Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:22, 13 August 2014

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 10 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

WikiProject Anime and manga v · t · e · rc
Main project page  talk Portal Category talk Guidance Manual of Style talk Online sources talk Reference libraries  → Books talk  → Documentaries talk  → Magazines talk  → Manga magazines talk Templates talk Articles   Quality articles Open tasks    Popular pages Recent changes
Departments   Assessment talk  → Changelog  Cleanup talk  → Category  → Cleanup listing   Deletions archive · talk   Requests archive · talk Topic workshop talk    Yellow pages talk Task forces Biography talk Bleach talk Conventions talk Digimon talk Dragon Ball talk Evangelion talk Gundam talk Haruhi Suzumiya talk Hentai talk Light novels Joint TF! talk Sailor Moon talk Studio Ghibli Joint TF! talk Visual novels Joint TF! talk Yu-Gi-Oh! talk
Related projects Parent  → WikiProject Japan Related  → WikiProject Animation  → WikiProject Comics  → WikiProject Film  → WikiProject Television  → WikiProject Video games   → WikiProject Pokémon   → WikiProject Square Enix
Other Wikipe-tan talk Newsletter archive Character articles

Anime and manga Project‑class

This 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 Project This page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/WikiProject used

• WT:ANIME
• WT:MANGA

Top 10 C-class

I'm not so sure we're ready for making the top C-class articles into B-class or GA. I think they stayed that way for a reason, but i think we can at least try to see where we stand. Here are the top 10 C-class articles.

• Hayao Miyazaki
• Hentai
• Studio Ghibli
• Sword Art Online — B-class.
• Pokemon (anime)
• Fairy Tail
• Dragon Ball Z
• Digimon
• Sailor Moon
• Gurren Lagann

Hope nothing but the best. Lucia Black (talk) 10:18, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

This shouldn't be archived for a while either like the previous list. Its motivating to see this here. —KirtZ 19:49, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

i made it so it wont archive until august considering this is a much bigger project. Lucia Black (talk) 16:21, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Well at the very least Sword Art Online made it to B-class. —KirtZ 13:28, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Looks like it could be a GA candidate, assuming the sources I'm not familiar with are reliable. Tezero (talk) 13:38, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

I agree with Tezero; a production section section is always good, though. However, if we are looking for GAs, the B-class articles should be better. I see some very, very, very promising ones. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 00:02, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Y'know, not a complaint about poor importance/reputation-based prioritization (I am so not one to talk), but I'm kinda surprised there aren't more Miyazaki-related GAs or FAs. (Spirited Away's the only one as far as I know.) It seems like artists of various media and media franchises that are as consistently critically acclaimed and popular as him usually have plenty here. (e.g. Radiohead, Pearl Jam, Halo, Final Fantasy) Tezero (talk) 00:16, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Haha, I've already stopped to wonder about it... to start let's say that anime are not high culture or history (you know, people doesn't take Pokémon too serious as other subjects). As otaku and hikikomori we tend to prefer things that are not that good but nonetheless some people like. (PS: Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind and The Castle of Cagliostro are also GAs) Gabriel Yuji (talk) 01:22, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

This is a bit harder than it looks. Perhaps B-class to GA-class would be easier. or maybe we should go back to stubs/start-class to C-class. Lucia Black (talk) 08:50, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

I'd be willing to lend a hand at converting more Start-class articles to C-class if another top 10 list was posted. It was really effective the last time around. —KirtZ 22:36, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

I agree with KirtZJ. Maybe should we have goals to reach like WP:VG? Gabriel Yuji (talk) 03:09, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

I've asked people if they were willing to make something VG, but unfortunately, no one responded. Lucia Black (talk) 23:18, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Hm... I didn't see it... I don't know if it's enough but for the record: I'd go for it. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 18:12, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Re:List of anime series by episode count

Proposed: Reduce the number of series displayed to make it more manageable. Please check talk page and leave a comment. Thanks. Hei Liebrecht 03:36, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

WP:A&M/ORS

Hi, everyone. I've just added The Fandom Post to the project's library of online reliable sources per this discussion. Thoughts?

