Misplaced Pages

talk:WikiProject Anime and manga: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 14:04, 16 May 2013 editChrisGualtieri (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers457,369 edits →Manga articles that are tagged for possible non-notability: Re← Previous edit Latest revision as of 23:28, 27 December 2024 edit undoLullabying (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users38,944 edits →90's shojo manga series clean-up: new sectionTag: New topic 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header|noarchives=yes|search=no}}
{{shortcut|WT:ANIME|WT:MANGA}}
{{WikiProject Japan}} {{WikiProject banner shell|
{{WikiProject Anime and manga}}
}}
{{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/Templates/Signpost article link for WikiProjects|link=Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2009-09-07/WikiProject report|writer= ]||
||day 7|month=September|year=2009}}
{{to do}}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn
|target=Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Index |target=Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Index
Line 6: Line 11:
|leading_zeros=0 |leading_zeros=0
|indexhere=no |indexhere=no
}}
}}{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{Talkarchivenav|noredlinks=y}} |archiveheader = {{Talkarchivenav|noredlinks=y}}
|maxarchivesize = 200K |maxarchivesize = 200K
|counter = 55 |counter = 77
|algo = old(10d) |algo = old(30d)
|archive = Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Archive %(counter)d |archive = Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Archive %(counter)d
}} }}
Line 17: Line 23:
|index= /Index |index= /Index
|search= yes |search= yes
|bot= MiszaBot II |bot= lowercase sigmabot III
|age= 30 |age= 30
| <hr><center>] | <hr><center>]</center>
}}{{shortcut|WT:ANIME|WT:MANGA}}
}}
{{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Anime and manga/Navbox}}

== Airdates after midnight ==

I've seen networks use a programming schedule from 04:00 to 27:59, so technically shows can air after midnight, yet count towards the previous day. For example. Monday April 8, 2013, 24:30-25:00 is the same as Tuesday April 9, 2013, 0:30-1:00. So in the listings, should they be posted as April 8, 2013 or April 9, 2013? The sources I've seen appear to support the former, although I have seen networks use the latter as well. Is there some sort of footnote standard we can use for such show airtimes? This impacts all those anime shows that tend to air at those wee hours. -] (]) 01:51, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
:I don't think I've seen the former anywhere outside of Japanese networks' programming schedules. It doesn't seem to be at all common anywhere else. Either way can be confusing, unless the air ''times'' are listed as well, or unless which date is listed is noted.
:In my opinion, the latter should be used in all cases, regardless of networks' listings, for consistency across articles and because the former can be confusing for a reader who is unfamiliar with it. ー]<sup>]]</sup> 02:39, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
::I would prefer the former. If an airdate has been set by the network then it is set. I don't really think using the latter would do much help in keeping track. However, if either the former or latter is to be used, then there should at least be an indicator to show that the shows ''first'' aired after midnight to avoid confusion to the readers, something like my personal experience though. --] (]) 08:48, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
:::I would think the latter should be used for consistency. Going by ], it says "24:00...should not be used for the first hour of the next day (e.g. use 00:10 for ten minutes after midnight, not 24:10)." So if a network says it airs at 25:00 on April 8, I believe MOS:TIME is telling us to render it as 01:00 April 9, right?--<span style="background:white;color:">]]</span> 09:31, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
::::As Juhachi mentioned, MOS:TIME should be the standard. The most popular anime databases (MyAnimeList, AniDB) also employ this format. If there is further need for input, WikiProject Japan will be an appropriate place to ask. —<font face="Garamond" size="3">] ('']'' + '']'')</font>— 13:51, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
:::::I didn't realize there was a time format. Alright then. --] (]) 18:25, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm taking this out of the archives because I've got something to say about this. This isn't how things are formatted in general across the project. They advertise that it airs on Saturdays, even if it is after midnight, so we should note that it premiered on that ''broadcast'' date rather than the actual calendar date. American TV shows with similar schedules are treated in this way as well.—] (]) 16:21, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

It seems that nobody holds a strong opinion on this subject. Can we simply adopt either of the two formats for the sake of consistency across articles? ー ]〈] | ]〉 21:28, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
:Due to ] and the fact that ], for now, we should probably stick to the actual broadcast date instead of the official one (for example, if a show is advertised to air on February 12 but actually airs on February 13, the latter date should be used). Or perhaps an RfC is in order? That would be a good way to determine consensus. ] <sup>]]]]</sup> 18:32, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
::] does not in any way state anything that you're suggesting. If something is said to premiere on April 6, even if it is at 25:30 or 26:45, then it's still part of the April 6 broadcast day. This confusion doesn't seem to happen to American programs that say have new episodes Sunday night at 12:30am so why should Japan be any different?—] (]) 19:05, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
::I don't think the text on MOS:TIME really applies here. It was written with only "00:mm" vs "24:mm" in mind. ー ]〈] | ]〉 19:29, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
:::I too support the use of standard times and dates, according to ]. It applies, because the date is connected directly to the (non-standard) time format. And not all japanese stations do the same thing; and use standard time formatting in their TV schedule. ] (]) 19:46, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
::::Just stumbled here, and not like it's big news, but A+/Animax here in Hungary uses (at least used) such 24+ hour air times in their teletext feed. Not sure about their website schedule though. --] (]) 19:56, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
::::The guideline at ] states "do not present times as 24:mm, but rather as 00:mm". It says '''''nothing''''' about changing the date of something just because it is after midnight. Again, American television shows do this all the time. I can go look at the ] schedule and it says that a new episode of ''Bleach'' is airing at midnight on Saturday, May 11, 2013, even though the date is technically May 12.—] (]) 19:57, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
:::::You can find a similar discussion about an american TV show ]; the actual airdate (for the moment) as a result. ] (]) 19:58, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
::::::I haven't seen that done for any other AS program, though. I know Venture Bros uses the broadcast day date rather than the effective date.—] (]) 20:02, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
:::::::It is clear that airdate is directly related to airtime. To say that '']'' started on April 6, 2013, without stating the exact time (that is "25:58") is misinformation. There is no consensus here to use non-standard time in articles. ] (]) 20:06, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
::::::::No. An airdate is part of a broadcast schedule. And there is no misinformation, because reliable sources state that the Japanese premiere was on April 6, 2013. It's honestly &ndash; and I'm stretching this as much as you are stretching the meaning of what's written on ] &ndash; a violation of ] to say something other than what the reliable sources say, just because it's technically a different date.—] (]) 20:19, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::Again, airdate and airtime are related (not debatable), and using non-standard formats for time is absolutely not recommended. ] (]) 20:24, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::I don't see how it's a "non-standard format" when the actual time the show airs isn't listed. All we are doing is saying the airdate according to the network's broadcast schedule rather than the actual calendar date.—] (]) 21:44, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::Also, to continually revert me actually was against ] and ] as you are falsifying sources to state that it is April 7 while just hiding the fact that it's April 6 at "25:58", you have replaced a secondary source with a primary one, and as I use that reference to state that Daisuke Ono and Romi Park are appearing in the show you've made two sourced statements into further falsified sourced statements.—] (]) 22:51, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::I didn't falsify anything. I provided a source with detailed information about schedule (exact time and date on different stations), and edited it to comply with Misplaced Pages's guidelines (to my understanding). Also I don't find the source provided was against WP:V or WP:RS. ] (]) 04:47, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::::You changed everything back to the "April 7" date when "April 6" is still written over everything, and replaced the secondary source I had used with the primary one, despite the fact I used the same source elsewhere on the page to source other statements.—] (]) 08:45, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::::I changed the date in '''two''' ; saying I had ''changed everything back to the "April 7"'' is overdramatization, giving the impression I made some big changes. Ignoring the named <code><nowiki><ref name="natalie"></nowiki></code> ref tag was definitely a mistake (I apologize). And again, I don't consider ''shingeki.tv'' a primary source for airing dates. ] (]) 19:53, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::::::If it's the official website, '''it's a primary source'''.—] (]) 19:54, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::::::This is your interpretation of ], I assume. It doesn't say that "all contents in an official website are primary sources". ''shingeki.tv'' belongs to Pony Canyon, and this company doesn't run the TV stations airing the show (no direct relation). The airing dates in the website aren't ''original materials'' published by Pony Canyon, they are a collection of informations provided and published by different TV stations (primary sources). ] (]) 22:53, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

