Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Archive 11

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5 ← Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 → Archive 15

Questions on Musical theatre

A user asked me to take a look at the brief coverage of anime and manga inspired musicals in Musical theatre. I don't know much about it, but I figured someone here could take a peak.--Monocrat 00:45, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

My fault. The user must have looked at my edits when I put the limited geographical scope note on the article back when. I was refering to the Gekidan Shiki WWII-based "Showa Trilogy" musicals: Ri Kohran (about the Manchurian-Japanese singer), Ikoku no Oka (Foreign Hill about a post WWII internment camp in Siberia), and Southern Cross (B and C class War Crime trials in Indonesia.) I should get around to writing these articles one day--they're hard to source, though. I didn't realize that s/he refered to "Kiki's Delivery Service" as a popular musical. It had three runs, but nothing to write home about. A lot of the musicals of the 90's had cast members from SMAP (Kiki, Saint Seiya, Hime-chan no Ribbon) or Sakurakko Club (early Sailor Moon musicals). There was the long run of Kayou Shows by the Sakura Taisen seiyu cast and the new breed from the 00's -- Prince of Tennis Musical and Rock Musical Bleach. And this is all not mentioning the Takarazuka Revue's Tezuka musicals like Berimyu and Black Jack --Kunzite 02:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Please add some information to musical theatre to round out the coverage of Japanese musicals. None of us currently active at the musicals project have the background to do it. Thanks! -- Ssilvers 04:49, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

MADLAX

Hello, everyone. I am a member of the Russian Wikiproject Anime and have recently successfully nominated my article about MADLAX for a featured article. Right after it was elected, I started with the translation of the Russian article into English, and it is complete now. Please, read the details on the corresponding talk page. This message is there solely to let you know that something is up. :) --Koveras ☭ 16:31, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi people, just a word to let you know there is some pretty amazing work going on there. This will soon go through peer review, as it is GA, or even FA material. Any insight, advice, copyedit, formatting eagerly appreciated.--SidiLemine 12:05, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Just as Sidi predicted, I have nominated the article for a peer review - please, see Wikipedia:Peer review/MADLAX. Everyone is invited. :) --Koveras ☭ 18:53, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Category:Manga covers

Category:Manga covers is apparently not used. Where are the covers put? What licensing tag is used for them? --HKMarks(T/C) 05:02, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, Image:X vol1 cover.gif uses {{book cover}}, and I suspect many of the others do too (and in some cases, there's just one article for anime and manga, so they might use a DVD cover or other such image from the anime). It might be worth putting some work in to add the manga cover tag ... only apparently it doesn't exist (The only cover in the category, for the Evangelion manga, apparently uses the comic book cover template and was added to the manga cover category manually). Confusing Manifestation 09:09, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Weird, the category says to use the {{manga cover}} template, but the template doesn't exist and it doesn't seem to have ever existed - no record in the deletion log. Confusing Manifestation 09:13, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
If the category is to be populated then perhaps {{book cover}} could be edited so that there is an optional type= parameter and if type=manga then the image is added to the Category:Manga covers instead of the default category for book covers. --Squilibob 03:09, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

"The Movie"

Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga#Article name - Per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films), I might suggest that the section be changed to (film). Thought I would bring it up here, rather than just "Be bold" : ) - jc37 22:18, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

One point: often anime-based films actually have "Blah blah: The Movie" as their titles. --Masamage 04:00, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
I think there's a guideline saying we shouldn't repeat the article name in the subtitles.--SidiLemine 09:44, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
I didn't understand the last comment by $yD, could you please clarify?
As for "Blah blah: The Movie", then that's possibly the actual title (though several films, such as Superman: The Movie, have dropped the qualifier). We shouldn't add "the movie", however, when it wasn't a part of the title.
Anyway, someone has already changed it, so I suppose the discussion is moot at this point : ) - jc37 11:36, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
We only need to disambiguate when necessary. If something is called Ah My Goddess the Movie or Naruto the Movie III then it doesn't need disambiguating. --Squilibob 11:50, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
What I meant is that in the "Marco Polo" article, we're not supposed to have a section called "Travels of Marco Polo", but "Travels". I was wondering if we could have a "Naruto: the movie" section in "Naruto". Probably, as it's the commercial name of the piece.--SidiLemine 12:57, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Stub tags

