Talk:Oh My Goddess!/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Voice cast

I've added a bit more information on the voice cast based on what I've found on the Japanese Wikipedia. There it noted different seiyuu for the TV series on The Almighty and on Chrono, Ere, and Ex, so I put them down in the table.

There seems to be a little confusion on the TV seiyuu for Ere and Ex, though. Japanese Wikipedia has Chiemi Chiba voicing Ere and Yoko Honna voicing Ex. I had found before on Ryu's Seiyuu Infos that it showed the other way around, and my searching of Japanese sites with Google doesn't seem to show any consistency either. One seiyuu database I check, Les voix des Anges, has both Ex and Ere listed on both Yoko Honna and Chiemi Chiba profiles. I haven't watched the TV series in any form yet, but I guess this comes from some kind of mishap with the TV credits. Anyone have the series and have a good ear for Honna's or Chiba's voices, and can tell which is which? I decided to enter in the way it was on the Japanese version of Wikipedia, as I guess having it in one way was better than listing the Movie seiyuu for them. The possible spread of inaccurate information bothers me, so I hope it can be clarified, though.

Lastly, it listed a seiyuu for Hild, "Gara Takashima (Game)". I found that the game is Quiz: Ah! My Goddess from checking the Seiyuu Database, so I added the appropriate information for Hild's and Gara Takashima's entries. Should she be listed on the main table, too, even though she hasn't voiced her in any anime adaptations? EmperorBrandon 06:48, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I think thats approporate. :) --Cat out 06:11, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Template change proposal

Not as big and not as untidy. It unites the articles together under one. --Kunzite 01:08, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

{{Oh_My_Goddess/change}}

I oppose this idea. There is a reason why 3 templates are used on this article rather than one. If you look at any of the linked articles only one of the three templates appear. I also find the current version more tidy. --Cat out 20:14, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
I know that only one of the templates appear on the various sub articles. However, if you have a series of articles, I feel that all articles should be represented in the series box.
What's the reason that there are three templates? Is it not better to have all articles linked from the same page as they are all part of the same series? Even if the templates were kept separate, they're still in need of clean-up. With everything in bold, it breaks the feature that tells what page you're on. (That title is bolded and unlinked.) Also, there is way too much whitespace in the table.
We can get rid of some of these excess characters in here as well. After I finish with my Sailor Moon mergers, I'll help clean up here with some minor character merge proposals. --Kunzite 20:40, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
The reason we have 3 templates is simple. Relevancy. An article talking about a spesific Oh My Goddess! episode does not need to link to all of the characters. However linking to all characters on an article talking about a character is only logical. So the reason is relevancy. Providing the user with a flood of links will confiuse them. It surely confiuses me. Thats why I do not like templates that are cramed up.
I do not mind templates undergoing a cleanup. I just dont want them to be cramed up. Do note that sometimes the templates are compressed such as on stub articles which is why they are spaced out so much.
We are not getting rid of "excess characters". I am not much of an article writer, but I know there is lots to be written about all those "minor" side characters. We should be focusing on expanding articles, not deleteing them.
--Cat out 21:10, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
Hmm maybe we can merge both ideas... --Cat out 20:39, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Ah! My Goddess should redirect

I don't see any reason why Ah! should be a disam. page instead of a simple redirect considering how everything that the Ah! page links to is linked in this page as well. I went ahead and changed it but I felt it needed mentioning her as it seems that it has been a redirect page in the past.--SeizureDog 05:44, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Moved ah-vs-oh down again

Dear CoolCat,

You wrote "naming is more important than the plot. (first thing people will need to understand from the article is that series have multiple names), then what inspired the series, then plot, then etc".

"Naming is more important than plot."

I just have to disagree with you on this one. I hardly know what to say to someone who really believes that, but I'll try.

If you had to pick any one point to get across to the reader, be it plot, name, nordic references, staff etc. what point would that be?

  1. OMG is a series about a college freshman, who, because of his pure heart, has been chosen by God's computer system to receive a single wish. An angel-like goddess is sent down to ask for his wish, and he wishes for Belldandy to stay with him forever, which she does gladly. etc.
  2. OMG is a series also known as AMG because of problems translating the original title. The translations have led to a great deal of debate and flamewars amongst English-speaking anime fans during the early 1990s. etc.
  3. OMG is a series influenced by Nordic mythology. The main characters for example have been named after Nordic deities. etc.
  4. OMG is a series featuring the following seiyuu: etc.