I think we should have an RfC so that a consensus can be reached. Any thoughts? ] <sup>]]]]</sup> 20:29, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
:Since this seems to apply to several different projects, we should probably have a centralized discussion at ].--<span style="background:white;color:">]]</span> 20:45, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
::I think Juhachi's suggestion would be a good start. ] (]) 04:47, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
:::I've started the discussion ]. Input is welcomed. Since ] is the parent and was where the discussion was originally suggested to take place, I'll inform them as well. ] <sup>]]]]</sup> 10:14, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

== Devil Survivor 2: The Animation first airing date ==

In the trailer, it's clearly stated that the anime started at April 4th in MBS. The online streaming delay a day after the original air in Japan, except Crunchyroll that follows the original air in Japan for the members only. --] (]) 12:36, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
:The listed dates aren't because of the CR stream, but because it airs after midnight. A broadcast day according to Japanese TV stations is the time between 5:00 and 28:59 (4:59 on the next calendar day). Thus the air time is listed as "2013-04-04(木) 26:05" but this is technically April 5, 2:05.

:There was a short discussion about this just a while ago: ]. I think the consensus was that this non-standard format should not be used. ー ]<sup>]]</sup> 13:51, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

How do you explain Crunchyroll, then? Crunchyroll already started online streaming (for members only though) of Devil Survivor 2: The Animation at Thursday, 4th April, 2013.--] (]) 09:45, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

== ] a task force? ==

Since this new WikiProject is directly related to content already under this project, shouldn't it just be a task force under WP:ANIME? Several of our current task forces (], ]) were also separate WikiProjects originally, so it's not uncommon to absorb related projects under our scope--<span style="background:white;color:">]]</span> 21:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
:While the overlap is strong, the project includes non-Japanese works including Chinese, Korean and English 'hentai', broadly. A Wikiproject should cover hundreds if not thousands of articles in its scope, our scope is a subset of yours, but we work together, but our editing area and topics are about explicit and erotic content. Last I checked, Japan is related to WP:ANIME, and COMICs include manga. Our scope of articles renders in the thousands, while WP:ANIME is governed by 10x that number. Smaller defined topics exist for Wikiprojects with singular topics like ] or ] which have smaller scope, limited to a single universe. Its like ] being outside of ]. With more then 60 titles being released every month in Japan, and literally thousands of examples I believe the group is distinct enough to remain on its own for now. Single franchise/universe scope would be under a taskforce in my opinion, if 2000 topics under our initial scope is a fair estimate of said "hentai" works then we have about 1/5th of the WP:ANIME as our targeted subject with a focus on artists, producers and organizations related to producing or censoring hentai. We don't even have an article on CASPAR for instance. What about the ero-gekiga publications of the 70s and the 80s? Tezuka is the beginning of your movement, where as ] is the beginning of our subject. Why Hideo Azuma you ask? He's the connected figure that was the impetus behind the pornographic revolution and depiction of anime and manga into something erotic, fantastical and of unique focus. WP:ANIME has so many issues with its own articles, that even publications like Osamu Tezuka's ] is sadly lacking, despite being the very first instance of an anime serving as an introduction to sex education. And those were Tezuka's own words! Our scope is about improving the content and dirty little secrets that regular editors of ] do not want to touch, think about or even cover. GA's like ] were originally ero-games, but before the ] capitalized its formula, ero-games like Rance and Dōkyūsei. What about ]'s as a whole? Our coverage of these topics are so spotty and so broad that some forty years of content is undeveloped. If a span of 40 years, thousands of notable works, a unique distinct history and the actual development of ]'s entire topic is relegated to a taskforce, well... I disagree. ] (]) 23:07, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Such a long speech for such a simple answer? What proof you have hentai encompasses chinese/korean media?] (]) 23:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Whoa. First of all, the entire scope of what "hentai" covers has to be something animanga related per it's own definition. "]" is a Japanese word pertaining to erotic Japanese media. I don't know why you'd think you could apply that to Chinese or Korean works, or anything non-Japanese in origin. Besides, the difference between a task force and a WikiProject is purely cosmetic; instead of it's own banner, it would get a line in the existing WP:ANIME banner; see ]'s WP:ANIME banner for what it would look like. Having the WikiProject as a task force under WP:ANIME just facilitates a central discussion related to articles under the scope of WikiProject Hentai. Having the project completely separate from this project makes little sense.--<span style="background:white;color:">]]</span> 23:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
:: Juhachi, the Wikiproject is not a taskforce, it uses the Americanized definition. As no "hentai" genre exists in Japan. Furthermore ] is an example of a bishōjo-style visual novel that WP:HENTAI covers despite it not being Japanese at all. The ] work and major websites (you know the type) would be included in this, despite also being outside ]. Our scope is not limited to Japanese focus, but all sexually explicit or erotic depictions in the art style, which include clearly American works. So just like WP:ANIME avoids ]-type works, we'd include it if the subject matter was explicit. Afterall... how many people even know Shadman? ] (]) 23:37, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
:::] is one of a very few exceptions. Besides, that article is already under the ], a joint task force under both ] and WP:ANIME. Keeping the WikiProject separate because of a few outliers makes no sense. The point of any WikiProject or task force is for centralized discussion to better improve a group of articles with different editors who share the same interest. They don't exist just for the sake of existing. WikiProjects and task forces go inactive if no one is actively improving the articles under its scope and/or if there's no discussion going on. How many editors do you know of who would be interested in actively improving hentai articles? I mean, other than the people already under this project, WP:VG, or ]. And who are you to say that "hentai" should be just defined by what it means in America? Seems pretty ] to me. Hentai as ] (per Oxford) is "a subgenre of the Japanese genres of '''manga''' and '''anime''', characterized by overtly sexualized characters and sexually explicit images and plots". Now tell me that isn't under the scope of WP:ANIME.--<span style="background:white;color:">]]</span> 02:37, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
*'''Support task force under ]''' - Our project covers so many Hentai titles that keeping the projects separate for the sake of a handful of articles (if there are those) makes little sense anyways. What our project doesn't cover other's do. - ] (]) 23:40, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
*'''Support Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Hentai'''. This topic was discussed before in section, I was the first to suggest the '''Hentai Task Force''' at that time. However, now I can see that it should be a WikiProject. The scope of ''Hentai'' is wider than you know, not just limiting itself to R-18 Anime and Manga. These can also include Japanese non-Anime style Pornography, but that's according to the original definition. If you apply the English definition itself, then that will limit your understanding about the subject in mind. Check on ] and you'll find a list that's barely supported by 3 WikiProjects, and to think a '''Hentai Task Force''' can clean the mess up under ''WikiProject Anime and Manga''? This is why I agreed to start the new WikiProject instead of a new Task Force. --] (]) 04:06, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
**This is the English version of Misplaced Pages though not the Japanese, if reliable sources define the word under anime and manga's scope we should follow this. - ] (]) 05:05, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
***As you said, ]. I want to say that I'm not the offensive type of person, but this is '''Not''' a 💕 limited to the American knowledge. And about the definition of Hentai, what do you mean by "English" definition? I have implied "itself" on my previous above statement, saying that there is some sort of misunderstanding as far as I can see. --] (]) 10:33, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
: {{edit conflict}}Honestly, it is not a voting matter. Another Wikiproject cannot compel or force to be tied to another and they can be similar like the Theater splits as noted above. With more then 2000 notable articles that need to be created or covered, many works are not even addressed. How about ], you know he started with ero. Right? ] as well. Even Oh! great is one. How about ] and the Pokemon manga artist Toshiro Ono/Toshihiro Ono/Kamirenjaku Sanpei? Pen names and such a real pain to deal with, but its not the artists that are lacking coverage. The actual games are really lacking and even key ones that made major advances in the genre are horribly insufficient. The entire Rance series and most of the Elf works, I don't care if VG has a taskforce with you to deal with it, our coverage is sub-par. Even ones with animes are terrible. ] anyone? Alright.. how about the largest English distributors? ]? ]? The defunct ]? Seriously you can't even get more then two sentences on US Manga Corps? WP:HENTAI needs to be a full Wikiproject because of its size and scope includes thousands of articles and much of the material which it will focus on is abandoned and left aside. By properly categorizing and setting our own importance and criteria and centralized discussion the Wikiproject can address these issues in a way that mere Taskforces cannot. Again, if it was 100-200 articles I'd agree, but we are dealing with 10X that number at minimum. ] (]) 05:14, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
:: ] then, articles are being maintained and Misplaced Pages has no deadline for things, it is a work in progress. - ] (]) 05:18, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
::: So we're gonna start this WikiProject to "Fix it" then. Why not? --] (]) 10:24, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
::Actually, this '''is''' a voting matter. A wikiproject isn't made onthe number of articles fall in its scope. Its how distinct it is to merit one. And so far the range is pretty much tied to anime and manga related to not split from anime&manga. And I don't doubt that there are a large number of hentai (devil's advocate) but I doubt the number of "notable" hentai articles are reaching 2000 articles, and if they do, then most of them may not be notable.] (]) 06:40, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
:I don't even know why ] is under the Hentai project, it is not an erotic anime. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by</small> ]<sup>]</sup> 07:34, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
::A multitude of articles were mistagged by ]; I tried undoing some of them, but many still reside. And this is a general reply to Chris. When you say "the Wikiproject can address these issues in a way that mere Taskforces cannot", I feel you don't understand that the difference between a WikiProject and a task force is purely a difference in wording; they both function the exact same way, whether it was apart of WP:ANIME or not. The difference, however, if that if the WikiProject is separate, it is more likely to fall into inactivity sooner and thus likely to die within a year or less. I thought you might realize that if it were a task force under this project that it might survive better, but if you really want them separate, be my guest. I've been on Misplaced Pages for over 7 years, so I've seen my fair share of projects and task forces come and go. The project will merely die within a year or so and fall into obscurity the likes of ] or similar.