User:Angel,Isaac just added {{manga-stub}} tags to a ton of articles that don't need it. I don't have time to fix them all, but I did leave a note on his talk page. Here are his recent contributions, for cleanup purposes. Have fun. >_> --Masamage 07:49, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Vandalproof lets you roll back multiple edits. — Dark Shikari talk/contribs 14:11, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
I'll run clean-up on the whole cat with AWB. Seems there's more than what he's entered that need to be removed. --Kunzite 15:42, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Saint Tail

Hello. Could anyone of you attempt to improve the Saint Tail article? While it isn't bad, it's still labeled as a stub, which is sad, because it was a great show.--Saoshyant talk / contribs (I don't like Wikipedophiles) 11:17, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it's really a stub, so I bumped it up to Start class. --SeizureDog 00:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Referencing Manga

I've been searching Wikipedia for the best way to reference individual volumes of manga but the best I could find is the format used to reference comic books. Is this acceptable format to use? Is there a format specifically used to reference manga? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blanko4 (talk • contribs)

Not that I'm aware of, no. For all intents and purposes, a book reference format should work fine. --tjstrf Now on editor review! 05:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
That's been my experience. Citing looks kind of scary and complicated, but all it really boils down to is just saying exactly where you got something. On Wikipedia in particular, the formats vary all over the place, but the difference between a good citation and a bad one is simply whether or not people can find what you're referencing. --Masamage 07:57, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
One thing that's a tad bit of a problem is that often manga don't have page numbers. So I guess you have to be careful in your counting :/--SeizureDog 19:55, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Since we're generally getting our information directly from scans of the chapters for in-progress series, it makes more sense imo to reference by page number within the chapter. (e.g. series chapter x, page y.) --tjstrf Now on editor review! 20:33, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I used Template:Comic book reference. Seems the closest analogue.--Monocrat 17:36, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Permission

Hi, I'm new here so I asked for permission if I can find a picture of Kunio Okawara for the article since it was used for the collaboration of the week's article, so may I use the search engine to find a picture or is it not necessary to do that?? Rakuten06 21:12, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

It's most likely that any images you find with an image search are copyrighted and not released with a free license. We generally can use copyrighted photos when we can't get free ones under fair use, but Wikipedia has stricter fair use guidelines and policy (see Wikipedia:Fair use). One of the ways Wikipedia is stricter is that we can't use fair use images of living people, since the idea is that someone could take a picture of them and then release it under GFDL or Creative commons licenses.
However, this might be easier than some think. Do an image search anyways and see if you find any images taken by fans, then contact the person who took the image and ask them if they would be willing to license the image so we can use it. Wikipedia:Example requests for permission shows an example of how to do this. You might also want to try to e-mail Kunio Okawara directly to see if he'd be willing to license one of his own personal photos.
Although, this creates another problem, most of us can't speak Japanese.. and I'm not sure if Kunio Okawara speaks English. So after a request is written up, you'll likely need to find someone to translate it. You might try asking other Wikipedian editors who list themselves in Category:User ja-N, which means they are a Native speaker of Japanese. Or Category:User ja-4 (near native), etc. -- Ned Scott 08:48, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
I find a site of Kunio Okawara's image but It's in French, so I don't know how to ask for the license of this photo, The photo of Kunio Okawara Rakuten06 12:55, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
The same system goes, through the category of French speaking wikipedians. I happen to be a natural French speaker, so you can give me your text and I'll translate.--SidiLemine 13:12, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Posted it on your discussion page titled "Text", thanks for translation of the text. Rakuten06 13:29, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Manga Volume and Anime Episode Infoboxes

On the Sailor Moon Wikiproject we are using the TV series info boxes, however, this is a bit difficult to use because there are things that happen in animation that need to listed by episode sometimes. For example, a significant change or switch off in character designer, which is much more important in anime than it is American-side. Directors and Animation directors, etc will switch... It would be nice to have an anime-specific box with a forward back function that's agreed on by this project for other anime series.