I really do hope you understand that to people who don't know the series the ah-vs-oh debate is of very little consequence indeed. As long as you don't know what a series is about this debate is simply not interesting at all. Even if you do know what this series is about, even, in fact, if you're a fanboy, it's a bit of trivia, nothing more.

The primary question any article should answer is: "what is this?" If we return to my little list for a moment, #2 could equally well refer to any number of books and movies; in other words, it isn't really an answer or good definition at all.

If you have the ability to monopolize your audience you might go for tactically saving some bits for last, but for a webpage or reference book that is just not possible. Most readers tend to read from top to bottom and if they lose interest they close the browser window (or book) and go somewhere else. It's that simple.

While the actual position of the oh-vs-ah section may be the subject of some debate, I contend that any sensible person would at least put it somewhere below the plot and nordic-influences sections. I don't plan on starting a revert war with you (or anyone else for that matter) so if you do, I'll file for a mediation request. Of course the exact location of the ah-vs-oh debate is open to debate.

Yours faithfully, Shinobu 03:42, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Plot section is visible with little scrolling as well as on the TOC box. For the reader it won't matter where it is.
Naming of a series is not Trivia. The OVA/Manga beared the official title Oh My Goddess!, Ah! My Goddes was the title of the movie and the recent TV series as the title Ah! My Goddess! All of these are the official titles. Info regarding alternative names generaly are presented in lead, however the complex nature of the issue requires a section.
After done with the naming rest of the sections are ordered per importance with the exeption of 3 sections (References, See also, External links) which come last respectively.
--Cat out 19:00, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
But.. the alternate names are already included in the lead. I personally feel that this information is relevant only to hardcore fans of the show and should be relegated to the note section. See: InuYasha. Shinobu's lower placement in the article is also an OK option. It's not something to include over plot. (I, personally, was confused when I first read this article as it seemed like that it was a disambig page because there was all of this information about naming of the series.) --Kunzite 01:03, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
A diambiguation page does not have an infobox. Name of the series is something that had prompted copyright/trademark issues. Changes in the official title is NOT cruft.
Plot is the least relevant thing in an encyclopedic article. Why is Oh My Goddess! significant compared to other anime? It's complicated naming is one of the reasons. Norse referances is another. Plot is significant, just not as significant in my view. However perhaps naming can be placed after norse referances tho I want to keep the norse stuff next to the plot --Cat out 14:14, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Blindly reverting me will not yield a solution. I will file for a mediation request. Shinobu 00:46, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Blindly reverting means I revert w/o posting a talk response... The diference in time index isn't several seconds only because I carefully considered your standing and wrote a response before reverting... --Cat out 14:14, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

MedCab Case - I spoke with Cool Cat earlier and he'd already decided that it was in the best interests of all involved to simply not argue, so I've moved the case to "in mediation" with a status of "Resolved". If anyone has any questions, please feel free to contact me. Thank you. ~Kylu (u|t) 15:41, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

@Blindly reverting: I'm sorry if I sounded more grumpy than I was - it wasn't meant as bad as it might appear. Shinobu 22:27, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
No problem, I reccomend we forget about this minor issue and focus on bettering the article. --Cat out 22:59, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Video Games/Other Media Section?

A New PS2 video game came out last week for AMG, and I'd add the info myself if not for two things. 1) I know very little about the game, as I can't read the website (http://www.mmv.co.jp/special/game/ps2/megami/), and 2) This isn't the first game to come out for the series, so in light of that fact and the Soundtracks section (and the mention of a novel right below this topic), would it be possible to create a section entitled "Other Media" to list all the non-manga/anime AMG...things? Xenon Zaleo 10:39, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Novel

Would someone have some info on that, please ? http://eg.nttpub.co.jp/news/20060605_15.html

Article for deletion

Before you jump and think Oh My Goddess! is up for deletion, it isnt. Kiddy Grade is, but unfortunately the discussion has started to critise this article too. And in order to delete the Kiddy Grade articles they would have to do the same here. It is of note because, obviously, you don't want that to happen.

This is quote from one of the people: "I don't want to be rude and please don't take this is gnawing the newbies or assuming ill intentions of an editor. I don't, it's not the editor, it's the culture. But there has been a pervasive explosion of these character articles in Anime articles. They contain little chunks of information, but only seem to exist to hold an image and an infobox on the character and to fill out a character navagation template... I have half a mind to say delete the lot of them and start from scratch .. but I'd only push for that if we could throw in the similarly formatted character articles from OMG, IY, and Tenchi as well. They were all created in the same manner, and it's not well suited to the wikipedia. First off, they contain way too many pictures and (some of them) seem to only exist because an infobox was able to be created for the article. But, I will not be mean to the information and I will push for a SUPER speedy merge These articles fall under the auspices of the WP:FICTION which give a wonderful steps on how to create such pages. Also, a aticle like Eclair and Lumiere (Kiddy Grade) contains WAY too many photos and is a definite violation of the fair use policy. It needs a lot of trimming regardless of the outcome of this debate. I would vote to Delete the Kiddy Grade Infobox and navigation templates, if I could."

