらほ?) is a romantic school comedy light novel series by Toshihiko Tsukiji, illustrated by Eiji Komatsu and serialized in Gekkan Dragon Magazine. The light novel was adapted into a manga illustrated by Miki Miyashita and later developed into a 24 episode anime series produced by J.C.STAFF and broadcasted by WOWOW in Japan.

Character Categorization

Is it ok to categorize characters by redirects? I've added some, but I wanted to check before I went whole-hog. See: Category:Manga_and_anime_characters_by_origin --Kunzite 02:54, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

First of all, that category is so misleading. It should be renamed to Manga and anime characters by nationality if it's going to stay around. Secondly, it seems like a stupid thing to categorize by. 95% of characters are going to be from Japan, 5% from somewhere kooky like space, and 1% from somewhere else. And even then, often times they don't tell you where they're actually from, you just know they look different. And where do characters born in Japan, that move to America, that come back to Japan fit? I see that happen often enough. --SeizureDog 05:52, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
To be honest, I see this going the way of the Category:Japanese women, Category:American women etc. set of cats that were CFDs a while back. Shiroi Hane 15:46, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
It mimics the pattern used here: Category:Fictional characters. I think origin was chosen because nationality is not always something that is applicable... i.e. If we had an article on the Aterui anime, the character would fall under Ainu as opposed to Japanese. I only came across the topic when I noticed it in an CfD for it. Apparently it was created to house the American animanga characters and the others were created to avoid the deletion. --Kunzite 17:05, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Anyone want to add some infoboxes?

Every title now currently in Category:Manga should be missing an animanga infobox. --Kunzite 23:46, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm busy trying to genre sort what is on List of science fiction anime so it can be put on AfD. --TheFarix (Talk) 01:09, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Any idea on where we can get some infobox info on some of the more obscure manga titles? --Squilibob 11:37, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
I usually try to find them on the other languages wikis (with discretion), especially the Japanese one. _dk 11:56, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipe-tan self-reference dispute

Many of you are already aware of Wikipe-tan's featured picture candidacy. An interesting turn of events has occurred, and on one of the articles where she was being used as an example, an editor felt that her inclusion was a violation of WP:SELF. Now, the article in question is not the article that Wikipe is "attached to" for her FPC (that article would be Moé anthropomorphism), and it won't be the end of the world if she's removed from fan service... but I fear it will be a slippery slope for her over-all removal, as the logic would be the same. I am requesting additional input for the dispute, which is currently taking place on Talk:Fan service#Wikipe-tan. -- Ned Scott 10:41, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Interesting debate on infoboxes at ja:wikipedia.

ja:Template‐ノート:Infobox_animanga google translation Which, apparently, some have opposed the use of the infobox from en because of patriotic (?) reasons. (Though most of the reasons are because: "It messes with the layout".) I think, however, that there was a useful proposal: color scheme based on genre or audience. --Kunzite 15:13, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

better (IMO) translation engine. Shiroi Hane 15:35, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

There have been attempts to color code infoboxes here on the English wikipedia, but it seems people don't want to make ugly infoboxes, so the color scheeme was broken pretty fast. --GunnarRene 21:42, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I figured. The other suggestion that I liked was putting the ISBNs in an infobox. I usually find them distracting when included in the article. --Kunzite 23:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
{{Infobox musical artist}} uses color coding and looks all right to me, except for the fact that the Image tag is unfortunately hardcoded, so you can't change the size of the pic or the alt-text. --SevereTireDamage 23:23, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Magazines and other information sources