::Even if I'm wrong, it's unlikely that a large number of editors wanting to improve hentai-related articles will show up out of no where, thus defeating the purpose of having a WikiProject/task force. At this point, it looks like only you and Bumblezellio are willing to do this. General editorship on Misplaced Pages has declined over the past several years, and is still declining. You should have seen this place back in its heyday around 2007-2008; you would have seen more support for something like this back then. If people were going to improve hentai-related articles, they would have done so already because, as I've been explaining, all hentai-related articles are already under the scope of WP:ANIME per its own definition. To take a quote from ] (which I would suggest you read): ''have in mind that interested editors will not appear out of nowhere just because there is a WikiProject''. I would suggest you take this to heart and heed the suggestions of other, more experienced editors here and let us absorb the project for its own sake.--<span style="background:white;color:">]]</span> 10:41, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
::: No one is tied to working solely on a Wikiproject and becoming a member to work on things, I have worked on articles under ANIME scope without being a member. Same with video games with the G-Zay matter. Did I miss tag a few Yuri articles, yes, but I'd be fixing that if I wasn't spending time here dealing with this. If we became a taskforce we lose our categorization, ratings and a fair amount of direction and push our NSFW content into here. Frankly, hentai is anime's dark secret, the sort of material that parents don't want their kids seeing and many editors of this project are not supposed to even be viewing such material. While Misplaced Pages is not censored, WP:HENTAI will be a platform to monitor and improve standards for all the articles. And yes that includes organizing and publishing our own pool of resources and such, though I must admit this will be as much of a cross-wiki matter with the Japanese Misplaced Pages content and editors. So yes, while Misplaced Pages's editor base has declined and more and more content is done by established editors, our coverage is still lacking. And that is why, unlike the defunct Bleach group, WP:HENTAI will not run out of material to cover. NENAW is an interesting essay, but we are a defined sub-genre of a major art form. We are the horror of movies, where even if the Wikiproject seems defunct or slow our article alerts will persist for ALL editors who wish to be involved with the more behind the scenes issues of Misplaced Pages. Now I reject the taskforce on all fronts, but I did initially begin by wanting to create a taskforce because of the overlap, but it is just detrimental to this group to do so. I know you may not agree with me, but in all this time, I have never labeled myself a member of the Wikiproject and I do not believe Wikiprojects really matter to wide-scope editors. Agree or disagree with me, I do not have to convince anyone here, mere existence will drive improvements and efforts around the focus the same way the defunct Dragonball taskforce does not mean the end of DBZ work, ] continues to improve and same with the merge of terms like Saiyan. WP:ANIME absorbed the Dragonball Wikiproject and for good reason, it is of very small scope, like a band or TV show, ours is a large genre which consists of numerous sub-genres and that's reason enough for HENTAI to exist. ] (]) 13:48, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
::::And those genre's are also connected to anime&manga. In the end, its just not worthy of a project. Taskforce is better suited.] (]) 16:19, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
::::"...mere existence will drive improvements..." That was exactly what I was trying to say will ''not'' happen, especially in this day and age. Misplaced Pages is not getting any younger, and more experienced editors are becoming an endangered species. Think of it like the ]. Articles do not get improved because a WikiProject exists. A WikiProject exists to facilitate (i.e. coordinate) the improvement of articles. In short, if there isn't an interest to improve articles, WikiProjects or task forces wouldn't exist, and forcing the creation of one when interest is minimal or lacking is not going to magically "drive improvements" because of its "mere existence". But you can believe what you want to believe, I guess. And you also mistagged a bunch of ] articles too.--<span style="background:white;color:">]]</span> 20:25, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Just putting this out there but one of the reasons why I dont look for sources for hentai that often is the computer virus risk, you have to be very careful when looking for reliable sources when it comes to hentai. - ] (]) 20:46, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
: To those who oppose, this is not a fair assessment. For instance, Lucia Black has a strong and established grudge on me. Lucia, who is currently part of ] is not calling for it to be a taskforce under ]. Despite a scope that is completely under VG, let alone a single company. ] is not governed by this project, while related we cover adult content and that includes some sexology-related side projects. I intended to announce the formation here, Juhachi raised the issue first. While you may not share my sentiments and some of you have reasons to rail against anything I do, I sincerely believe that ENWIKI will grow and develop from it. Who cares if it starts with 2-4 editors, it is not even half functional or developed. Editors like Knowledgekid87 are the reason I want to make this Wikiproject, Google is useless on just about anything pornography related, but there is no shortage of academic articles and books preventing me from getting this far on ]. It has a long way to FA, but the Wikiproject's journey and development has just begun. Embrace it or shun it, just be glad I don't hammer the topics here and drive away the younger editors. Even this conversation is risking comfort zones of the watchers. ] (]) 03:46, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
::This seems a little odd. First you want to talk about it and want more support, and yet you are not keen to the idea of talking about it openly and thus want it separate from WP:ANIME for those reasons. Am I understanding that right? Do you honestly think less people would be interested in contributing to WP:HENTAI if it was a task force under WP:ANIME because it might risk "comfort zones"? I don't even know what to say to that, honestly. I doubt you'd "drive away younger editors" if you talked about hentai-related content on this talk page. Anyone who's watched even a little bit of anime or read a little bit of manga knows how sexualized the media is, even in the most mundane circumstances. Hell, why do you think most shounen series have women with ] ]? So it pretty much comes with the territory.