The discussion is here

--Crampy20 09:48, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm getting sick of this, why is it that anime and game articles are going for the chop. There is no logic for why they are disapearing without proper reason. First most of the command and conquer articles, now this!?

I am having big fears that Wikipedia will fall under fire again.-Dynamo_ace Talk

I love the smell of napalm. :)
I have initiated a discussion on Wikipedia talk:Notability (fiction) and how its violating Wikipedia talk:Stub.
--Cat out 11:39, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
I want wikipedia to fall under fire becuase of this, it pisses me off. sigh. These are all articles legible for deletion, if only i had enough time to AfD them all... And there are still many many many more. Abra Absol Aerodactyl Aggron Aipom Alakazam Altaria Amaldo [What follows is basically a list of every pokemon and some random anime characters Addps4cat] --Crampy20 16:53, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Please don't spam the talk page Addps4cat 17:10, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
see: WP:POINT. --Cat out 17:16, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
It isn't spam, it's used to make a point. Spam is advertisement in all forms and all definitions (except DoS, which that wasn't either), that wasn't. But i won't rv it, i get tired of people rv'ing pages because they think they understand policy. *sigh* --Crampy20 22:53, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Ok how about this. I kindly ask you not to post every pokemon known to exist on this talk page about Oh My Goddess! anime as all of it is completely irrelevant. --Cat out 00:21, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. I was being sarcastic about the deletion. Seriously, there are many OMG articles that need to be merged to follow the style guides at WP:FICTION. I've proposed this several times. We don't need articles on every single minor character or bit of minutia that is produced within a series. For other interested parties, you can find further debate on Fictional articles at Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(fiction) --Kunzite 03:41, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

This is hot, "character popularity poll" has concluded

I think the official competition (translation) has concluded. The competition was basicaly an online poll of fans favorite characters. Belldandy for instance was voted #1, no suprise there.

In any case this info can be incorporated into character articles. I just am not certain how to do it. We could use the infobox or add it in as trivia. What do you guys think?

--Cat out 02:06, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

  • One Piece character articles just put it in trivia. I think that works out best. Danny Lilithborne 02:11, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Add to trivia?

I just watched Season 1, File 40 ("Dangerous Date") of Fujishima's You're Under Arrest (Taiho Shichauzou). In this episode, the bagpipe tune that plays in the background of the amusement park, sounds uncannily similar to the opening theme (also with bagpipes) of the second TV series Ah! My Goddess: Everyone Has Wings (Aa! Megami-sama: Sorezore no Tsubasa).

Can anyone confirm this? Add to trivia?

xjaymanx 05:30, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

V.a. table

Currently there are still "x"'s and "v"'s in table cells for anime wherein the corresponding character never spoke. I think it would probably be better to have these cells empty. In fact, I'm having my doubts on the usefulness of this table as it stands. Except in a few cases this is essentially a who played in what anime list, and there are only a few cases where one chara was played by multiple v.a.'s. Currently the list is not particularly clear/helpful. Shinobu 16:46, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

I find the table helpful, if you have a better idea feel free to suggest.
Those charcters had manga only appearances. son an "n" is only approporate. "n" represents that the character did not have a voice actor on that spesific series.
--Cat out 17:02, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Ah! or Oh!, again

At the risk of starting some giant war over what is almost just a nitpick, shouldn't Oh! My Goddess redirect into Ah! My Goddess instead of the other way around? I say this because in the Ah! or Oh! section, Fujishima says that it should probably stay as Ah! for consistency. Further, the only media to use the Oh! My Goddess name is the Dark Horse Manga and the OVA. Both of which were named, what, ten years ago? Also, all the more recent media has used Ah!, both the movie and the TV series. It may not be a big deal, but looking through the archives I noticed that it was never discussed.Xenon Zaleo 10:39, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