On the manga side, the only info box I found was a book infobox. This is not very pleasant to use... it mentions illustrator and author, however, I'd like the field to either read creator, mangaka or have an option for those in addition to the author and illustrator. The cover art doesn't really mean anything. It's missing the forward back functions of the TV series, however, I need the ISBN, publication, etc functions of the infobox. Again, an agreed upon info box would be nice to have. Particularly for dealing with shinzoubon (the reprinted volumes kodansha and Shueisha have been doing). I still want to be able to have an image, etc... but the book infobox needs some customization, like Volume number, chapters covered, etc for it to fit well to what a manga infobox needs.

In general, I thought this would be useful to more than the SM fandom, so I'd like this project to figure it out so more people can use it evenly. It would be useful to have kicking around. --Hitsuji Kinno 08:54, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Citation of Anime

Just citing the episodes... there isn't one that works all that well. Could this project make up a citation template for anime episodes? Thanks. --Hitsuji Kinno 22:46, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

For what it's worth, check out Template:Cite episode.--Monocrat 00:40, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Can anyone give a third opinion on this?

Just recently had a long debate on Talk:Hunter × Hunter regarding naming conventions. specifically, the "Characters should be called what the series officially states their romaji names as. If that does not exist, use what they are named in the most recent or popular English translation, if it exists, isn't egregiously bad, and is the generally-used name (a google test is appropriate here). Otherwise, use a literal transliteration. " part.

Me and the other editor involved have sort of came to a standstill. Basically, we don't agree, but the other editors on the hxh talk page haven't bothered to comment.

So i'm hoping a few people here can come over and give a comment at Talk:Hunter × Hunter#A call of opinion regarding naming in HxH Thanks. --`/aksha 10:38, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Well, I was summoned here to say something about it, and here is my two cents: I'm completely indifferent to what names are used, as long as I'm familiar with both sets. According to what some of the people have said, it looks like Viz translates the names that they felt needed translation; all other names were transliterated. Ron Stoppable 04:59, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Yoshihiro Togashi

This would be within the scope of the wikiproject AMP, so it needs some kind of heading, either says not rated, or has one with a grade... there is one over at his wife's page.... --Hitsuji Kinno 02:51, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm having difficulty understanding you. Are you asking someone to add a project template to Yoshihiro Togashi? --tjstrf talk 06:43, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
...Yoshihiro Togashi is within the scope of this wikiproject. And as far as i can see, it is tagged and does have a rating (rated as start) --`/aksha 08:26, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, that was me. It wasn't when he made the complaint. --tjstrf talk 08:28, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
oh...ehh...sorry then. --`/aksha 09:36, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. --Hitsuji Kinno 02:26, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Project title capitalization

The current title capitalization is inconsistent and highly irritating to type. We should be at either Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and Manga or Wikipedia:WikiProject anime and manga, (or maybe even Wikipeda:Wikiproject anime and manga. I have no preference for either capitalization, but can we please not have Anime capitalized but manga in lower case? Thanks. --tjstrf talk 09:45, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Do you actually type out the whole thing? You know you can just do WP:MANGA or WP:ANIME right? --SeizureDog 01:14, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I do when discussing. The redirects aren't as precise because they ignore the other half of the project, and I hate the term animanga. --tjstrf talk 03:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
I think he just finds it annoying. Let's get it moved to "Anime and Manga". capitlizing one but not the other does seem very illogical --`/aksha 02:28, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
It should be pointed out that this is actually the standard naming convention for WikiProjects, because the "WikiProject" at the start is considered to be a pseudo-namespace; hence, the actual title of the project—in this case, "anime and manga"—is capitalized into sentence case as though it was the entire page title. (In other words, one might think of it as "WikiProject:Anime and manga".) Kirill Lokshin 02:34, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
I'd prefer we do away with the camelcase in WikiProjEcT as well, but that would require wider input. --tjstrf talk 03:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
This was discussed in October as well. I'll point out again that the WikiProject was originally spelt with a capital M. --Squilibob 10:25, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Then let's move it back there. Why was it moved in the first place? --tjstrf talk 09:31, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Naruto Episodes Clean-up

