This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 92.148.172.89 (talk) at 22:05, 2 March 2012 (→Article issues). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 22:05, 2 March 2012 by 92.148.172.89 (talk) (→Article issues)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff) | Film: Japanese Start‑class | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | Anime and manga Start‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | Animation Start‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | Error: Target page was not specified with to. |
Image wrong
The image associated with this page is the wrong image. That image is off howls moving castle, not whisper of the heart. If I can find a cc image, I'll change it. In the meantime if anyone else does ... (or I forget :-)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by SmallBiscuit (talk • contribs) 23:07, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Article issues
All right. There are some serious issues going on here in the article:
- 1. The article needs sourcing from various reliable websites, books and reviews.
- 2. An IP hopper from France has insisted that the edits he/she has done are correct. However, I and Edward321 (talk · contribs), strongly disagree with this. These include seemingly disruption of the talk page to illustrate a point, using all-caps in the edit summaries (which are incivil), and clearly violating the neutral point of view policy by adding personal interpretations of the characters.
As I do not want to edit war here, I am taking the WP:BRD route to see if anyone can voice their opinions on the matter. Thanks, Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:18, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
Hmm, what do you mean by "IP Hopper". Are you just trying to be rude? Why? Yes or no - is one allowed to be anonymous on Misplaced Pages? the answer is of course "Yes". If so, what's your actual name instead of just an internet nickname?
It's worth noting that a number of points in the description were totally incorrect and completely unsourced "urban myths" in the earlier article (such as the total nonsense about "Disney requiring a different ending" and so on) - anyone who has seen the film would realise it was just wrong.
You insist that "yourself and Edward" strongly disagree with this. But you have not changed it back to the earlier, incorrect information.
Another good example is the section titled "Sequel". You can simply look up what "Sequel" means in the dictionary. It has nothing to do with a "sequel". It is a "spin-off" or some sort of related movie.
Can you simply STATE something that I "claimed was wrong" that was not in fact wrong? That is a very very straightforward question.
Can you STATE one issue that you and Edward "strongly disagree" with?
Are you able to do that>
You seem to have a panic about the fact that I had to "SHOUT" in caps a few times to get some attention from "Edward". the problem was, Edward was simply reverting anything else anyone would do.
Do you understand that that sort of behavior is not really the right approach on Wiki?
It's worth noting that you have now completely rewritten the description, for no reason. Your writing style is choppy, not very smooth (just one oerson's opinion of course) - the previous version which built up over time was really quite good. But the point is you've simply swapped one totally acceptable description article, for another one written by yourself - with no real discernible reason or difference.
Are "yourself and Edward" desperate for "ownership" of this page? Or? Is it a common problem on wikipedia that you get fans who really "want ownership" of a particular page?
It all seems a bit strange.
Anyway, I am standing by, all ears, ready for you to STATE one specific issue that you and Edward "strongly disagree" with???
signed, Anonymous — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.148.172.89 (talk) 20:13, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
Incidentally there are quite a few plain errors (e.g., "accepts 'her' offer", sentences in wrong order, etc) in this baffling new rewrite.
Since this is clearly now a page where one or two contrubutors feel they really "own" the page, I urge you to at least proofread.
You'v also completely forgotten to mention the major subplot regarding Yuko (although you appear to be, may I say extremely keen, to mention certain extremely minor details which seem completely pointless in a plot description.)
92.148.172.89 (talk) 20:30, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
- Please assume good faith. No one is trying to own the article in any way. And we need to remove extraneous details per WP:FILMPLOT to make it more concise and remove trivial information. It will also help if you are more civil, as there is no need to be irritated. Also, I think the appropriate title change for the "sequel" would be "spin-off". Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:39, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
For some time, you and/or Edward simply reverted any edit anyone made. Do you understand that sentence? it is very straightforward.
Allow me to repeat: . For some time, you and/or Edward simply reverted any edit anyone made. And you now say "No one is trying to own the article in any way".
Are you kidding?
Secondly - beyond all belief and totally against every reasonable standard on Misplaced Pages, you and/or Edward have simply DELETED material on the talk page - such as actual factual source information - and you have done that over and over again. You now say "no need to be irritated". Is this a joke?
Once again, allow me to repeat: beyond all belief and totally against every reasonable standard on Misplaced Pages, you and/or Edward have simply DELETED material on the talk page - such as actual factual source information - and you have done that over and over again.
Regarding the trivial issue of "spin-off" it's great that you and/or Edward now wants to change it to "spin-off" - do you work in the industry, TV? I already wrote a long passage in this talk page discussing why "spin-off" is probably not the best choice. Of course, you and/or Edward deleted that.
The whole situation is incredible, and very unfortunate.
I've never seen anyone so totally keen to maintain control of a fairly unimportant Wiki page, to the point of being wildly, blatantly, openly rude as outlined - point by point - clearly above.
Of course - you'll probably now just delete this talk page.
Right?
No adult has time for silliness like this:
I urge you ("and/or Edward" who writes identically, makes the identical mistakes, rewrites things in the identical way) to try to adopt a more relaxed, - indeed polite - community-oriented approach in your Wikipediaing.
I urge you to at least correct the huge bloopers in the current version. I assume you don't even speak Japanese, right? A good idea is when you play the DVD or recent BluRay, you can find a set of subtitles which give something of a transliteration of the original Japanese. This might point the way to see what is going on. Good luck.
92.148.172.89 (talk) 22:05, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
incorrect use of "translation"
As already explained - at great length - the lyrics in the film (both the Japanese and ENglish versions of the film), have utterly no connection to a "TRANSLATION". In japanese the girls talk about writing new lyrics; same in the English version. In Japanese the lyrics have utterly no connection to the original John Devnver song, same in the English version.
I urge anyone very keen on editing this page to go ahead and correct this very obvious error.
92.148.172.89 (talk) 20:20, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
Categories:- Start-Class film articles
- Start-Class Japanese cinema articles
- Japanese cinema task force articles
- WikiProject Film articles
- Start-Class anime and manga articles
- Low-importance anime and manga articles
- All WikiProject Anime and manga pages
- Start-Class Animation articles
- Low-importance Animation articles
- Start-Class Animation articles of Low-importance
- WikiProject Animation articles