"ah" is the reading of the Japanese Hiragana symbol while "Oh!" is the usual English 'translation' of the utterance. In a way, they are *both* correct useage. Fujishima, when he later learned of the English phrase "Oh my God!" said that was the sense he had intended (as in "Oh My Goddess!!!") but by this time most of the English translations were using "Ah" which is simply the writing of the sound of the hiragana symbol in our alphabet. In other words, what you are seeing here is the difficulty of translating from one language to another. And its one of those things like a dog chasing its own tail where we can debate for the rest of time which is the most "correct." I think it is never discussed, as you say, for this very reason. There is no "correct" answer, except to say that "Ah" is the closest we can get to the original Japanese sounding (albeight not the closest morphological English meaning) and I guess that's the convention that everyone has decided to use in order to keep people's head exploding pondering it. :-) Yanqui9 20:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
I understand the history and why it's the way it is, but that still doesn't answer my original question. Oh! is certainly closer to the original meaning.....but it's also used only in the Manga, and this is likely because Dark Horse has had the license for so long. So I come back to my original question. Due to Fujishima saying that things should be Ah! for consistency and given that every license since the OVA has been Ah!, should this article still be Oh! instead of ah (currently, Ah! My Goddess redirects here, I'm proposing that instead, Oh! My Goddess would redirect to Ah! My Goddess with all the current information).Xenon Zaleo 05:45, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I am confused, because if the official DVD releases say "Ah!" and the creator agrees with the "Ah!" camp, then why is this article still titled "Oh!"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.118.193.129 (talk) 21:46, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Could be classified as "harem anime"?

Just wondering if Ah! My Goddess should be added under harem anime. I believe it should, since it generally fits the criteria. ie. Male surrounded by many females all interested in him romantically at one point or another.

I would agree, although it's not the an arch-type of harem it certainly has all of the common ingredients. I'll add it to the harem page. MkDoyle 11:30, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


Too many articles for minor characters

I propose merging of several minor characters' articles into one. The reason is that they already cover the subject and are unlikely to be expanded considerably. If no objectons, I'll do the merge within few days. --Tone 10:12, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

I do not exactly object. But I do not want an excessively large "list of minor chars" article either. I do want to point out that a 3rd season for the show is scheduled. Which specific articles do you have in mind? -- Cat chi? 11:06, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Let's say all the characters that don't appear in more than 2-3 episodes or are not really significant to the plot. --Tone 12:45, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Okay, which specific ones do you have in mind? Peorth appeared in very few episodes yet had a serious impact to the plot. Same goes for Hild or Marler. They make more appearances in the manga than anime mind you. A single episode in the anime can be an entire 7 month arc in the manga. -- Cat chi? 13:47, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
Let's say Hijiri and the others of the kind. I suppose, if you are unhappy with specific merges, you can still make them separate. Let's wait for more people for commenting before the merge... --Tone 14:09, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
We do not need to wait for "others" for a merger. Please give me a list of the pages you are considering to merge. I'd rather discuss first rather than revert your edits. -- Cat chi? 23:10, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
I don't object. Showers 15:22, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
I suggest to merge all the characters except 3 listed in the main section and potentially the three you mention above. All others are really just minor. I appreciate your work but sometimes you went to too specific details. --Tone 12:42, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Thats unacceptable. I need a list so we can discuss specifics. A blanket argument on mass merge equals a blanket oppose. Have you watched the series or read the manga? -- Cat chi? 12:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