Hi, I'm looking for Reliable sources on sales and the reception of shows. Is there a central place were users can register what sources they own, so that other users can ask them for information. Example: I'm looking for sales and popularity for a show that aired in Japan in 2002, was released on DVD in the US and UK in 2003, and aired on some US stations too. Where would I look for fellow Wikipedians who have editions of Newtype USA or Protoculture Addicts from that period for example? --GunnarRene 22:51, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm willing to scan my (very) scattered newtype (mostly NT USA) ratings pages in. If someone wants to set up an off-wikipedia resource. Someone could also try to interlibrary loan any missing issues. (My institution won't allow me to.) --Kunzite 23:11, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
I would really appreciate it. I'm researching a particular show, RahXephon right now. Wholesale uploading of scans might be copyright infringement, but temporary uploads to some other site might perhaps work (depending on site policies). Even if that could not be done, I was wondering if it could be possible to keep an inventory of magazines/information so that the users who own the magazines could include information themselves. --GunnarRene 04:42, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
I've had the same thought as well and think it's a good idea for everyone in the project to say what resources they have at their hands. Unfortunately though, I have nothing to offer.--SeizureDog 18:57, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Well I have issues of Newtype USA from November 2004 to current, with the exception for Sept. 2005. But truth be told, the magazine is more fluff than substance. --TheFarix (Talk) 19:20, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, are there any decent articles on anything? I'm willing to write an article on anything as long as the resources are there. Quite a problem for this project, most manga/anime don't seem to have anything to stick in the references...--SeizureDog 20:53, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
It is a published source, and particularly valuable for interviews and sales ratings. That kind of information is sorely lacking from many of our articles. A lot of the other stuff is not very interesting to us, such as teasers and illustrations from upcomming shows and stories about the knitting fashions in Japan or whatever. In the case of Newtype USA, their website has information on what is featured in each magazine, so all it would take is for a researcher to find out who owns those issues and then ask for help on the user's talk page. Back issues is not allways an option, since some of them are sold out. In fact, this kind of issue has potential for a site-wide solution (Like Wikipedia:Babel).--GunnarRene 22:26, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
There is usually one interview in each edition which you can probably mine. And occasionally, you will get some creator/director commentary in one of the series pieces. Of course, there are also the poll results from Newtype Japan, but I usually don't pay attention to those.
Yes, interviews are usually very good for milking a lot of information out of.--SeizureDog 00:37, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
But all in all, Newtype USA is a promotional rag for A.D. Video's various properties. The only thing that it is good for is plot information. And even then, IMO, they are typically very disjointed and disorganized. And we don't know how much "fanficion" on the part of the editors occurs either. --TheFarix (Talk) 22:32, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
What about anime DVDs that also include commentaries or special interview features? Anyone got any of those?--SeizureDog 00:37, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, they write about other properties too, don't they? I know they've carried DVDs from other distributors too.. The poll numbers are less interesting than sales rankings. That is hard to get to anywhere else. I hope you don't mind being listed here: User:GunnarRene/Sources--GunnarRene 00:23, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't mind, I'm just jaded after trying to mine it for information about a particular anime series. It just didn't work very well. Of the 6 or so articles on the series, only one had any useful information and I mined it for all it was worth. --TheFarix (Talk) 01:37, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
User:Kunzite/newtype updated. The Japanese versions are much nicer.. (But a pita to translate.) --Kunzite 03:56, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I found a related project. (Strange I didn't know about this before): Wikipedia:WikiProject Fact and Reference Check --GunnarRene 20:10, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Early Universal Century Mobile weapons

Hello. I came across this template: {{Early Universal Century Mobile weapons}}. I have a few concerns:

  1. It's very long.
  2. It doesn't declare what exactly it's talking about, in this case, Gundam. (I think. I don't know much about anime.) This problem is easily fixed, however,
  3. Many of these articles lack context, or meaningful text of any kind. Some of them just list various "stats" that mean nothing to the reader if he/she is not familiar with Gundam.

I suggest breaking up the template into smaller chunks (as the sections are already divided), and merging the shorter articles into more meaningful umbrella articles, plus adding context to all of them. I do not think it's necessary to have individual articles about every different piece of armor, at least not unless there is more than one paragraph to say about them.

Please, at least break up the template. It is so long and ugly the way it is now. Thanks. --Fang Aili talk 18:38, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Lyrics

Is there anyone that could make me VERY HAPPY by translating and transliterating the lyrics of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table (anime)? I LOVED this series when i was a kid, and i always singed along, but i never knew what they were saying :( --Striver 22:15, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

We are not a translation service and that would be against wikipedia's copyright rules. I would suggest that you try animelyrics.com --Kunzite 00:41, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Marmalade Boy VAs

I have updated the Marmalade Boy by filling in the name of the seiyu who was missing, and adding some more of the English cast, as well as adding as much as I could of the Spanish. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hanachan01 (talk • contribs) .