::Not to mention that your goals seem a little short-sighted. If you wanted to try to get ] up to FA, I don't think you needed to establish a WikiProject to do so. Indeed, I doubt you'd get much help either way if the article has been stagnant and cruft-filled for as long as it seems to have been. Sure you can say that starting the WikiProject ''might'' help improve some kind of development of hentai-related articles, but I personally don't see it happening. Who else, other than you and Bumblezellio, are in support of the project? Has anyone else come forward?--<span style="background:white;color:">]]</span> 08:11, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

:::Before I begin, I will like to apologize for any of the following offensive statement. So what is the harm to others for forming a WikiProject at this point? From my view, it's seems more like a threat rather than a comment. What's done is done. WP:HENTAI is already up and running at this point, so you don't need to continue barking at our business. Please refrain from hindering us any longer, and just reread ]. We editors are trying to improve Misplaced Pages, and you're interrupting, saying that we need a ''Hentai Task Force'' instead? Why do you think I rejected the Task Force idea? --] (]) 13:41, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

If that wikiproject becomes a task force, so be it. Previous attempts were that it handled media unrelated to video games such as the anime films, TV series, and CGI films. But consensus can change. Challenge it, I might even support. But at this point, you're not providing good arguments. Rather you admit you have no argument.] (]) 07:56, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

:: WP:ANIME is its own project, WP:HENTAI is the 'adult' version with coverage of explicit works and non-Japanese works are included. We are related to WP:ANIME, but not bound to this project. The same way as Lucia is in the SquareEnix wikiproject and that wikiproject is not a taskforce of VG. We are a separate entity and will not discuss our matters here. For any issues or further discussion please go to ] and comment on our talk page. ] (]) 14:26, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

:::Yeah okay, even though the majority of titles are under the anime/manga scope you just keep telling yourself that. "'adult' version" are you serious? - ] (]) 15:51, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

:::Oh, so basically WP:ANIME can't discuss or improve anything that's 'adult'? You keep saying non-Japanese works, but what are these works? Are there any examples other than ]? But I can see this is getting us no where, as you seem to not even want to comment here anyway, instead wanting to split the discussion to WP:HENTAI under some supposed 'right' that you have to form this project outside of WP:ANIME against consensus. Have fun being the only two in your little project, because I can see you do not want to discuss anything with other editors. Instead, you seem to just want to go off on your ].--<span style="background:white;color:">]]</span> 21:15, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

===RFC===
{{rfc|proj|rfcid=ED19835}}
The above section is rather long, so I'll provide a nutshell:
{{nutshell|] started up ] (WP:HENTAI), a project who's scope is largely (if not entirely) under the scope of this project, WikiProject Anime and manga (WP:ANIME).|A discussion started as to whether it should be a task force under this project, but ChrisGualtieri and another user, ], are against this under a supposition that WP:HENTAI should be kept separate.|Several other users agree that it should be a task force under WP:ANIME, but Chris and Bumble refuse to go along with consensus.}}--<span style="background:white;color:">]]</span> 21:46, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

I just want to say that this not a matter of butting into other's business or saying how one project is better than the other but as an idea that has a consensus and makes sense. I hope that we can all agree to a solution one way or the other and no bitter feelings last from the outcome. - ] (]) 00:52, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