list

  • Heaven
    • Almighty
      • made appearances in the OVA, the movie, the TV series.
    • Celestin
      • only appeared in the Ah! My Goddess! the movie. chief antagonist
    • Lind
      • Was present during the Lord of Terror and Angel Eater arcs which is like 3 volumes (10% ish) of the manga
    • Morgan le Fay
      • only appeared in the Ah! My Goddess! the movie. secondary antagonist
    • Peorth
      • made appearances multiple times on multiple arcs. Showed up on at least 5 tv episodes as well as the movie
    • Troubador
      • one tv episode few manga chapters - former love interest of Urd
    • Chrono, Ere & Ex
      • few manga chapters, minor roles in the movie and the anime.
  • Hell
    • Hild
      • secondary antagonist from Hell
    • Lord of Terror
      • temporary enemy - did occupy an entire volume worth in the manga and 3 episodes in the anime
    • Marller
      • chief antagonist from Hell
    • Senbee
      • 1 episode in the anime and 2-3 chapters in the manga
    • Welsper
      • No anime appearance however he occupied over 16 months worth (or more) of manga arcs.
      • A full 2 arcs were dedicated to him. He was present after that too
    • Angel Eater
      • temporary enemy
      • did occupy nearly two volumes
  • Nekomi
    • Megumi Morisato
      • made multiple appearances. Some volumes were dedicated to her. Quite major
    • Keima Morisato - made a full volume appearance
    • Takano Morisato - made a full volume appearance
    • Chihiro Fujimi - had few apearances on the tv series was on the movie. Also was on every manga arc where a race had taken place and more. Boss of Keiichi
    • Toraichi Tamiya
      • Had a more of a role on the earlier chapters. Like Chihiro they are on every race.
    • Otaki Aoyama
      • Had a more of a role on the earlier chapters. Like Chihiro they are on every race.
    • Sora Hasegawa
      • Had late manga appearance, had one tv episode dedicated on her, was on the movie
    • Banpei had several arcs dedicated to it one was featured on the anime.
      • Had several
    • Sigel
      • Had at least two arcs dedicated on it. Love interest of banpei
    • Satoko Yamano
      • Made appearance on a single arc (arc was dedicated to her and Otaki Aoyama). Love interest of Otaki Aoyama
    • Shiho Sakakibara
      • Made two appearances on the manga, and one TV episode
    • Sayoko Mishima - chief antagonist from Nekomi
    • Toshiyuki Aoshima - secondary antagonist from Nekomi
    • Hijiri
      • Made few appearances on the tv series
    • Koshian
      • appeared on a few manga chapters and at least twice on the anime
    • Shohei Yoshida
      • Apeared for a few chapters and on one tv epsiode
    • Sentaro Kawanishi
      • Love interest in skuld. An entire manga volume was dedicated on him. He also made other appearances.
    • Gan-chan
      • chief lead in the mini series. Made appearance in all of the 48 episodes as well as the mini-goddess manga.

discussion

Ok, let's say all from the list except Peorth, Hild (Oh My Goddess!) and Marller that you mention. Would you like to exclude some more? --Tone 12:57, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok I expanded the list, what do you think? -- Cat chi? 13:13, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Id say "Shohei Yoshida" "Koshian" "Hijiri" "Senbee" "Troubador" "Chrono, Ere & Ex" to be somewhat minor. Others had more of a role. The anime didn't cover half of what is in the manga. -- Cat chi? 13:16, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
I do want to point out that this listed characters are not even half or a quarter of whats in the manga. -- Cat chi? 13:17, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
I'd say all the characters that showed up on the movie are rather major (thats why they were in the movie). With the exeption of Morgan and Celestin from the movie they all had lead roles in one or more of the arcs. Some of the charaters work in pairs such as the parents of Keiichi and Megumi or "Toraichi Tamiya & Otaki Aoyama" pair. They can be merged among each other perhaps. Though this may complicate the natural flow since Otaki Aoyama did have a stand alone appearance. -- Cat chi? 13:25, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
How about you move that list to List of Oh My Goddess characters? --Jack Merridew 13:21, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
How about you let me discuss first. There wont be a "List of Oh My Goddess characters" but several seperate lists. I do not want to see yet an unintelligible and impossible to navigate list. -- Cat chi? 13:29, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Of course there should be a List of Oh My Goddess characters — even if a merge were not being discussed. If you want to distinguish Heaven, Hell and Nekomi then use sections. --Jack Merridew 13:34, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
It wont happen. They may be 3 lists. See how pokemon articles were merged. -- Cat chi? 13:35, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

I was looking at some of these characters the other day and was surprised to see that there is no List of Oh My Goddess characters. I believe that the minor characters would be best covered by a merge to a list. The template {{Oh My Goddess}} currently lists Keiichi Morisato, Belldandy, Urd (Oh My Goddess!) and Skuld (Oh My Goddess!) as "main characters" so it would seem reasonable to keep those as stand alone articles with brief summaries in the list. --Jack Merridew 13:07, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

I am not really good at anime/manga articles but although the characters had an episode or arch centered around them, they are still minor IMO. Maybe we should move the debate to the anime/manga wikiproject? I guess we agree on the merge, the thing to decide is only the size of it. --Tone 13:19, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Can we please at least discuss this on our own first? -- Cat chi? 13:25, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
An arc if it lasts a full year (real life year not manga year) should make it more than notable if you ask me. Shohei Yoshida had a full arc dedicated to him but, I am still counting him minor since it was a shot arc and he made no other appearance. It is unlikely if he will ever show up again. Hence minor. -- Cat chi? 13:27, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
There are main characters (the 4 mentioned) (they show up ever since first appearance), secondary characters (they show up frequently and impact the plot), and minor characters (make few/rare/one time appearances with no significant impact to the plot). -- Cat chi? 13:34, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Look, I think we agreed on a merge already but if we continue the discussion in this way, we will not get any further since you know the topic much better. I did some research on the anime/manga articles and I've seen that it is a common practice to have articles only for the main characters and the rest are minor. For example, even all the pokemon articles (500+) have recently been merged and trimmed, much to my delight. Separate articles about really minor topics make WP look like a fansite. --Tone 13:38, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