The articles this affects are:

I'm posting this here in order to gauge consensus before I start making massive changes and spark a massive edit war. There are currently articles for all the episodes of Naruto through 209, except 204 and 205. I recently started an AfD for episode 208 Rare artifact, The importance of the Beauties of Nature. I did this since I believed that this article was little more than plot summary, and was unlikely to become any more than that and the article was not very notable. The AfD closed with no consensus. I assume that any other deletion debates would go down the same path the last AfD did: the debate would inevitably turn towards the notability of all the Naruto episodes, or TV episodes in general, instead of discussion of the article at hand.

But I digress.

There is already work under way to include short summaries in List of Naruto episodes. This is good, and I would encourage other editors to help out with this. Short summaries like this are useful, and helps bring it in line with many other List of ... episodes articles. I think it may be a good idea to split the list into seasons to keep it more readable, but it would be easier to judge that once more summaries are written.

And now the part I expect will ruffle the most feathers:

I think that many of the articles in Category:Naruto episodes should be merged into List of Naruto episodes. I'm going to pick on episode 208, but only because that is the one I happened to nominate, and that article is similar to many other Naruto episode articles.

  1. Many articles could be summarized in a few sentences. Episode 208 could be summarized as "Kiba and Naruto are assigned to protect a expensive treasure. However, when the treasure they were protecting is destroyed, they find the real treasure was the client who hired them in the first place." That is all that is needed. The article doesn't have to go into minute details about what jutsus (or whatever your prefered translation is), or a scene-by-scene retelling of the story. This is too much detail for a general encylopedia, even if wiki is not paper.
  2. Two hundred plus articles are hard to maintain. I just added a nav box to episode 208 to bring it more in line with other episode articles. Episode 144's content is "The new three-man group Two people and a dog! (Japanese: 新生三人一組　二人と一匹！, - Shin'sei surīman seru futari to ippiki) is episode 144 of the anime series Naruto." and few templates. Yes, I know episode 144 is filler. That's not the point. The point is, it would be much easier to maintain, for example, seperate seasons of Naruto with short plot summaries instead of 200+ articles.
  3. This level of detail makes Wikipedia look silly. Episode 208's plot summary runs 601 words. The plot summary in the article on Shakespeares's Hamlet article runs 585 words. Something is out of whack here.
  4. Quite a few of the articles are plain lousy. I'm not an English teacher, but I know bad writing when I see it. Actually read over episode 208. That is not my idea of good writing.

If nothing else, I would like to see some of the individual articles in Category:Naruto episodes to be improved. If that is the only thing that comes out of this longish spiel, I'll be happy with that.

Please provide comments on this suggestion. I look forward to your input.