*'''Oppose''' it should be a taskforce under ] -- ] (]) 07:22, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
*:Eh, it wouldn't have to be one or the other if it came to that. For example, the ] is a joint task force under both ] and WP:ANIME. This would make sense, though, since WP:HENTAI deals with pornographic material.--<span style="background:white;color:">]]</span> 07:57, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
*::That would work better, if it were a shared task force, than if it were an ANIME task force. Though, it is porn, so the porn project is the most logical parent. It already covers JAV. -- ] (]) 08:07, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
*'''Comment'''. Whether the scope of WikiProject Hentai falls within WikiProject Anime and manga's scope isn't such a great argument, because this can be true for both WikiProjects and task forces. For example, ] falls within the scope of ], which in turn falls within the scope of ], but no-one is arguing that WikiProject Birds should be turned into a task force of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles or WikiProject Animals. Rather, the usual metric for whether something should be a separate project or not is the number of editors who are interested in getting involved. At this point there only seem to be two editors involved, which makes me think that a task force would make more sense. Are there any technical aspects of the project infrastructure that wouldn't be possible if the project was turned into a task force? — ''''']''''' <sup>]</sup> 08:37, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
*:Most of the bots and related infrastructure play nicely with task forces. AFAIK the only truly insurmountable problem is if the task force wants to support a page that the parent doesn't want to have associated with it. Any page tagged by the task force is also counted in the parent's stats, with no exceptions. ] (]) 18:43, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
*'''Support''' per my reasons above, I just want to ask what harm is going to come if it is turned into a taskforce? Yes it wont be a project but has the potential to get more editors from WP Anime and manga involved. - ] (]) 11:58, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
**I guess I changed my mind. Now I'm fine with either ways. --] (]) 12:12, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - While there is overlap, article count is in the thousands and that is proper under the scope. Far smaller Wikiprojects exist like ] which overlaps with ] and it is independent despite having a mere 476 articles. ] basically needs to exist for the independent categorization, assessment and peer review according to ]. Another key issue is that our assessment and importance is going to be different, and for technical reasons a full Wikiproject is required. ] is low importance for WP:ANIME, but he is top importance for Hentai. As he created genres of hentai and is really responsible for a major shift, just like ] is responsible for starting the hentai movement under the cartoon-cute Tezuka art style which was a shift away from realistic art styles of the 1970s. ] is outside our scope, actually 90% of the projects TOP articles are outside the scope. Even more for the HIGH priority. No one is going to remove WP:ANIME's banners from these overlapped pages either, focus can be shared and overlapped. Thus we need to remain independent for more then just the banners, but the organizational reasons as well.
*(courtesy space)
*If not for technical reasons we need to be separated at least consider the content. Many ANIME editors are probably not of age to even view this content, a separate task force page for discussion essentially needs to be made, which is why a full Wikiproject is easier. If we were to combine, WP:ANIME would have numerous topics about the explicit content as this talk page would be the main discussion point. Books like ''The Erotic Anime Movie Guide'' and ''Adult Manga: Culture and Power in Contemporary Japanese Society'' are key resources for our project, but would the group be content to have numerous explicit links be published here? I know Misplaced Pages is not censored, but a full Wikiproject is really necessary because a separate Taskforce will have a murky split and no vehicle for assessment and review and stifle growth in the long run. So combined with low importance tagging of WP:ANIME for pages like ], do you really want a Hentai taskforce to be dealing with this subject matter right here? And to be completely fair, just about everything in this sector is terribly covered and wrong. Futanari stems from religious depictions and says absolutely nothing of its imagery and doesn't even offer up insight as to why. Its vulgar material, incredibly so, but it is best covered in its own Wikiproject for technical and content reasons. While we are under no obligation to be apart of ANIME, as under ], our scope and technical requirements are only served by full Wikiproject status, overlap or otherwise, any number of projects can express interest and tag the page. I'd PREFER WP:ANIME to consider us a taskforce or a related project and come to us like a taskforce page for discussion, but WP:HENTAI really needs it own space, I welcome any editor to join us and given the nature of the work, expect a larger service as a resource, guide and page for editors who do not formally identify themselves as such. A recent change/watch system (again... Wikiproject) will allow for monitoring and improving those articles in our scope and answering questions raised by other editors without flooding our watchlists. Not even ] uses it, and if its 11,000 articles say anything, it'd probably be a waste of time, but for us it'd be key. In summary, many reasons point to full Wikiproject status, not Taskforce, the decision to do so was not careless and was the result of over a week of research and weighing of the options. Hopefully, with these reasons you'll agree with my actions and see my reasoning. Thanks for reading this important wall of text. ] (]) 14:39, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
*:BannerMeta fully supports different importance/priority ratings for parents and task forces. I don't know whether it supports different quality rankings, but these should have less variation, since they're supposed to be at least somewhat comparable between groups for ]'s work anyway. ] (]) 18:46, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
*:If your concerns are about age appropriateness, wouldn't that argue for listing WPHENTAI under WPPORN instead of WPMANGA ? -- ] (]) 23:20, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

I saw the note at ] about this. The official advice on this subject is at ].

It is ''usually'' not a good idea to have two separate groups working on the same subject (because there are ''usually'' too few editors anyway), but it is '''not prohibited''' and you '''cannot force a merger'''. Ever.

The reason that we do not permit forced mergers is because a WikiProject is people, not articles. Imagine that your groups were real-world groups, like student clubs. And imagine that someone came along and said, "Why should we have a "Student Club for Anime and Manga" and also a "Student Club for Manga and Anime? We'll just force the second one to join the first." Do you think that would work? Or do you think a lot of the students in the second one would just quit out of disgust for someone interfering with their free choice of which people to spend time with (and which people ''not'' to spend time with)?

So here's what you can do: You can invite the new group to freely join you. You can offer to provide technical and bureaucratic support for them, such as making your banner display links and logos for their group. You can offer to host their pages as subpages. You can offer to provide practical and moral support. In other words, you can make joining you seem as attractive as possible. But ultimately, the decision about whether to join your existing group or to strike out on their own is entirely up to them. ] (]) 18:36, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
: '''Support''' Its not really a merge but rather renaming to be part of A&M.] (]) 19:50, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
:::No, this is a proposed merger of two separate groups of people. You cannot "rename" ''people'' to be part of another group of people. ] (]) 17:15, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

:If this is the case and the project creator seems to have no intention of agreeing to a merge here I don't see how this convo can go forward. Seems to me like the result would be yes there is a consensus to merge and a lot think its a good idea but there can be no outcome. I would revisit this in another few months and check back on the Hentai project then, if no or very very few members have joined up then it might be a better idea to bring up a merge discussion again then. - ] (]) 19:51, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

::Does the creator automatically become the owner? Creating a project is a big deal and usually needs consensus first, so pushing a hentai wikiproject was a bad move.] (]) 20:13, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

:::I agree with you I just don't know what the guidelines or rules if any there are for this. - ] (]) 21:50, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

:What WhatamIdoing said. Even if a merge would seem to make sense by other metrics, there's no way you can ''force'' it to happen. As the WikiProject Hentai editors don't want to go ahead with a merge, there's really not much to discuss here. Let's give the project a few months to develop and revisit the situation after that. — ''''']''''' <sup>]</sup> 21:54, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
::not exactly a merge. Plus one already game up on the wikiproject idea (out of the two editors).] (]) 22:03, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
::I'm not sure I understand this logic. Assuming the project doesn't gain many members in a few months time, a merge would still be impossible as long as ChrisGualtieri was against it, right? Are you suggesting that in such a situation Chris might be inclined to rethink the merger? I personally don't think so, seeing how strongly he thinks the two projects should be kept separate.--<span style="background:white;color:">]]</span> 22:18, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
:::Chris is a rational person; given more time and information, he might change his mind. And if he doesn't, then you ''still'' cannot force him to join your group. ] (]) 17:17, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
He doesn't have to, and "rational" is circumstancial. What I will say is, creator of a wikiproject doesn't mean they have ownership, similar to how an article or a policy is created. That said, not all wikiprojects are based on "people", some are based on just being a portal of helpful info and a place to CANVAS appropriately. Otherwise, people would wikiprojects left and right knowing full well consensus won't matter because they created it. With that said, someone can move the project into a task force within A&M's wikiproject and it won't be considered vandalism or disruptive.] (]) 17:31, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
::I agree here, it makes little sense to have a one person project with no support for it, it would be one thing if this was thought out but wikiprojects have not one person in charge but groups of people who make choices per consensus, something which was done here. - ] (]) 04:05, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
*'''sigh''' If s/he does not want support from this project, let him/her be. Hentai includes non anime and manga, so logically speaking, if it does not want to be a TF of WP:ANIME, I am perfectly fine with it. The only problem is the support given, but since obviously s/he does not want it, then why force him/her to? <small>—Preceding ] comment added by</small> ]<sup>]</sup> 07:56, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
::Prove it.] (]) 08:10, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
:::So all hentai video games are "anime games"? Including Japanese video (photographic) strip mahjong games using real women models? -- ] (]) 06:07, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
::::Some live-action is part of A&M's scope. And a lot of video games featuring anime and manga artwork is part of A&M's scope too. But even then, can there even be a hentai article dedicated to a mahjong game? I am well aware there are even panchinko machines with hentai on them. How about a compromise. It turns into '''Hentai Taskforce''' similar to Visual Novel taskforce, unlike bleach taskforce that has WP:AM as part of the title.] (]) 06:35, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
:::::That only works if Hentai is a taskforce of WPPORN, not WPAM. -- ] (]) 11:53, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
::::::I don't have to prove anything, ]'s meaning is not limited to Anime/Manga/Games/Light Novels as per the article, or any Japanese dictionary, and whoever created WP:HENTAI, from all the comments up there, obviously does not want our help. Like I said, if s/he does not want our help, why do we want to force him/her to receive our help? <small>—Preceding ] comment added by</small> ]<sup>]</sup> 15:36, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
Actually it can be a task force of both. Also If you don't have to prove anything, then be prepared for any of your comments to be dismissed. I'm not taking you seriously.] (]) 17:41, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
: Lucia, it is not up for debate. That is final. You do not respect policy and have control issues. I try to be as nice as possible, but you continue to persist and be disruptive and disrepectful to any editor who disagrees with you. Being loud and having the last word does not mean you win, remember ]. You have been warned about personal attacks and your behavior before. It is becoming as childish as your essay which is all bad-faith and attacking. Consider this the last warning. ] (]) 18:11, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
::Lucia, if you don't even know the definition of Hentai, you are the one at fault. Hentai is not limited to Anime, it includes all forms of media, the burden of prove is on you if you say it is limited. However, the linked article's second source already give hentai in Japanese have 3 different meanings, and thus whatever the project/TF will be, it will cover more than things covered in anime, given the term is currently used as its second form in our case. What it is most usually being used for recently does not limit it to just that. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by</small> ]<sup>]</sup> 14:55, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
::<s>Are you kidding me? A consensus was formed to make a taskforce out of ] the only reason why it is not is because what is in place, so take your own words stop making personal attacks and ] with the argument. - ] (]) 18:19, 9 May 2013 (UTC)</s>