We don't add VAs who were not in the original Japanese version or VAs who weren't in English-language dubs. (Unless the VA is someone *really* notable. i.e. if Vladamir Putin voiced the biwa vendor in Yakitate!! Japan in the Russian version of the show... or similar.) --Kunzite 21:24, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Need stubs for licensed manga

For the past few weeks I've been working on getting List of manga up to be featured list quality, an epic task to say the least. Now, obviously, including every manga ever made would be next to impossible, so I'm focusing on including every English licensed manga in the list, which is much more doable. Not to say it's easy though, that's still a lot of stubs that need to be made, but these are the kinds of articles we need stubs made for anyways. While I haven't added all of the Englished licensed manga yet, there are plenty of red links that I could use some help blueing. All of them should have basic information listed at ANN. If everyone could try to do a couple a day then eventually we could have a very inclusive list that would rival that of other anime information sites. Additionally, once the manga list is done it would easier to fix up List of anime, since, considering that 95% of all anime is based of a manga, most of the additions would already have their stubs created.--SeizureDog 00:52, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

List of anime is up for AfD and the consensus so far is to delete. Two other lists, List of manga published in English by Tokyopop and List of science fiction anime have also been categorized and proposed for deletion for being obsolete. Sooner or later List of fantasy anime will join them. (I'm talking a break for now and I hope it is nowhere near as bad as the sci-fi list.) List of manga may follow suite once they've been categorized and redlinks transferred over to Wikipedia:Requested articles/Japan/Anime and Manga. --TheFarix (Talk) 01:31, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing this out to me, I have gone and argued for List of anime to be kept. Granted, List of anime is a mess, but I don't think you it's fair compare List of manga to it at this stage anymore. I have made it into something far more useful than a cluttered category. If somehow it's decided that List of manga should be deleted I would be very, very pissed... --SeizureDog 02:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Just on a side note: even if you happen to be against the List, the articles themselves are still important to the project and need to be made.--SeizureDog 01:42, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Well great, List of anime got deleted. I can never find anything with those stupid categories. --SeizureDog 06:55, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

If you want to recreate the list, I suggest making it more useful than the categories and playing to the strengths of lists in general: broader coverage and better navigation. Basically, having an alphabetical list with nothing else besides titles isn't really an improvement over the Category system. Use tables with information like year, duration, and studio. [unsigned]
SeizureDog was doing that the day the page got deleted. That compromise wasn't even given a fair chance. CFLeon 04:58, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
A few mentioned on the AfD about making "list of anime" into a list of lists, separating by 1980s anime, 1970s anime etc. In fact, film already does this, but to an even more specifying degree: see 1955 in film, which is the main article for Category:1955 films. I'm not sure if en.wiki's anime coverage is quite good enough to go that far, yet, maybe sticking to the decade might be better for now. --SevereTireDamage 12:07, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Here is the August 12th version of List of anime from my sandbox history, for anyone who still wishes to take a crack at it. You can probably even ask an admin to copy the last version of it before it got deleted directly into a sandbox page. Although I was in support of a delete, and I don't think the list should be "live" in the article namespace right now, I do agree that categories leave much to be desired. Personally, I think MediaWiki will eventually have expanded categorization features for browsing that will address all these issues. -- Ned Scott 05:46, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
I have a version from August 13th saved, if anyone needs to reference it. That still was 3 or 4 days before it was deleted, though. (Sorry, I got careless and didn't save my last few changes.) Only System Operators can access the history of deleted articles. I voted to keep it and I find the categories which have replaced it are so wordy that I can't finde anything that I want without spending way too much time in useless searching. The main problem aside from just the layout of categories being crappy, is that categories assume previous knowledge of what the person is looking for and also, especially in Anime, there's a lot of stuff that doesn't fit into 3 or 4 one or two-word pigeonholes. The worse sin in my mind, however, is that the wonderful serendipidous factor of searching through a general list and finding something that you would have never known about otherwise is now gone. I am very much for a Chronological listing (by decade would be best- the yearly listing would end up being TOO detailed), but if that has been implemented, I sure haven't found it. CFLeon 04:58, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Constructive Criticism and tags

Wikipedia is obviously a growing place with plenty of room for improvement. However, in order to improve, comments need to be left on what is wrong with XYZ.

What I've been seeing is quite a few instances where tags have been used complaining about certain elements of the article, be it neutrality or especially cleanup WITHOUT any explaination why the individual feels that an article or section requires cleanup.

To the team or individuals who write it, this is indeed a slap in the face. Instead of being a suggesting comment in how the entire thing can be improved, instead it acts as a playground cry of "this sucks but I'm not going to say how."