Also, I want to ask: should we add Shaenon K. Garrity to "individuals". I saw this discussion but I don't see her in the list. I guess she has credentials enough (in fact, she's already been cited in several of the project's articles). Gabriel Yuji (talk) 02:17, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

She's a freelance editor for Viz, so her comments in the publications are primary sourced, much like Carl Gustav Horn's footnotes, so are you asking if her blog should be considered? -AngusWOOF (talk) 02:30, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Yeah... but by saying she is a primary source you say she can't she be used for reception on Viz's manga? Gabriel Yuji (talk) 04:22, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

I've seen some reception based on first-party sources. Lucia Black (talk) 05:17, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

For the record, her blog should be usable as WP:SPS, but you can't use a SPS for talk about living people. I discovered this when investigating if I could use one of her entries about Carl Horn for Excel Saga. Therefore it may limit what can be used. SephyTheThird (talk) 06:10, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification, Sephy. I only used it on Dance till Tomorrow's reception so that's okay. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 07:09, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Top 10 start/stubs (2nd project)

i decided to bring back the top start/stub articles that readers have been paying attention on. If all of them are improved, we can extent the project by trying to get them all improved even further.

stubs

• Dramatical Murder
• When Marnie Was There
• Terror in Resonance start
• Glasslip start
• Love Stage!! start

start

• Digimon Adventure
• Perfect Blue
• Tokyo Ghoul
• Aldnoah.Zero
• Daily Lives of High School Boys C

FYI, Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Anime_and_manga/Popular_pages is a good page for checking the most popular articles. --Mika1h (talk) 20:53, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Responding to the opening statement, or we could do like a monthly community project where we improve that month's top 10 start / stub, with—progression to B-class and higher as an ongoing long term project. So if everyone agrees, we could start that trend this instant since August just barely began. —KirtZ 21:25, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

I would like that, but i dont want the older articles to get ignored, especially if we ignore them more, the more likely we lose information such as refs that become dead links. So we could make it monthly, but i still intend to make it so we improve our older articles too. Lucia Black (talk) 21:29, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm in support of a monthly project. —KirtZ 21:49, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

I would like my main concern addressed aswell before we make a voting. Lucia Black (talk) 21:50, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Start list doesn't look right per Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Anime_and_manga/Popular_pages, are you sorting them by importance or popularity? -AngusWOOF (talk) 22:44, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Here's the Start list by popularity:

• 4 Tokyo Ghoul 284196 9167 Start Low
• 9 Knights of Sidonia 207123 6681 Start Low
• 10 No Game No Life 206682 6667 Start Low
• 11 Akame ga Kill! 203459 6563 Start Low
• 17 List of Sailor Moon Crystal episodes 162991 5257 Start Low - C class now

Many of these are in process, especially the Sailor Moon one, so don't see a problem getting folks on that one. The others could use some attention. -AngusWOOF (talk) 22:47, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

By popularity. But other than that, i skipped epiode lists. As they are suppose to be in list class. For some reason Knights of Sidonia doesn't appear when i'm looking at it. So whichever is best. I also had to look at certain ones because some of them say they are start or stub but are actually a different class. Lucia Black (talk) 23:12, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Aren't most of these currently airing? On the one hand, obvious high demand for content there. On the other, recentism bias. --erachima talk 06:24, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, some of them get reclassified to List because they are List-class in another Wikiproject. And yes, the popular ones in July are recentism-biased. People like to look at articles regarding recently airing shows. ;) That's weird how it selects different shows to be popular, maybe dependent on region or some other range? It's okay, you can go with the original list if you'd like. -AngusWOOF (talk) 06:57, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Heh. I'm barely here, and my priority's always been more on the manga side, so pick however you want. I'm just noting that there's a pretty obvious bias in what it's going to call the most-demanded stub/start pages for improvement. --erachima talk 14:02, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

I've previously voiced concerns about this myself. However keeping on top of them as soon as possible is a good way to keep the pages up to some sort of standard rather than falling into a bad state because they aren't being controlled. Also, it's good for adding articles and news stories as they are made available rather than spending hours researching them later (it's quite easy to get per episode reception information these days making for good running commentary). It all offsets the number of large pages which need complete rewrites and substantial investment of time to reach any sort of standard. It's also surprising how some articles of recent/current titles that you expect to get lots of edits actually don't. Ajin: Demi-Human is a good example of that. SephyTheThird (talk) 19:15, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