So what is it are you suggesting? -- Cat chi? 13:40, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
That we move the debate to the project and discuss it with more people. In fact, this is not the only case when I think a heavy trimming would be necessary. Oh My Goddess! is just the topic I've come around once before and have therefore decided to start the debate here. --Tone 13:43, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Man I cant have 1 month of peace and quiet. Do as you wish. -- Cat chi? 13:44, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
All but the four I mentioned above should be merged. --Jack Merridew 13:47, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
You massacred the episode articles and now are after character articles. Stunning. Why am I your target of interest? -- Cat chi? 13:50, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Come on, this has nothing to do with you, there are hundreds of anime/manga articles that need to be rewritten in the same manner. --Tone 13:53, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Yea right. Why bother with the discussion Jack Merridew will mass mergeredirectify despite whats being said discussed or voted on. Why even waste the time. Just invite a horde of meatpuppets and we can be done with it.
Tone I'd rather discuss this with you and perhaps reach a compromise and consensus. However if you decide to use the other option, thats fine too. Let a group of people who know nothing about the topic decide whats "right". However only one of the option is productive.
-- Cat chi? 14:02, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
I always look forward to a discussion. But I really think that we have presented all our arguments already. The reason I want to move the debate to the project is that there are people who are also familiar with the topic and a consensus there can also be applied further, not just to this series of the articles. --Tone 14:10, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Would it be possible to pick a different topic? Perhaps a more popular series at which more people are knowledgeable on. This series have a more select audience unlike shows such as Naruto , One Piece, or Bleach. This is a bad test case and I am quite burnt as is. -- Cat chi? 14:20, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Here. I guess the debate there will be more productive. So much for now, I'll come around again when some standpoints are made. Greetings. --Tone 14:42, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your understanding. I hope we meet again - until then I hope to sort these articles as well. -- Cat chi? 14:44, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Actually, Wikipedia is my target of interest. And don't forget, you reverted my closure of the discussion re the episodes so you rather asked for my attention.
All these episode and character articles are fanish and don't add encyclopaedic value. So we merge. --Jack Merridew 13:57, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Why would we even want to keep the major characters? They don't assert any real world notability, and if due weight is given to all of the characters (sections for major characters, sum up minor characters and groups), one list should suffice. TTN 17:57, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Point taken; I believe my comment was driven by the opening section heading and possibly with an eye towards throwing a cat a bone — sorry, for the mixed. The 'main' characters would, of course, need to be established as notable, which they do not appear to in their current state. --Jack Merridew 11:31, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

roadmap

Few examples not the full list.

Thats my basic roadmap

-- Cat chi? 13:44, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Merge suggestion

further discussion occurred at the now closed Afd: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Belldandy --Jack Merridew 13:12, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I have stubbed-out a merge-target page and opened a merge discussion there.