This is a matter of decorum as much as it is a matter of improving the article. If you're going to criticse, do it, not just whine. And when it is done, may I suggest it be done diplomatically, so that instad of having overzealous people getting insulted, we have a better article overall. And of course, being polite is always accompanied by a good case of COMPROMISE, which would be effective compared to "I think like this therefore I am the only one right."

Karn-b 06:38, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, we're supposed to be civil, but a cleanup tag is not an attack on the editors. (I've never added or removed one myself, however). If a cleanup tag is added (these are those with a blue background usually), look in the tag itself where cleanup is explained. Look through the cleanup guideline (or whatever it's called) and fix the article, then removing the tag. Don't just remove the cleanup tag because you feel offended.

NPOV tags or other disputes, however, should always be explained on the talk page, except in the most obvious cases. If somebody tags an entire article with a dispute without adding something on the talk page, then the tag should just be removed again. Small tags like {{fact}} or {{who}} don't need an explanation on talk though, since they are placed right next to the statement that they apply to. --GunnarRene 20:00, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Here's what I think is the main thrust of the problems in the A&M namespace. Much of A&M articles as a whole is under the influence of systemic bias, mostly because the people who write the articles tend to fall in the "typical" demographic as pointed out in the CSB project (this is amplified in A&M communities). "But A&M is about Japan! How can this be systemic bias?" some of these people wonder. Actually, it's not; much of the A&M articlespace is dedicated to North American interpretation of A&M, for example the article Shojo has more on the English-language translations of Shojo manga than the history of Shojo! The "international influence" section in the Manga page is also heavily Americentric (Around 2/3s of that section is on North America, 1/3 is on Europe, and no place else is mentioned even though if you count sales figures Asia (not counting Japan) would probably have just as much readership as North America and Europe. So there's clearly a problem here. ColourBurst 06:52, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

WP:FICTION

Proposed guidelines makes the policy for creating additional pages on characters more stringent per the new "writing on fiction" guideline -- check it out. --Kunzite 03:55, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Lists up for AfD

I had originally proded both, List of manga published in English by Tokyopop, and List of science fiction anime because they have been catagorized and made obsolite. However, the prod was contested and they are now up for AfD. See their discussions here and here. --TheFarix (Talk) 14:21, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Voted against both. In my opinion, the only lists we need to have are List of manga, List of anime, and List of light novels. I may be forgetting one or two, but those basically cover our needs and allow us to focus on keeping a few lists nice and updated...eventually at least. That's my big goal for this project, to get those three lists up to snuff. --SeizureDog 01:41, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
FYI, List of anime has now been nuked and protected. Shiroi Hane 14:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

List of manga published by VIZ Media was added to the Tokopop list deletion as well. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 15:15, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

AfD delsort page?

Here is an idea I like to throw out. What does everyone think of creating a delsort page for WP:Anime? --TheFarix (Talk) 17:06, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I think it's a good idea. Currently the articles are all listed under Japan-related but actually I believe the whole project (AfD sorting) is defunct. ColourBurst 06:57, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Deletion sorting via WikiProject seems like a good idea. WP:DIGI has been doing that, and even has an archive. Seems much easier to maintain by project than category (which.. is sometimes the same thing.. but, you get what I mean). -- Ned Scott 07:02, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Ok, I'll copy the stuff we are using at the video game & webcomic projects. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Deletion and Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Deletion Archive. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 15:17, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't particluarly like the CVS format. --TheFarix (Talk) 15:24, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
I've created the pages. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 15:36, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't see much wrong with keeping them under Japan. --Kunzite 16:30, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
I do. Currently the A&M articlespace is not limited to the Japanese viewpoint on such things (and in fact the Japanese viewpoint is quite minor); many things like North American Anime conventions and Western interpretations of A&M are included. An example would be the Alaska anime convention that was deleted a while back; it's in Alaska and has very peripheral association with Japan. ColourBurst 20:29, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

This should be made into a separate page and then included on the project page like a template so that it is easy to keep a track of and is easy to archive and also so it does not get mixed into the project page's history. The news part of the page is like this for the same reasons. --Squilibob 09:42, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

The CVS format was weak and made Wikipe-tan cry, so it's now using the format that was on the Japanese delsort page. It's also been moved to Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Anime and manga. -- Ned Scott 14:09, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