I've assed Glasslip and Terror in Resonance as start as they are decent enough, I guess. Also, I gave Love Stage!! a shot... Gabriel Yuji (talk) 07:49, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

A start now? Gabriel Yuji (talk) 05:29, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

I just crossed out the ones that are reassessed, but we can still improve them further, if possible. Anyways...If this wants to be a popular thing, perhaps we could create a table based on it. I'm not familiar with these kind of things, but we could not include the most popular pages, but the least popular aswell. Perhaps some series aren't that notable and could be AfD. I'll look for someone who can help find a way to make it happen, but first might ask for approval. We don't even have to constantly be updating a new list, it'll be updated for us. But thinking ahead of myself at the moment. for now, we got these articles to consider. Lucia Black (talk) 08:25, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Hm... Talk:Love Stage!! still assessed as stub despite being crossed. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 21:55, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Start-class now. -AngusWOOF (talk) 23:54, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Vampires in anime... and manga

Hm... not sure if it's best place to propose it but there is a category titled Vampires in manga and another titled Vampires in anime. The categories of this project generally encompasses anime and manga when possible (e.g. Anime and manga by genre, Anime and manga terminology), so these two should be merged into Vampires in anime and manga in my opinion. Thoughts? Gabriel Yuji (talk) 19:28, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Appears to be the standard categorization snafu when Category:Anime and manga by _______ and Category:_______ in comics collide. I support the merge, practical utility outranking strict logical coherence of category trees. --erachima talk 19:47, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

On further review, note that the naming convention would actually be Category:Vampire anime and manga, according to most contents of Category:Anime and manga by topic. Which would leave e.g. Alucard out of it. --erachima talk 19:51, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Good point, erachima, "Vampire anime and manga" seems the most appropriate title. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 20:22, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion sounds like the place to propose it. -AngusWOOF (talk) 21:49, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Here it is: Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 August 3#Category:Vampires in manga. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 23:12, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

MyAnimeList as external link

What benefit is there to linking to MyAnimeList? MyAnimeList is an open database that allows editors to add or change content. However, unlike ANN's encyclopedia which contains links to articles and reviews about the entry, MyAnimeList does not add anything that isn't already in the article. As far as I can tell it doesn't meet any of the conditions at WP:ELYES or WP:ELMAYBE. On top of that, MyAnimeList overtly links to fansub groups, which would be prohibited on Misplaced Pages per WP:COPYLINK. As an external link, I don't think it should be one we should be using. —Farix (t | c) 20:22, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. Any specific problem, or just for the sake of record? Gabriel Yuji (talk) 21:15, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Not a specific problem. But to establish a consensus before removing the links altogether. There is likely to be some contention about removing the links and I wanted to point to a discussion on the matter. —Farix (t | c) 22:05, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

I agree, the reasoning makes perfect sense. While I make use of it to keep a ongoing record of what I've watched/read so I know where I am when returning to something, it's really not a suitable resource of any kind. I see no reason for us to direct to what essentially amounts to fan scores, forum comments and fan groups. It arguably fails at least 3 points of WP:ELNO but the Copyright concerns are enough of a reason on their own.SephyTheThird (talk) 21:35, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

It's already on the unreliable list for WP:ANIME/RS and many of the summaries and character descriptions for the series reference Misplaced Pages so that would be WP:CIRCULAR. I don't see any staff articles. Was there a plan to create a template like perhaps with Crunchyroll and Hulu? -AngusWOOF (talk) 21:46, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

AFAIK most/all "staff" are picked from site users to be moderators more than running the site as a "formal" operation. While the site may be on the unreliable list, I'd bet most editors have never read it. Even then, that might just stop them from using it as a source but not from using it as an EL. I'm not sure there is much control of Els in general on our pages for the most part.SephyTheThird (talk) 21:54, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

No one is discussion using MAL as a reliable source (it isn't per WP:SPS. —Farix (t | c) 22:05, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