Believe it! --Phirazo 06:04, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I brought up an idea that would serve the same purpose as your second point, and what comments were given were all in favor of the idea. I'm currently in the process of sifting through all of the episode summaries and condensing them into broader articles, which I hope to have done by the end of the weekend. Your third point seems as though it will carry over into the new articles in some areas, but that problem should be solved fairly easily. ~SnapperTo 06:40, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
We don't want the summaries on the list of Naruto episodes. The article is already too long, and I believe we have a sort of half-consensus to stop. The existing summaries haven't been removed because we'd prefer to move them to a more appropriate place than to delete them. Anyway, here are the higher-level plot articles:
Those are great overviews of the important parts of the series, but there are two problems. Firstly, as it is, it can be difficult to work your way back from those articles to the exact point in the source material. Attempt to find out what episode some non-prominent event occurs in using Wikipedia, but without referring to the individual episode articles. It can be difficult.
The second problem is the filler is not covered. Now, I've yet to find anyone who actually cares about the filler, but it should be important to include it, for the sake of completeness. Summaries of the filler arcs is particularly important, as coming this Spring, Part II will begin animation and many people will come here looking to see what they missed (rather than suffering through the filler themselves). The immediate solution is obvious, I suppose. Create an article at Naruto filler arcs, and make it look something like this: User:Gunslinger47/Sandbox. The article in my sandbox isn't complete, but it should give you some idea of what I'm thinking, dattebayo. –Gunslinger47 06:43, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Considering that not much really happens in any given episode of Naruto, I agree with the idea that perhaps grouping them into seasons to summarize would be better. --SeizureDog 10:02, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Grouping them by season doesn't work very well. Grouping by arc might be more efficent, as User:Someguy0830 is suggesting. Especially for the filler arcs, as they are completely autonomous. –Gunslinger47 20:00, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
My main reason I had splitting the article is to make it easier to access what you want from the sea of other stuff. I think an arc summary is a good idea as well. There is a pretty good start already, see (List of Naruto story arcs). A filler arc article would be good, especially if you can dig up some critiques of the quality of the arc. You might want to name it "Anime only Naruto arcs" or similiar - "filler" implies the episodes are low quality. --Phirazo 20:18, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Filler has somewhat of a derogatory slant to it, but you know what Shakespeare says. He refered to roses smelling sweet, but his words applies equally well to "anime only arcs" and their vile carrion stench. :D –Gunslinger47 00:06, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Serial Experiments Lain FA

I've been foolhardy enough to nominate Lain for FAC. I'm not expecting it to pass, but to get impulse on how to make it better. Please leave comments and suggestions here or on the talk page.

  • Shouldn't you take the article to peer review first if you are sure it won't pass FAC? --Mika1h 22:11, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Peer reviews are hit-or-miss compared to FAC. Peer reviews sometimes don't even get any replies at all. --tjstrf talk 00:53, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
It's been peer-reviewed for a good while recently, and has gone through GAC after it. There's been a few very good comments recently in the FAC, some (like the fact that there's no ref from scenario experiments lain or visual experiments lain, two books I do not have) will probably fail the FAC. If I get to all the others, I'll get a PR to make sure where it stands. --SidiLemine 13:20, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Any ideas on where to find visual novel reviews?

Specifically, I'm looking for something I can use for Shuffle!, but I don't have the faintest idea on where to look for them. Finding anime reviews is hard enough, but visual novels are expensive, low selling, and (of course) entirely a Japanese market. I can find a few reviews for the Shuffle! anime, but I want/need to focus on the game first. Any ideas?--SeizureDog 08:06, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Stablepedia

Beginning cross-post.

See Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team#Stablepedia. If you wish to comment, please comment there. ★MESSEDROCKER★ 23:29, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

End cross-post. Please do not comment more in this section.

What should the standard be for translating non-standard characters?

I give the following examples:
いな☆こい! ～お稲荷さまとモテモテのたたり～

Should the title be translated with star, as "Ina☆Koi!", or by reading the star as a space, as "Ina Koi!"?

Should the long tildes remain?, making the second part "～Oinari-sama to Mote Mote no Tatari～", be translated as normal tildes?, making it "~Oinari-sama to Mote Mote no Tatari~", or not be translated at all?, leaving just "Oinari-sama to Mote Mote no Tatari"? Alternate suggestions may include treating long tiles as needing colons, such as "Ina Koi!: Oinari-sama to Mote Mote no Tatari" or replacing the tildes with some other character such as a dash.

Next example:
ノストラダムスに聞いてみろ♪

Should it be translated "Nostradamus ni Kiite Miro♪" (as I have it now), or should the note be left out, making it just "Nostradamus ni Kiite Miro"?

My personal opinion

I'm all for keeping titles as official as they can be as romanizations. However, the stars (☆ or ★) do tend to have a too cluttered of a feel to warrent translating, as much as I hate to admit it. The tildes I'm not so sure about, I suppose I go with making them into normal tildes for ease of use, but the colon option seems logical as well. And finally, I'm completely smittened with the little music note. Unlike the stars, they usually end up at the end of titles, where they don't look so cluttered, so they really don't hurt the translation in any way by being including (assuming people don't forget to make easier redirects of cource) and they feel that much more official. I assume there are also a few titles that use hearts in the same way, I don't know of an example, but I support them as well.