*'''Oppose''' If the people of ] don't want to become a task force of ], then they shouldn't be forced to. I agree with the argument above discussing how ] falls under ] but they remain separate. There are definitely some similarities between the two projects, but also some differences, so if both sides do not agree on merging together, they should just stay separated. I don't see anything wrong with that. - ] ] 02:14, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
*Differences are minimal, they both share the same scope though. However you say oppose but your explanation says support. In the end, then we cn only compromise. This "wikiproject" can still be a wikiproject but still fall under A&M.] (]) 02:31, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

== File:Sailor Moon English logo.jpg ==

] has been nominated for deletion -- ] (]) 07:23, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

== Article Title ==

There seems to be some dispute over the article title of the series ] in the ]. I believe there is a preset rule on how such is handled and therefore I would like to request help from an experienced editor to resolve this issue. Thanks. ] (]) 09:05, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

== VisualEditor is coming ==

The ] is designed to let people edit without needing to learn wikitext syntax. The articles will look (nearly) the same in the new edit "window" as when you read them (aka ]), and changes will show up as you type them, very much like writing a document in a modern word processor. The devs '''currently expect to deploy the VisualEditor as the new site-wide default editing system in early July 2013'''.

About 2,000 editors have tried out this early test version so far, and feedback overall has been positive. Right now, the VisualEditor is available only to registered users who opt-in, and it's a bit slow and limited in features. You can do all the basic things like writing or changing sentences, creating or changing section headings, and editing simple bulleted lists. It currently can't either add or remove templates (like fact tags), ref tags, images, categories, or tables (and it will '''not''' be turned on for new users until common reference styles and citation templates are supported). These more complex features are being worked on, and the code will be updated as things are worked out. Also, right now you can only use it for articles and user pages. When it's deployed in July, the old editor will still be available and, in fact, the old edit window will be the only option for talk pages (I believe that ] (aka Echo) is ultimately supposed to deal with talk pages).


== Proposed split of List of Pokémon anime characters ==
The developers are asking editors like you to join the alpha testing for the VisualEditor. Please go to ] and tick the box at the end of the page, where it says "Enable VisualEditor (only in the main namespace and the User namespace)". Save the preferences, and then try fixing a few typos or copyediting a few articles by using the new "Edit" tab instead of the section buttons or the old editing window (which will still be present and still work for you, but which will be renamed "Edit source"). Fix a typo or make some changes, and then click the 'save and review' button (at the ''top'' of the page). See what works and what doesn't. We really need people who will try this out on 10 or 15 pages and then leave a note ] about their experiences, especially if something mission-critical isn't working and doesn't seem to be on anyone's radar.


Inactive talk page over at ], so I'm putting it here as well. (Please respond at the source page, linked directly below)
Also, if any of you are involved in template maintenance or documentation about how to edit pages, the VisualEditor will require some extra attention. The devs want to incorporate things like citation templates directly into the editor, which means that they need to know what information goes in which fields. Obviously, the screenshots and instructions for basic editing will need to be completely updated. '''The old edit window is not going away''', so help pages will likely need to cover both the old and the new.


{{Excerpt|Talk:List of Pokémon anime characters|Article Split}}
If you have questions and can't find a better place to ask them, then please feel free to leave a message on ], and perhaps together we'll be able to figure it out. ] (]) 01:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
:Correction: Talk pages are being replaced by ], not by Notifications/Echo. This may happen even sooner than the VisualEditor. ] (]) 14:43, 7 May 2013 (UTC)


== Determining the authority of anime bloggers ==
== ] and ] considered ]? ==


Can anyone tell me what rules are used to measure the authority and significance of the opinions of YouTubers and influencers? In this case, anime bloggers. It seems to me that in a number of articles their opinion could be an important addition to the dry or superficial opinion of the resources. But I want to know in advance who and how I can use. ] (]) 11:26, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
I noticed that these articles were placed under ]'s scope and I agree that some were made into Hentai per reliable sources but is it valid to lump in the terms with Hentai as a whole? - ] (]) 18:44, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
:Well... Loli and Shotas are also a material for Hentai stories. ] ] 20:03, 8 May 2013 (UTC) :See ]. --] (]) 13:09, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
:: So, if I want to cite the opinions of anime/manga YouTubers or bloggers, I should either show their importance and authority, or use a reputable source that quotes them? ] (]) 16:19, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
::I guess the fact that lolicon and shotacon ''could and are'' used in hentai is the matter.--<span style="background:white;color:">]]</span> 21:19, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
::: Something like that, yes. --] (]) 17:19, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
:::Per ] "...'''if a WikiProject says that an article is within their scope, then you may not force them to remove the banner. No editor may prohibit a group of editors from showing their interest in an article''' per ]." I am deeply concerned about the attempts to coerce and force actions and drive away editors. If you have issues go to ] and do not bring it up here. The hostile and petty nature of this dispute stifles cooperation and growth. And to clarify according to the NPA 30% of seijin manga material falls into this category. ] (]) 23:32, 8 May 2013 (UTC)


== Nomination of ] for featured list removal ==
== Planning on sending ] to FLRC ==