The links to fansubers are what concern me the most. I know that links to mangaupdates.com (aka Baka-Updates) are frequently removed for similar reasons. —Farix (t | c) 22:05, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Well apparently, there is a link template at {{Mal}}, which should be sent to TfD as part of this discussion. —Farix (t | c) 22:24, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Nominated the template for deletion. We will see the outcome before removing the remaining MAL links. —Farix (t | c) 00:44, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Move Highschool of the Dead to High School of the Dead

Should we move Highschool of the Dead to High School of the Dead. I have never seen either the manga or anime spelled as one word. I own them all and I double checked myself too. Even on sites like Amazon, it is spelled as two separate words. Chambr (talk) 00:17, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Just go with the title that Sentai Filmworks or Yen Press use in press releases. —KirtZ 00:34, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Yen Press uses Highschool of the Dead. Given that the manga is the original media, the article should stick to that name. For example, Chibi Vampire instead of Karin. —Farix (t | c) 00:41, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, agreed. Chambr (talk) 00:44, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Crunchyroll News

Im not sure if this was brought up before. What are some thoughts on the use of news articles taken from Crunchyroll? Should we add it to the WP:A&M/ORS list, whatever sub-section that may be? I think there is some merit in using it, much for the same reasons that we use ANN. —KirtZ 03:38, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

For announcements for what Crunchyroll is streaming, it is definitely a reliable source. For news articles like this or pop-culture articles, let's just say that we don't know who their editorial staff are or how they are structured to determine if there is any kind of editorial oversight. So it comes down to establishing if it has a repudiation for fact checking and accuracy, which would be extremely difficult without first establishing that it has editorial oversight. —Farix (t | c) 03:51, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

I would never use CR as a source, even for it's own titles. Generally ANN reports on everything they do so I've never seen the need. SephyTheThird (talk) 04:20, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

I mainly use the CR articles by Scott Green. But you can see Crunchyroll News Team. I'd stay away from the moderator ones and those icons; that seems to be more for their forums. -AngusWOOF (talk) 04:27, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

While ANN is a highly reliable news source, I've noticed that most of the articles here simply rely on that one source to cite developments. Especially the newer ones. I thought having a different perspective would be a good thing from a site most people are already familiar with as well. Should we add it to the WP:A&M/ORS list as another option? —KirtZ 15:29, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

It would be under Situational section if implemented. Lucia Black (talk) 20:58, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Katsudō Shashin FAC

I've nominated Katsudō Shashin as a Featured Article, and invite you to take part in the review here. Thanks, Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 08:02, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

RS evaluation of anime-planet.com

I know that this site does not meat WP:EL critical for an external link. However, I've noticed it being referenced several times in articles, mainly for plot information. The reviews appear to be user submitted and would fail WP:SPS. I cannot tell if the other information on the site is user edited or not. The only previous discussion on the website was over whether it complied with WP:EL. —Farix (t | c) 13:51, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

It sounds like someone rewrites their summaries or at least plans to according to this: The reviews are user-submitted however the video links are provided with a partnership with Crunchyroll. The staff section looks to be "a single admin and a handful of volunteers": . -AngusWOOF (talk) 14:34, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm not seeing anything to suggest we should use this site. A partnership with Crunchyroll etc (assuming they are officially sanctioned) would seem to benefit the providers as free advertising more than suggest any quality of the site. SephyTheThird (talk) 15:17, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

I've removed it from the "External links" sections and where its reviews have been referenced as part of a reception section. But there are still a number of references to plot elements and staff that I believe could be better referenced to other sources. —Farix (t | c) 18:43, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

"Young" roles

There was a discussion back at Talk:Free! (anime)#Character section comments on whether the "young" voice actor roles (meaning, if a certain character, for example in a flashback, is given a different voice actor than their normal because of a need for a "younger" voice) that used to be in that article should be included. As you can imply by the tense of my sentence, the consensus was to remove them. However, several articles, such as Oreimo and Tokyo Ravens, still have in their character lists at least one mention of a "young" role. So, should articles that have "young" roles continue to be included in articles which have them, or should they be removed? Or should their inclusion be on a case-by-case basis? The arguments against their use are explained by KirtZJ in the aforementioned discussion; however, I am neither in favor nor against the inclusion of such information in articles. I just want to see what consensus there is for their inclusion. Narutolovehinata5 10:51, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