That seems all right for now, though I think the previous format was better. Especially if there's a snowball of deletions, like what's been going on all summer at CVG, and you have 20-30 articles listed for deletion each week, the delsort inclusion style becomes much harder to read (and, like the actual WP:AFD/Log pages, utterly destroys my computer). --SevereTireDamage 15:57, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
I disagree. I prefer the transclusions over the CVS style. It's much easier to keep track of the progress of the discussions without the hassle of the extra clicks and tabs. --TheFarix (Talk) 16:48, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Character notability

Wikipedia talk:Notability (fiction)#Clarification of "notability" for fictional characters and its subsections contain some discussion about revising the WP:FICT guideline to require secondary or tertiary sources for standalone character articles, and to require that such artcles contain no more than half plot summary / backstory, in order to ensure an out-of-universe perspective. Comments are welcome. — TKD::Talk 10:27, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

New Bot

The purpose of this bot will be to put every article in Category:Anime and manga stubs into WikiProject Anime and Manga. Some questions:

  1. Which of the 6 subcategories should also be patrolled by this bot? For example, I don't think Pokemon should be added as Pokemon has its own Wikiproject.
  2. Should I put the WikiProject tag on the discussion page with no rating, or should I put a Stub-Class rating on it just to start it off?
  3. Do you guys think this is overall a good idea? I think it is because there are hundreds (or thousands) of articles out there that are orphaned due to not being part of the WikiProject.

Thanks. — Dark Shikari talk/contribs 13:41, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Umm. Can't be just add the category to the stub template? That way the metadata wouldn't be hardcoded into the article. --Kunzite 13:59, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Wait, the project page here links to the stub category, and the stub message added by the template links to the project page... so.. yeah.. But if you want to use the bot to add the project banner to the top of talk pages that don't have it, then that's alright, I guess. You should just add the banner and not have the bot set it as anything, since a person should be the one rating an article. Have you run this past WP:BOTS yet? -- Ned Scott 14:14, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Thats what I meant, add the banner to the top of the talk page. I ran it past the Bots people and they've approved it, so all I need is the approval of this WikiProject. — Dark Shikari talk/contribs 14:33, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Aaaah, I see. Well, I don't speak for everybody, but I'd just go ahead and do it, I don't think there'd be any reason to be mad about someone adding the project banner to talk pages that didn't have them. Just make sure to add them as unrated. -- Ned Scott 14:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Which of the 6 subcategories should also be patrolled by this bot?
Ideally, all of them since they are within the scope of this WikiProject. That doesn't prevent some of the articles from also being part of a child project of WP:Anime
Should I put the WikiProject tag on the discussion page with no rating, or should I put a Stub-Class rating on it just to start it off?
It should just be the WikiProject tag with no rating. I don't trust bots to accurately rate even a stub article. Humans should determine if it is an actual stub or not.
Do you guys think this is overall a good idea?
If that is all the bot will do, then I don't see a problem. One thing I would like to see it do is identify articles in Category:Anime series, Category:Anime OVAs and Category:Anime films that need genre sorting. But just like the ratings, the sorting should be done by humans using external references.

--TheFarix (Talk) 15:32, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Sounds like a reasonable idea. I guess you just check the bot's logs to go back and assess the pages that it has tagged? By the way you'll find that most of the articles in the stubs category already have been tagged and assessed but the bot would be good for maintainence. --Squilibob 06:35, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Hmm... you said that all Anime child projects should have the Anime banner on their talk page? Pokemon doesn't seem to... are you entirely sure? — Dark Shikari talk/contribs 14:07, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Userboxes

I'm going to start moving a number of anime and manga userboxes onto a subpage of WP:Anime. That should keep them safe from some of the disruptive deletionists that have been delegating userboxes right and left from template space. The list of templates I'm going to move are listed at Wikipedia:Userboxes/Media/Anime and Wikipedia:Userboxes/Media/Comics#Manga. --TheFarix (Talk) 19:58, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