I figured I might as well bring this up for discussion as I'm starting to run into more and more of these funky titles. And of course, all of this only applies to titles that have no official English translation. Also, feel free to bring up any other abnormal titles you happen to know about. As a final note, I'd like to point out these characters aren't just funny flurishes, but are usually part of the actual official Japanese titles that our friends over in ja.wikipedia use in their article namespace.--SeizureDog 09:52, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Your thoughts?
  • For tildes, convert to single-space tildes and it would be okay. I don't think stars and music notes should be took as the page title, even it should be mentioned, at the start of the article, the full name with all these. This is because other editors cannot type in these symbols conveniently and this would easily cause a large number of double directs.So it should be Ina Koi!, but start with " Ina☆Koi! is ...", or Nostradamus ni Kiite Miro, but start the article with " Nostradamus ni Kiite Miro♪ is..."

Just my 0.02.--Samuel Curtis-- TALK 10:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't like that thought at all. The first thing I think when I see a name space that doesn't match up with the bolded title is that "somebody must have moved the page and didn't update everything", after which I'll try to get the two to match up. I think making them different would be too confusing. And double redirects shouldn't be much of a problem as long as it's not moved around, which shouldn't happen if we agree on which format to use. --SeizureDog 10:23, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
  • I think that in general we should avoid such characters in article titles, because they do not work in all browsers, and because they may break links (e.g. when copy/pasted into article text). We should instead use the ASCII equivalent, if any (e.g. Ina*Koi!) or a space, and explain in the article text that the name includes a symbol. (Radiant) 12:51, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
What is the ASCII equivalent for a musical note and a heart...? This would be seen in manga/anime titles often, as I foreseen... --Samuel Curtis-- TALK 14:20, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Of course! I just thought of a good example of the heart usage. We ♥ Katamari anyone? The use of a heart in the title space seems minorly standard, as I ♥ Huckabees also uses one. And these are English titles mind you.--SeizureDog 23:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-na-Katamari Damacy!...sorry, can't stop myself. Anyways, nobody seems to mind the title for Lucky☆Star, so I think it's okay. _dk 00:15, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
In my searching to find an image of the English version of Lucky ☆ Star, I found out there are actually two series named that -_-. The real series that got licensed is a yaoi, [1] and does use the star in the middle even in the English version. --SeizureDog 02:08, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure about this matter. Personally, I prefer using normal letters and things you can say out loud, but I don't feel strongly about it. I believe I ♥ Huckabees stirred up a huge debate on the matter, maybe there is something in the talk page logs that might help us here. -- Ned Scott 03:08, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
For discussions over the heart symbol, I found the following articles to be useful: Talk:We ♥ Katamari Talk:I ♥ Huckabees Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(trademarks)#Use_of_decorative_analphabetic_characters_in_article_titles,_text WP:MOSTM#General rules --Samuel Curtis-- TALK 04:30, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
From:WP:MOSTM#General rules
Avoid using special characters that are not pronounced, are included purely for decoration, or simply substitute for English words (e.g. ♥ used for "love"). In the article about a trademark, it is acceptable to use decorative characters the first time the trademark appears, but thereafter, an alternative that follows the standard rules of punctuation should be used
So I'm confused, does that mean we should use them in the namespace or not? It's annoying that none of the discussions of this problem really seem to be resolved.--SeizureDog 05:03, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Another thing to note. ♪ is part of Windows Glyph List 4, but ☆ and ★ aren't. --SeizureDog 05:11, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Well, the namespace really isn't for the "official" way to spell something, just the more common and / or simpler way (i.e. Bill Clinton instead of William Jefferson Clinton). Since there could be technical limitations, I'd say we should limit what we can (the stars and music symbols don't seem vital) for the title itself, but then follow the MOS for the content. -- Ned Scott 06:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Well, generally, yes, but in our project we do need to strive to keep our still un-licensed anime/manga/games' titles as close to the Japanese versions as possible. For example, we aren't suppose to refer to un-licensed anime/manga/games by popular un-official translations that they may have, simplier and more popular they may be. --SeizureDog 08:39, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Eh, it doesn't really matter, though. I mean, who cares? A star in the title or not, doesn't really matter. If one will work on more computers than the other, and both are acceptable, and the full title can be seen in the article, then... I mean, where is the issue here? -- Ned Scott 08:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Consistancy. Plus, I want to know what everyone thinks first before I go off, translate a bunch of these titles one way, then learn that everyone wants it the other way and have to go back and redo them. So I don't so much mind either way.--SeizureDog 08:51, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
I'd be strongly in favour of including such symbols, to make article titles as correct as possible. —Nightstallion (?) 19:50, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
New policy over these. See WP:NC#Special_characters. --Samuel Curtis-- TALK 11:08, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Drop the Anime and Manga Collaboration of the Week