I have nominated ] for featured list removal. Please ] on whether this article meets the ]. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are ].<!-- Template:FLRCMessage --> ] (]) 01:57, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
I brought up issues ]. Someone can address them if they want. ] (]&nbsp;'''·''' ]) 07:24, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
:So ]'s legacy is finally starting to unravel, huh? Not that I'm surprised since this is what happens to abandoned articles. Still a shame though, seeing how much work she put into the project back then. For all intents and purposes, was probably the last stable version aside from the name changes and a few other cosmetic changes.--<span style="background:white;color:">]]</span> 09:15, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
::How about to revert to the last stable version? ] (]) 04:32, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
:::I agree with that. We should keep the legacy of Wikipedians alive as well. AnmaFinotera was one of my major influences during my time on Misplaced Pages. ] (] - ]) 04:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
::::Accuracy is still debatable due to new translations. I would've reverted it if that was the only issue. ] (]&nbsp;'''·''' ]) 04:49, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
::::I see. We should keep an eye on the article and update where necessary. ] (] - ]) 05:25, 11 May 2013 (UTC)


:] has also been nominated for featured list removal; you are encouraged to ]. ] (]) 02:30, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
== Category:Dirty Pair ==


== Last Quarter ==
] has been nominated for deletion -- ] (]) 04:21, 11 May 2013 (UTC)


I noticed that ] originally redirected to ] (which I redirected to ], but judging from the , it looked like an anonymous user hijacked the redirect in 2009 without any discussion. ] (]) 02:37, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
== ] ==


:] can probably be moved to ] per ]. Might want to do that through RM, but it seems to be &#8213; ]] 05:23, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
Hello. Can some one give an opinion in this discussion? ] (]) 18:41, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
:The article should have never been moved but some IP decided to fuck up the redirect.—] (]) 18:50, 11 May 2013 (UTC) ::I've opened up a move request at ]. Any comments are welcome. ] (]) 03:22, 5 December 2024 (UTC)


== Requested move at ] ==
== How to determine Japanese title ==
] There is a requested move discussion at ] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ] (]) 17:37, 9 December 2024 (UTC)


== Good article reassessment for ] ==
I've been having several issues with ] with one particular issue: Japanese naming conventions. For example, Ghost in the Shell japanese cover shows as "攻殻機動隊" with "The Ghost in the Shell" under it. And because of this Ryulong includes "The Ghost in the Shell" alongisde the kanji within the nihongo template. So it looks like Ghost in the Shell (攻殻機動隊 The Ghost in the Shell, ''Kokaku Kidotai Gosuto In Za Sheru'') when using nihongo template. I've attempted to explain to the editor that there are no japanese reliable sources (or any source) includes "The Ghost in the Shell" with the kanji unlike other adaptations ] that has its japanese title as "Ghost in the Shell/攻殻機動隊" (despite the cover NOT having a "/" on the logo) and ] in which its title is "攻殻機動隊 Ghost in the Shell". I know this sounds difficult to follow. But basically there's no proof that "The Ghost in the Shell" is part of the Japanese title for the original manga. Can someone help form a consensus on this?
] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ] (]) 18:06, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
== Second opinión ==
] has been nominated for a while but the reviewer requested a second opinion about size. Could somebody provide it? Cheers ] (]) 02:50, 24 December 2024 (UTC)


== Search for Japanese language sourcing? ==
Another is Ghost in the Shell: Arise, in which all reliable sources including the official site refers to the series as 攻殻機動隊ARISE but Ryulong insists on 攻殻機動隊ARISE -GHOST IN THE SHELL- because of the url title in google search for the official site.] (]) 02:40, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
:Are you still going on about this? If multiple sources close to the subject include these words in some form then it should be considered part of the Japanese title.—] (]) 08:44, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
:Also, on Arise's title, .—] (]) 10:28, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
::But logos and cover art is a stretch and you know that. The only source out there is the cover and japanese wiki (which also adds "control preferences to second volume). In that very site, they refer to it as 攻殻機動隊ARISE. No other source adds "-GHOST IN THE SHELL-" and no source refers to the manga as 攻殻機動隊THE GHOST IN THE SHELL unlike the film and video game. EXample: ] apparently translates as "The first Step" but adds "The fighting!" under it. But its not part of the title despite the video games adding it as a subtitle because no sources add the english title as part of the japanese one. Both are in the exact same boat. Not to mention Kodansha USA renamed all of them as "The Ghost in the Shell", and its not like naruto where.primary.sources specifically refer to the series.with the english name alonside the kanji. Even bilingual editions dont sell it as 攻殻機動隊THE GHOST IN THE SHELL. Just 攻殻機動隊.] (]) 18:33, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
:::I'm pretty sure the English words Ghost in the Shell, is just the translation the creators wanted for the Kanji. Anyways, returns titles without the English words in there. A strong source with commentary by a reliable source decide this discussion. ] (]&nbsp;'''·''' ]) 23:10, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Well the translation is different. However i know the first two kanji can be translated as "ghost" and "shell". Still, falls in the exact same situation as hajime no Ippo situation.] (]) 01:12, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
:攻 is "attack". 殻 is "shell" in some forms at least. Nothing in the name is "ghost". Still, you have "GHOST IN THE SHELL" plastered all over the official website for ''Arise''.—] (]) 12:24, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
::So your willing to remove "the ghost in the shell" as part of the japanese title? And "plastered" everywhere is an exaggeration considering the developers themselve refer to it without the "-GHOST IN THE SHELL-" several times. All you have data info. Even production I.G doesnt add it in. See . Its similar to how officially Dissidia 012(duodecim) Final Fantasy even though the names are interchangable.] (]) 20:34, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
::: No matter what reliable sources I can dig up, I always see ''Ghost in the Shell'' as it's Official English/Romaji Title. If we put up a different title that's unfamiliar with the general view then that is going to mess up 18 years worth of knowledge about one title. So please do us a favor; use ] and help us move on with our lives. --] (]) 21:14, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
::::For the longest time the manga was just with the kanji. Unlike the film and video games that have the english text as part of the japanese title and.is properly sourced. The english title wont change, the Japanese one is in question. No source adds the english title as.part of the japanese one for the manga.] (]) 21:21, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
:::::The collection for the original manga has on its cover both "攻殻機動隊" and "THE GHOST IN THE SHELL". Obviously, "攻殻機動隊" is the name of the manga when it was in serialization only. However, the first collection is clearly subtitled "THE GHOST IN THE SHELL" so drop this nonsense already Lucia.—] (]) 17:49, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
Why state the exact same thing? No source calls it that. You know better than to rely solely on a cover because a.cover says a thousand things but has to be confirned through reliable source. Hypothetically, even if the creator intended to call it that, there are other first party sources who make the final call. Example: Oh My Goddess!/Ah! My Goddess! Situation where the anime is known as Ah! My Goddess! despite the creators intention being closer to "Oh My Goddess". Its not "obvious" if the only thing you have is cover art. You have to bring a reliable source. Hajime no Ippo is a perfect example here. Address it.] (]) 20:36, 15 May 2013 (UTC)


Can someone assist in looking for Japanese language sourcing for ]? It's currently up for AfD and while I think it's very likely to pass AfD, it wouldn't hurt to do some searching for Japanese language sources.
== DNA Media Comics ==


I'm not fluent in Japanese at all and searching with Google Translate is difficult since I don't really have a way to limit the results so that the garbage sources are lessened. It's also possible that it would be referred to more casually by the date and author rather than the full title, which also complicates search attempts. Can anyone help search? I'm going to post in the Pokemon WP as well. Thank you! ]<small>(formerly Tokyogirl79)</small>] 20:53, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
Looking for more views on this redirect deletion ]. It currently redirects to Clannad. ] (]&nbsp;'''·''' ]) 23:13, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