P.S. I'm moving them all to Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Userbox/<Userbox name>. Not sure where to put the directory at. --TheFarix (Talk) 20:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Move is complete. Everything has been indexed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Userboxes. --TheFarix (Talk) 23:02, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Dude, you are the template master. Good work! (in reference to not just these, but all the other tweaks and updates to the other templates as well) -- Ned Scott 23:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Master? Hardly. I consider myself more as a journeyman. It also helps to have a programming background. But don't ever call me a designer, I actually suck at design unless I'm copying from someone else and trying to improve upon it. ;) As for the moving of the userboxes, that was more grunge work then anything else. I might go back and fix them so that they only place pages in User space into their associated categories like I did with the Wikiproject userbox. --TheFarix (Talk) 23:49, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok, now here is a question, should the userboxes maintain the word "User" in front of the name or should it be dropped for simplicity. (ex. {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Userbox/Anime}} instead of {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Userbox/User anime}}) --TheFarix (Talk) 16:52, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I'd say drop the User. -- Ned Scott 11:31, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

My querying is - Are issues likely to arise about this being cross-namespace? Shiroi Hane 12:37, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Nope. It's all apart of WP:GUS. -- Ned Scott 23:31, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
However, GUS is about moving templates to userspace, which is fine since the templates are to be used in userspace, but these templates have been moved to the wikipedia space. Shiroi Hane 13:40, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
WP:GUS also permits userboxes to be migrated onto a subpage of a corresponding WikiProject. --TheFarix (Talk) 13:51, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Vocal cast in languages other than Japanese and English

Do we include them? All of them, or just the main character (or two)? Checking out Slayers (oy, that needs work), we've got at least five voice actors for eight characters (a 40 cell matrix, not including substitutions). Surely this level of detail can be subsumed into a putative "International versions" section? Thoughts?--Monocrat 23:15, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I think additional cast credits past the original Japanese and the English would be just.. trivial information. It's not that the topics have to be about English things, but unless the other foreign dubs are particularly notable for some reason, it doesn't add to the article or to the reader's understanding of the article. -- Ned Scott 00:07, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Another solution is to ship all those information to another article, like List of voice actors of Slayers or something. _dk 07:54, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, but still, is it notable to list every voice actor? I can see the relevance to listing the original voice actor (Japanese) and for many (but not all) of the English actors, simply because those appear to be the two largest anime markets, and make the largest impact. Unless, say, a particular anime is notably well known in some country, or what's being discussed is how Germany dubbed such and such show, etc. -- Ned Scott 08:18, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't see what's the harm if the information is out of the main article, where they are obstructive. We shouldn't exclude certain relevent information because they are not relevant to us or doesn't make as big as an impact (that's called systemic bias). I also have doubts about English-speaking actors making the largest impact next to Japan, because they only serve the US, Canada, and the UK...which, to my opinion, is not that much more notable than other non-Japanese languages. So, if we include English-speaking ones, we should include other languages as well. I would suggest leaving the Japanese seiyu in the main article while moving the rest to a seperate article. _dk 09:06, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
I forgot Australia, allow me to take cover or I'll get lynched by the Aussie otakus. _dk 09:31, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