--Jack Merridew 12:13, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I have reverted it. The discussion was above and has concluded. I asked for time and the initiator of the discussion gave me that. Stop pestering me. I am already burnt. -- Cat chi? 13:38, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
You have no right to mass revert the merge suggestion. I will give you a bit to rethink your rash actions and restore what you have reverted. --Jack Merridew 13:48, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Your aggressive and self righteous tone is disruptive and annoying. Even the proposer of the original merge gave me time, how much time you gave me? A day or much less? Your past 250 edits are mostly dedicated to me now aren't they? -- Cat chi? 14:00, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
You have ownership issues and, it would appear, a persecution complex. --Jack Merridew 14:08, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
No you seem to feel as if you own all fiction related articles and that you are the sole authority.
You had no edits whatsoever that added any information or material to any one of these articles. All you have done so far was mass removal of useful information.
What options have you attempted (such as expanding the articles) before attempting a merge suggestion? Well?
-- Cat chi? 14:12, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
I happen to feel that the appropriate course of action with unencyclopeadic material is subtraction. See WP:USEFUL. You are entitled to argue against a merge; mass reverting as you did is utterly unacceptable. --Jack Merridew 14:20, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
That is your opinion not in line with wikipedias policies and guidelines. What is the point of me even arguing against a merge? You demonstrated that you are completely closed to a discussion before. And you have actively ignored it. Removal of unencyclopedic material goes though articles for deletion and that is only AFTER an extensive effort exhausting all other options. You aren't even attempting any of these. You are merely interested in mass removing of material you dislike and not improving the articles. -- Cat chi? 14:32, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
As an outsider, I feel that Jack has been overly personal and aggressive. White Cat, you'll find that this cluster are incapable of replying outside the paradigm of recent guidelines and selective interpretations of established ones. The JPStalk to me 09:59, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
You are hardly an outsider as I've encountered you before. And it is White Cat who is attempting to make this personal and is acting aggressively. Feel free to cite policies or guidelines that support keeping these unencyclopeadic, non-notable, unsourced fan pages as separate articles. --Jack Merridew 10:36, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Yes: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is an encyclopedia.
  • All branches of knowledge of course includes anime and manga.
  • Wikipedia is not censored against material related to fiction. Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy either.
  • A material being sourced did not prevent you from mass removing it (like the episode articles having the episode itself as source) before, it is surprising why you mention it now. -- Cat chi? 11:27, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh and this isn't a "merge suggestion" it is an imposed mass redirectification just like the previous case.
-- Cat chi? 11:27, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I have restored the merge tags on the character articles; the idea obviously has support. Interested parties should attend to the discussion here and at Talk:List of Oh My Goddess characters#Merge character articles. I believe all characters should be discussed and am open to arguments about the specific merge-target; i.e. possibly targeting multiple lists. --Jack Merridew 12:26, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Semi-outside opinion on this whole mess...

OK, first off, I'm not going to claim to be completely unbiased in this whole thing; people who follow Kim Possible articles or AN/I will recognize me as having butted heads with TTN over similar issues very recently; I mention this in an effort to show good faith here through the spirit of full disclosure.

Now, as to the always-messy issue at hand here... if I was going to make suggestions as to which OMG character articles should be kept and salvaged to meeting Wiki standards, I'm afraid it would see them pared down heavily. Based on the importance to the overall story, I'd say that, in addition to obviously keeping Keiichi, Belldandy, Urd, and Skuld's articles, a case could be made for the potential notability of Peorth, Hild, Marller, Megumi, Banpei, Sigil, and Gan-chan having separate articles. Pretty much all the other characters listed in the template, I'd have to recommend merging as follows:

I also note that there IS an entire category at MangaWiki, which appears to be in the process of having the otakalypse.com OMGWiki transferred over to it. If there's any valid information in the articles I suggested for a merge-to-list that is NOT in the MangaWiki character articles, I'd recommend adding that information to those articles, then having the links redirect to the MangaWiki character articles instead of articles in the main Wikipedia, per the transwiki-ing guidelines.

As a final note, I'm not sure what standard the OMG character articles were written to, but it would be a good idea to make certain that they are written to follow the standard format recommended by an appropriate WikiProject, such as WikiProject Anime and Manga; the WikiProject standards are designed to help in developing Good Articles, a standard that all Wikipedia articles should, ideally, meet, and that Wikipedia editors should always strive for. (And my apologies in advance to anyone who thinks I may be talking down to them; I've noticed in the past that discussions like this one often see at least some inexperienced editors who've never heard of some of these things get involved--and even if all the editors present are experienced, when emotions run high, it's possible to "get stupid" and forget about these things.)

Anyhow, I welcome comments on my suggestions, and hope that it at least helps bring a calming influence to the discussion... Rdfox 76 13:24, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