It would depend on whether the young voice was used often enough to be worth mentioning. Just use your best judgment. --erachima talk 10:55, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

I had proposed it to be removed because the profiles for the official anime website do not consider them significant enough to include on their main character page, leading me to believe that the "young" character is as about as notable as a guest character. For young ones in major roles (i.e. Dragon Ball) or for character articles, it can be retained. If they stay in a guest/recurring basis, they should be referenced properly with episodes involved, since digging up a Train Heartnet (young) reference can be a real pain and a barrier to getting an article properly referenced towards B or GA/FL class. They can stay on a VA's filmography. -AngusWOOF (talk) 14:11, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

I wouldn't consider them notable enough to include in an article if a series has one or two flashbacks because as you said they are a headache when it comes to finding reliable references. I think it's one of those things that the community seems to somewhat ignore because in almost every instance I've seen mentions of "young", none of the VAs (including the normal ones) are sourced even. At the same time, it's usually an IP who adds them, and they may have just been fanning on good faith. Another thing we have to consider is that the "young" thing can quickly become useless spam if a series gets an English release and we end up with at least 4 VAs for one character. However when it comes to improving class-status of an article, I would remove them if they cant be reliable sourced. —KirtZ 17:09, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Uncredited parallel universe characters

I have this situation where the VA voices the main character's parallel universe equivalent and also their's character mother, however, neither of the two voices are listed in the closing credits, and I can't find a reliable source that confirms this (ANN encyclopedia can't be used, and BTVA doesn't show a checkmark for confirmed voices). The editor has insisted it be left alone because they've confirmed the voice matches themselves, and that all the main characters do their parallels anyway HERE. So should the characters be kept or not? -AngusWOOF (talk) 15:02, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Well, not based on their arguments given that they are as WP:OR as can be.SephyTheThird (talk) 15:21, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

WP:V and WP:BLP. If it cannot be cited to a reliable source, it should be on the page, period. —Farix (t | c) 19:47, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

I would argue that the statement there's no need for proof, it's obviously her is so clearly OR that it'snot even up for debate.--67.68.22.129 (talk) 01:34, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

If it's that obvious that Protagonist and Evil Protagonist have the same voice, to the point that nobody thought of crediting the role separately, then we don't need to include the second VA credit in the first place. --erachima talk 02:12, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Shot in the dark request (Zombie Powder)

Do any of the regulars happen to own the first volume of Zombie Powder? And if so, would you be willing to scan a specific page from it? There are some decade-old scans out there on the web, of course, but they're so artifacty that I'm concerned there'll be quality issues even when cleaned up and downsized for article use. --erachima talk 16:53, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Are you looking for the original Japanese or English - because you said "decade old"? I might have it in my library, bundled in with my old CLAMP stuff for no particular reason. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 18:03, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

It's the art I'm after, not the text, so either version will probably work. --erachima talk 18:18, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Specifically, I want page 36. --erachima talk 18:41, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

I went ahead and used the decade-old scan, and as I suspected it's got image quality issues that neither basic cleanup tricks nor downsizing alleviated. afaict it was scanned into the windows XP version of paint as a .jpg and the resulting scuzziness is not correctable short of effectively redrawing the page myself to counteract artifact losses. So if you've got the page, I'd definitely appreciate a cleaner version. Still, better for illustration than nothing for the moment. Also, page is up for WP:GAN. --erachima talk 21:47, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

WP:AN, campaign to get rid of me permanently

I'm tired of this....it bothers me very much that there is always a specific group of admins and members attempting to ban me indefinitely. WP:AN#Excessive topic ban which for some reason, they want to change to an indefinitely site ban. Which really bothers me. I'd like someone to analyze the situation because theres more to this than meets the eye. And i know members have recently been recognizing my good contributions. Lucia Black (talk) 01:50, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

I really want other members to look at the situation. Lucia Black (talk) 02:02, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Hmm. That's no good. You might want to hit up WT:VG as well. Tezero (talk) 02:07, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

• Project-Class anime and manga pages
• NA-importance anime and manga pages
• All WikiProject Anime and manga pages
• Misplaced Pages pages with to-do lists