I mean market wise, English dubbed anime is likely the number two spot. Even if it's not (I'll have to find a source for this, but.. yeah..) our readers are reading the English Wikipedia, so it's far more likely that they speak English and will run into the English versions before they run into a Mexican dub. As far as harm, I think trivial information is harmful to articles on fiction, because it makes those articles bloated and crufty. If people do feel that info is valid, then I would agree that a split section to a separate article would be a good idea. If information, voice actor or not, about any nation, doesn't aid the topic at hand, then why do we have it? -- Ned Scott 09:12, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Voice actors of foreign languages would not be trivial if we have foreign readers on the English wiki, which we do. We cannot assume that only English speakers read the English wiki (because that's not the case), so therefore all articles on Wikipedia should represent a global view. (Here is a related cleanup template, describing my point). _dk 09:31, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Actually, it could still be trivial even if we have foreign readers for the same reason that many English credits are trivial. I'm not saying we should exclude something because it's not English, only that English is one of the more easily identifiable languages that are likely to be relevant. -- Ned Scott 09:44, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Reminds me of Airdates of Lost. -- Ned Scott 10:07, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
The assumption that "English dubbed anime is likely the number two spot" _is_ systemic bias (as it means the editor has not likely considered every market, even if the statement is true). However, I'd still say leave out the rest of the voice actors because they are not notable. Period. Japan and English-speaking countries are the only ones to my knowledge that give "extra status" to voice actors, though I may be wrong. And even then, in the English-speaking market, it's not that much status. I remember an article about English voice actors trying to get SAG membership and were having troubles doing so. ColourBurst 00:51, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
The assumption, yes, which is why I said some English dubs (I choose my wording carefully), and even suggested that not all English dubs would even be notable. I remember an article that talked about the gender of a fictional character, the original and English language track had a female voice actor while Germany chose a male voice actor. In that article the German voice actor is credited because it was relevant information. From a global standpoint, market presence can be a a sign of notability, but it doesn't mean that other less known dubs can't obtain notability in other ways, or even that English dubs will always be in the "number two spot" in the global market. That statement isn't to exclude notability, it's saying that English dubs are notable more often than not. -- Ned Scott 01:31, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
(collapsing indent) This information would only really be if interest to someone who speaks the language, and this is why there are wikis in different languages. ANN does lists multiple languages so I don't see why we need anything more than an interlanguage wikilink and/or an ANN link. Shiroi Hane 10:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I think we should cover all the bases as encyclopedias should. Basically, I'm against removal of valid content if they are not fancruft. On the inclusion of mentioning foreign voice actors: the information are real, verifiable, and likely notable - thus allowed to be included in Wikipedia. If having those information makes the anime seem bloated, then it's a truth we'll have to bear. (If the anime is popular enough to warrant dubs in several languages, then the anime probably deserves the bloatedness, so to speak) Anyways, I shall leave this discussion to the others; I have given my point and I probably won't have anything new to say. Good night :) _dk 10:50, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Arrgh edit conflict D: Um, I believe airdates and voice actors are on different levels....Voice actors are people who work to get their voices on the anime, airdates are just, er, airdates? (I'm amazed, really.) I'll also let others to decide if a list of voice actors in a certain anime constitutes as "indiscriminate information". _dk 10:50, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Jesus Christ edit conflict #2 D:D: It is my belief that wikis in other languages should act as identical copies of each other, only in different languages. We shouldn't assume that nobody would want to know who did the French dub and point to the French wiki in case someone actually does. Or else, wouldn't articles of J-Pop singers be only on the ja wiki? _dk 10:50, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Likewise, we really shouldn't point to an external link if the material can be presented on the wiki. ahh! to bed! to bed! must...get...off...wiki...._dk 10:56, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
However, Eenglish speakers listen to JPop. Most English speakers do not read Japanese so cannot refer to the JA wiki. If you can show me evidence that there are people who cannot read French yet import French dubs to listen to... Shiroi Hane 11:38, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