If notability can be established for specific characters and appropriate sources added; fine. I don't see mere potential notability as serving as grounds for keeping anything. And I don't see the need to merge into multiple lists; see the sectioned format I stubbed-out at List of Oh My Goddess characters. I am unfamiliar with the trans-wiki moves you mention; if anyone wants to move stuff and the licenses allow it... fine - whatever. --Jack Merridew 13:38, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Note that I was just going by the typical arrangement on comic book, manga, anime, and television series with large supporting casts such as this, breaking the list-of-characters into multiple articles to keep the overall size of the lists down and make them render faster when viewed. For example, see Minor villains in Kim Possible, Minor family members in Kim Possible, Minor allies in Kim Possible, and Minor characters in Kim Possible; the reason for splitting the Kim Possible minor-character lists into four articles is to avoid the long load-and-render times seen on excessively bloated articles (for a fine example that I'm hoping to get a chance to trim-through-splitting, see List of unused highways, which, even with a DSL connection and a moderately-fast machine, takes the better part of a minute to display on my computer). I believe the MOS recommends keeping article length to under 15kB if possible, and to seriously consider splitting when it exceeds 50kB; feel free to correct me on that if I'm wrong there.
Transwiki-ing is one of the primary recommendations in WP:FICT regarding what to do about non-notable articles, and is usually the best compromise in cases like this, as it comes the closest to satisfying both sides of the argument--the inclusionists get to have their articles kept, but the exclusionists get to keep the articles off of the main Wikipedia. Since my personal definition of a good compromise is "one where everyone gets screwed equally," I'd consider it probably the best solution in most of these cases.
I didn't mean that the character articles I saw potential for salvaging should be kept purely on the merits of potential notability, for the record; what I meant by listing them was simply that those are the ones I believe it would be possible to establish sufficient notability for, and thus the ones that people should concentrate on improving by bringing them in line with the guidelines for notability laid out in WP:FICT. I might also suggest that they get a somewhat extended period before any merge or transwiki is put into effect, compared to the others, but that's not intended to be indefinite, just until it can be determined if the editors interested in keeping them are interested enough to make a concerted effort to improve them. Editors, the ball's in your court; you need to either step up and put in the effort to improve those articles, or accept that they're going to be merged and/or transwikied. Rdfox 76 13:56, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
I looked at those lists and I see why they're broken-up — they have not been pared-down! Too much text on, well, minor characters; plus all the pictures.
Thanks for your comments on transwiki-ing (I guess the hyphen is required); it seems like a fine option. I'll read-up on it further. Thanks also for the clarification re potential notability.
And I agree that editors interested in these articles need to step-up and improve articles if they want them to survive. The OMG episodes were redirected after many pleas for time and absolutely no edits to actually improve the articles. --Jack Merridew 14:20, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh really? What are you? An idle bystander? You should also be trying to improve them as well as per WP:FICT. -- Cat chi? 14:24, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
I think Verdandi is less notable than Belldandy and should also go. Same goes for Yggdrasil. -- Cat chi? 14:55, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
All characters need to be merged unless an actual assertion of possible improvement comes about. This should all be on one list, as this is just one quick series. You may have to leave out details, but please remember this is not a fan site. If interested users wish to transwiki, that is always open to them. TTN 16:20, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
I would rather three lists are perfectly reasonable; as it allows a little more content (and yes, it is more readable). Do remember that it is still 25–27 articles down to three lists. G.A.S 18:50, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
I haven't really looked into the articles yet, but I'm willing to bet some of the characters that do have articles may not even need more than a couple of sentences in the long run. If one list is somehow too cramped, we will just cut details when necessary. Remember, this is not a fan site, so we will only need to describe the principal characters in detail, while we sum up minor characters together by affiliation or just by how minor they are compared to the overall series. TTN 19:15, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
You said even the main characters should be merged without even looking at the articles? I rest my case. -- Cat chi? 19:20, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
I looked at the ones listed on the template to see if there was real world information on them. I just haven't looked at every single minor character in-depth to see how many are just completely bloated beyond belief (i.e. if any one episode character has even a sentence). TTN 19:27, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Agreed, the information need not be in complete detail. But a few paragraphs would not hurt either. The minimum information for any character would include (a1) a synopsis the role of the character in the fictional work; (a2) a description of the character (i.e. enough to identify the character) (b) real world information (e.g. voice actors/Japanese text/translation etc); (c) the scope of the character's role (e.g. the media (types) in which the character appears. Given the amount of real world information I just gave, it would make sense, wouldn't it? G.A.S 19:53, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
The major characters and the secondary characters will likely receive a few paragraphs each, but minor characters will not require as much detail. TTN 20:18, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
There is a reason why I said minimum: That is what an unknowing reader would require to understand the character within the fiction (This obviously excludes once-off characters).
The quality of the current articles should also be considered. Even if the notability is not evident but otherwise according to the MoS, referenced, neutral, and verifiable, it should be kept seperate if potential for further improvement exists. G.A.S 20:52, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Our goal isn't to understand each and every character in full detail. The main purpose of a list without real world information is to provide context for the main article and other sub articles. Understanding the main characters is important, but minor characters will not require as much to understand (allowing them to be summed up). Even characters appearing in four or five episodes may not require more than a few sentences, though it may change depending on the character's relevance to the series. If potential for improvement exists, it's fine to leave them, but real world information must be provided for that potential to exist. TTN 20:58, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Oh_My_Goddess!/Archive_4&oldid=1142773343"