If anyone's bothered to notice, Kunio Okawara has been the Collaboration of the "Week" for a month and a half now. I think this is a clear signal that nobody really cares about the collabortations :/ I propose dropping the system altogether. Or at the very least, push it back to be "Collaboration of the Month".--SeizureDog 23:39, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

It might be good to put this system on a shelf for a while. Maybe a different method could be used, like, "Collaboration requests", where people could post about multiple collaboration efforts they wish to push, and get x number of support to list it, or whatever. I do find it interesting on what efforts are being done, but it's hard to make something like a normal collaboration of the week when it might not be something one is interested in editing. -- Ned Scott 05:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
I like your idea. I think a large part of the problem of the current system is our members' specific knowledge to only which series they've seen. What we need to do is figure out how to get people that have seen the same series to work together more effectively. This is especially needed in articles where the editors may have seen the anime, but not have read the manga, so they can't compare the two and stuff like that. I also think it would be a good idea for members to post lists of which anime/manga they've seen so that we can tell on what articles we can collaberate effectively. List of anime I've seen--SeizureDog 06:28, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
ooo, I like that ANN seen list idea :D -- Ned Scott 06:58, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
I agree that the COTW should become inactive. Another thing that we have that isn't being used much is the to do list. --Squilibob 10:27, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree, there is no point keeping around a collaboration that no one uses. The series which have lots of viewers/readers are pretty much constantly active anyway. --tjstrf talk 20:26, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Yup, it's dead. I wonder how/why the other projects manage to keep it alive? Is it a core of hard(core) editors that always accept the subject wether they like it or not, or a better choice of subjects? If we should get back to it, we might want to focus more on finding sources, whitch is the main problem this project has.--SidiLemine 09:52, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
On that note, I recently found out that The Comics Journal does reviews of manga sometimes. Reviews availible online are for Strawberry Marshmallow, Emma, Welcome to the N.H.K., an anthology containing Norakuro, Negima!, and Dr. Slump, and they've reviewed even more in print. There's also the article "A Comics Reader's Guide to Manga Scanlations". Since The Comics Journal is unique for treating comics as an artform, it looks to be one of our best bets for good published opinions. As far as manga goes at least. If anyone can happen to snag some copies that would be great. --SeizureDog 15:46, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Infobox animanga/drama issue with oneshots

I refer to Template talk:Infobox animanga/Drama#"Original Run" and One-shot (tanpatsu) drama.

The main issue here is, Detective Conan/Case Closed's drama(The TV station calls it a dorama and nothing else) has just one episode, but technical problems(?) in infobox animanga/drama prevented this to be shown properly (it needs an open and a end date). How should I do for that? --Samuel Curtis-- TALK 07:25, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

SeizureDog, I saw your edit-- but do you think October 2-October 2 is a bit weird-looking...? --Samuel Curtis-- TALK 08:33, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Better than the alternative.--SeizureDog 08:34, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Well, maybe, but my point is whether the template can be de"bug"-ed.--Samuel Curtis-- TALK 08:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

My solution is to make the last run field optional, as I have done in these two edits. [2] _dk 08:41, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

It probably doesn't need its own box in tbe first place. It should go in the "others" section with the movies and OVAs.--SeizureDog 08:46, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Anime_and_manga/Archive_11&oldid=1136054879"