How about just making a List of ___ cast members and showing the multiple language casts there? Many TV shows already do this (and for single-language shows, like The Simpsons, Stargate, etc.). IMO, only the original language cast should be stated (imagine listing all the different language dubs for the Simpsons in the main article) and the rest can be mentioned in a cast list. --SevereTireDamage 12:07, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

  • We do not need to mention every single voice actor from every single country or regional language known to man in Wikipedia article about a Japanese animation. This information is very trivial and really should be removed. It certainly isn't anti-CSB to remove the a series of non-notable voice actors from a French or Catalan or Tagalog dubbing. Read the CSB talk page: they're talking about removing trivial information inserted by fiction editors into serious articles. If broadcast data is included in the "parade of nations" area of the animanga infobox, we've covered the situation.
  • We also certainly do not need to create additional sub-article lists to house such trivial information. It makes more clutter and detracts further from the wikipedia goal of creating beautiful prose. Anime-related articles contain too much list cruft now and we should focus on writing and sourcing prose, not keeping trivial information in articles.
  • Finally, there's the issue of notability: Because of the seiyu industry in Japan, Japanese voice actors are mostly notable. Seiyu appear in major magazines, on TV telethons, have concerts, release independant cds, etc. Most professional English voice actors are non-notable and we really shouldn't be mentioning them either; however, there are a few here and there that pop-up as notable anime voice actors i.e. Steven Blum ... but Jill Frappier? Not really. But the level of notability drops even further down when you included non-English language dub names.. Iara Riça? Karl Heinz Tafel? No.. Send people who want to add this information to ANN; we link to this database for most Anime shows and they have better capabilities of handling such basic database list information. --Kunzite 17:10, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Then I suggest removing mention of English voice actors from the main articles altogether, except for the few immensely notable ones. _dk 00:18, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't think they have to be "immensely" notable to be included, but I would agree that there are some non-notable English dubs. Also, it's not so much as we shouldn't totally exclude this information, just that we should avoid the slippery slope of including every possible little detail. -- Ned Scott 05:35, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm all for keeping complete English and Japanese voice actor lists. I'm against listing voice actors for non-English dubs. Or in more wordy terms, if somebody can be bothered to enter a complete list of English (& Japanese) voice actors, then fine, no need to determine whether the people are notable or not. It's going to be a very subjective appraisal in any case. Statuses also change, maybe there's a greenhorn who a few years later will be somebody notable. Or somebody retires and is a nobody after a while. Let the lists remain, unaltered for importance. No point in confusing contributors with arbitrary judgments. However, lists of non-English dubs should be deleted. This is the English-language Wikipedia. Such info is out of place here and of trivial value. Better to simply list the dubs in various languages and link back to the appropriate articles in the "national" Wikipedias. I'm sure only a miniscule fraction of visitors find the information useful but lack the necessary language skills. Such a rule can be implemented with a minimum of confusion while keeping anime articles from becoming unnecessarily bloated. Jain-ma 03:15, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
To be honest, I think we should only mention English dubs when they are notable, not because this is the English language Wikipedia. It just happens to be that, market wise, English dubs are almost always worth a mention. Although, one can't completely ignore that the average reader of en.wikipedia will likely come across an English dub before a German dub, more often than not. So in that sense it's a matter of relevance and notability more than what language the wiki is as the only factor. -- Ned Scott 04:29, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
"If somebody can be bothered to enter a complete list" is systemic bias, because a large part of the Wikipedia anime base would be more inclined to enter this type of thing. On the other hand, there can be objective criteria for such people - the notability essays would be a good place to start. Deleting notable information because it's not in English, however, is also systemic bias. ColourBurst 00:58, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I would be against deleting notable information regardless of country or language. -- Ned Scott 01:31, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Of course status can change, but Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, so we're not interested in who might be famous tomorrow. What Wikipedia is concerned about are who is notable now and who was notable in the past. And wikis in other languages are not national wikis! They are just wikis in different languages! _dk 05:40, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Question about a possible article submission.

I have a question about a possible article submission. I would like to write an article about a web site that's goal is to get a third season of the Big O, an anime series. I don't want to submit a spam article, or an advertising article. Is there anyone I can talk to that can clear up these matters for me? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jet Black Wulong (talk • contribs) .

I would recommend reading Wikipedia:Notability (web) and see if this website falls within any of the notability standards set in it. If it doesn't, then you shouldn't create the article. –NeoChaosX (talk | contribs) 06:32, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll do that. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jet Black Wulong (talk • contribs) .

I'm guessing he's talking about http://www.savebigo.com which... doesn't seem to meet WP:WEB. -- Ned Scott 08:11, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

You guessed it. That is indeed the site. I didn't want to name it, though, in case it was advertisement. I've read the information you gave me, and I can definitely write an article that doesn't advertise or spam. Still, though, what character disqualifies the site for an article? I'm sorry, I couldn't make total sense out of everything I read. Jet Black Wulong 04:25, 20 August 2006 (UTC)ZacharyJet Black Wulong 04:25, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Has the site been covered in depth in any major newspapers or in any major media? (Brief mentions don't count.) Has the site won any major awards? Has the site been reproduced by any major media company? (This is mainly for blogs.) If no to all of these, then the site does not meet WP:WEB and will likely be deleted. My suggestion is to add it to the External links of The Big O, however, someone may remove it as link spam (WP:EL) --Kunzite 07:13, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

You're entirely right. The site isn't qualified for an article yet. Thanks for your time. I appreciate your help. § Zachary Jet Black Wulong 19:17, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Unassessed anime/manga article

I have assessed the anime article, Son Goten myself, even though I am not part of this WikiProject (though I really want to be part of it), and that I am an anon, as you guys say. I think anons aren't supposed to be assessing articles, so this is just an alert. You can rate Son Goten's article yourself if my rating is unjust. 65.8.35.224 22:19, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

To be apart of a project you only need to contribute to the article in some way. That being said, you have already made yourself apart of the project, anon or not. No one has to identify themselves, or list themselves in a category, to "officially" be in a WikiProject, it just helps to make things clearer is all. You can make an account, if it bothers you. In all reality, making an account is actually more anonymous than having your IP address publicly displayed. -- Ned Scott 04:53, 31 August 2006 (UTC)