:], nothing left to do here. ]@] 21:31, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
==] article is up==


== Good article reassessment for ] ==
I could use some help filling in some info here, if anyone here is a fan or has heard of the series, come feel free to help out =). - ] (]) 22:09, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
] has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the ]. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ] (]) 22:11, 27 December 2024 (UTC)


== 90's shojo manga series clean-up ==
== Manga articles that are tagged for possible non-notability ==


I've been cleaning up '']'', '']'', and '']'' for the past month and hoping to expand them, but this is the most I can do for now. If someone has additional sources and reviews, that would be great. Cheers. ] (]) 23:28, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
There are a lot of manga articles that don't demonstrate the series' notability. I compiled them with ] and pasted the result here: ]. If anyone here can help out with adding sources or anything, feel free :) - ] <small>(previously Atlantima)</small> <font color="138808">~</font><font color="602F6B" size="3">✿</font><font color="138808">~</font> (]) 12:56, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
:Well im not completely shocked as these also appear over at ], it would be great to get some help with those articles though yes. Right now I am in the process of taking your list and incorporating it to the list over there, my suggestion is for the clearly non-notable works ] and/or ]. {{unsigned|Knowledgekid87}}
:: I will see what I can do about this. I'm waiting on a few matters, but in the future why not just use the template clean up listing from the toolserver for this? Seems a bit much to reparse everything with CATSCAN when the work has been done for you already. ] (]) 23:26, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
::: So many of these are notable. ] and half this list have plenty of coverage at ANN to start with. A lot of Japanese sources are required for these works that never came to America, but doubt many of these need to be PROD or AFD'd. Some of the entries are archived at the Japanese National Library (there is only 1 btw) and that counts for something as well. ] (]) 23:34, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
:::: Please don't take my post as judging any particular series. It's literally just an automated list of articles in category: Manga series that had a {{tl|notability}} tag on them. If you can show notability for some then go ahead. -- ] <small>(previously Atlantima)</small> <font color="138808">~</font><font color="602F6B" size="3">✿</font><font color="138808">~</font> (]) 12:03, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Not all anime is notable, especially with manga as few reviews are out there. It might be good to start a AfD campaigne for articles that cant be above C-class.] (]) 10:48, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
:: That is not how Misplaced Pages works. Just because we don't have detailed coverage on it doesn't mean it isn't notable. Most of the sources on this material is Japanese language only, but many have reviews listed under our RSes. Not every work is reviewed by the same group either. By trying to remove those that are not developed you will be reducing coverage and the likelyhood of them all improving later on. ] (]) 12:35, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
:::you're quick to assume despite what little ive said. I'm saying we should AfD articles that "can't" make it to C class. An AfD campaigne has been done before. It takes more than news coverage to make an article notable. For media, it would need third party reviews too.] (]) 13:17, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
While we are on the subject of cleanup ]'s link to the toolserver is no longer working, can this be fixed? - ] (]) 13:58, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
: Lucia: An article can have zero sources yet still be notable. I do not know what you think I am assuming, but I'm pointing out mere fact. It has also been seen to be disruptive to the process to mass nominate anything you feel can't get above C, just because it is foreign does not make it not notable. I'm fairly certain almost any series could pass GNG/N with a few hours of research on it. Putting fire under editors to do so is a bad proposition, I've done quite a bit of work on the notability tags before, and can safely say that a lack of content does not mean a lack of notability. Knowledgekid87, I've been asking about it since yesterday, but the toolserver does this regularly and I was a little disappointed because it's been down for so long. I cannot even get my tasks run through because of it. It will be fixed when the Toolserver goes up, so don't remove or alter the link, its just a temporary issue. ] (]) 14:04, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 23:28, 27 December 2024

This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Anime and manga and anything related to its purposes and tasks.
This project page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconAnime and manga
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime, manga, and related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anime and mangaWikipedia:WikiProject Anime and mangaTemplate:WikiProject Anime and mangaanime and manga
WikiProject Anime and manga was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on September 2009.

To-do list for Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Anime and manga: edit · history · watch · refresh · Updated 2024-12-28

Featured list candidates
Good article nominees


Archives
Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77
Mascot Discussions

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.
Shortcuts

Proposed split of List of Pokémon anime characters

Inactive talk page over at List of Pokémon anime characters, so I'm putting it here as well. (Please respond at the source page, linked directly below)

Section 'Article Split' not found

Determining the authority of anime bloggers

Can anyone tell me what rules are used to measure the authority and significance of the opinions of YouTubers and influencers? In this case, anime bloggers. It seems to me that in a number of articles their opinion could be an important addition to the dry or superficial opinion of the resources. But I want to know in advance who and how I can use. Solaire the knight (talk) 11:26, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

See WP:SELFPUBLISH. --Mika1h (talk) 13:09, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
So, if I want to cite the opinions of anime/manga YouTubers or bloggers, I should either show their importance and authority, or use a reputable source that quotes them? Solaire the knight (talk) 16:19, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
Something like that, yes. --Mika1h (talk) 17:19, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of Bleach season 2 for featured list removal

I have nominated Bleach season 2 for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:57, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Bleach season 3 has also been nominated for featured list removal; you are encouraged to join the discussion. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:30, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Last Quarter

I noticed that Last Quarter originally redirected to Kagen no Tsuki (film) (which I redirected to Last Quarter (manga), but judging from the redirect history, it looked like an anonymous user hijacked the redirect in 2009 without any discussion. lullabying (talk) 02:37, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Last Quarter (manga) can probably be moved to Last Quarter per WP:DIFFCAPS. Might want to do that through RM, but it seems to be unambiguous ― Synpath 05:23, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
I've opened up a move request at Talk:Last Quarter (manga)#Requested move 4 December 2024. Any comments are welcome. lullabying (talk) 03:22, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:List of Lupin the 3rd Part V: Misadventures in France episodes#Requested move 26 November 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:List of Lupin the 3rd Part V: Misadventures in France episodes#Requested move 26 November 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Feeglgeef (talk) 17:37, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Clannad (video game)

Clannad (video game) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 18:06, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Second opinión

Kiruko has been nominated for a while but the reviewer requested a second opinion about size. Could somebody provide it? Cheers Tintor2 (talk) 02:50, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

Search for Japanese language sourcing?

Can someone assist in looking for Japanese language sourcing for Pokémon: The Electric Tale of Pikachu? It's currently up for AfD and while I think it's very likely to pass AfD, it wouldn't hurt to do some searching for Japanese language sources.

I'm not fluent in Japanese at all and searching with Google Translate is difficult since I don't really have a way to limit the results so that the garbage sources are lessened. It's also possible that it would be referred to more casually by the date and author rather than the full title, which also complicates search attempts. Can anyone help search? I'm going to post in the Pokemon WP as well. Thank you! ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 20:53, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

AFD closed as speedy keep as withdrawn, nothing left to do here. ミラP@Miraclepine 21:31, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Dragon Ball

Dragon Ball has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 22:11, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

90's shojo manga series clean-up

I've been cleaning up Tenshi Nanka ja Nai, Last Quarter, and The Devil Does Exist for the past month and hoping to expand them, but this is the most I can do for now. If someone has additional sources and reviews, that would be great. Cheers. lullabying (talk) 23:28, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Categories: