Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Archive 76

Archive 70

←

Archive 74

Archive 75

Archive 76

About Sankaku Complex

I recently viewed the article of Reincarnated as a Sword. I saw that there was a controversy under it, and wondered "What controversy?" and then saw that it had a reference to the website, Sankaku Complex, and I removed it stating that "Sankaku Complex isn't a reliable source". Sankaku Complex is a site that reports on anime, mostly hentai, and they're also known for being critical of translators who translate the term "lolicon" to "pedophile". Now I see that Sankaku Complex isn't mentioned at all on the Online reliable sources page. Do we add them to the page? and where exactly? SimonLagann (talk) 21:30, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I don't know why you brought up the translation thing (there's a lot nuance there), but no way is Sankaku Complex a reliable source. They're basically a tabloid news site—like The Daily Mail but for anime. (FYI, the official place to ask about RS is in the talk page for the page you linked, I think.) Sandtalon (talk) 21:39, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

I would like to pitch my support for adding this to the unreliable source list. Not only are their contributors completely anonymous and unverifiable with no citations from other reliable sources, but the website has also promoted false claims such as the anime industry is rife with unfaithful translations or translations meant to push an agenda, which have been happening for years and the corrupt Western anime industry has continued to be unfaithful to the source material [1]. They also rely too heavily on statements from random Twitter and Reddit users [2][3] and random incidents that were likely simple mistakes [4]. Link20XX (talk) 00:27, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

The controversy section was readded using this as source https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/answerman/2019-08-09/.149914. I removed it again though sine I quite confident that since the source doesn’t mention Reincarnated as a Sword at all it can’t be used to support a controversy section for the article in question. If I’m wrong please feel free to add again but I would recommend keeping an eye on the article to see if someone tries to put the section back in.--65.92.162.81 (talk) 06:01, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Merge discussion for The Stranger by the Shore

I have opened up a merge discussion for The Stranger by the Shore and L'étranger series at Talk:L'étranger series#Merger proposal. Your input is appreciated. lullabying (talk) 01:35, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Help with Japanese translation

I've searching for information for the upcoming anime Revenger (TV series) but the only interview I found is in Japanese here. Sadly, even with a translation I can't understand what are the director and writer saying so if somebody is experienced with Japanese, I would appreciate help expanding the production section. Happy holidays

Tintor2 (talk) 18:53, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@Tintor2, I'll break down the creator comments.

Gen Urobuchi's statement is full of baseball metaphors:

今回の『REVENGER』は策略や小細工を一切抜きに、久々にド真ん中狙いの剛速球ストレートを投げられた素晴らしい現場でした。

Urobuchi describes Revenger as a "wonderful playing field" (素晴らしい現場), as if comparing to a baseball field, where he was able to throw straight fastballs (剛速球ストレート) for the first time in a while instead of relying on clever strategies (策略) or cheap tricks (小細工).

世情も市場の動向もお構いなしに、コレが面白いはず！と信じた一念だけで投じたボールであります。

He likens the writing process to throwing a ball with one singular belief in mind (一念だけで投じたボール), "This should be interesting!" (コレが面白いはず！) without worrying about world events and anime market trends (世情も市場の動向もお構いなし).

おかげでタイトルも何のひねりもなし。

With that in mind, the title of the work also doesn't contain any hidden meanings (何のひねりもなし).

でもそういう作品こそ、本当に面白いものを待ち望んでいる方々にはきっと突き刺さるものだと思っています。

He believes Revenger will "pierce through" (突き刺さる), or make an impact, on those who are waiting for a "truly interesting" (本当に面白い) work.

視聴者の皆様のミットにバシッと音を立てて届くことを願っています！

He hopes the work will reach viewers like a baseball that hits the catcher's glove perfectly with a satisfying sound.

Masaya Fujimori's statement follows up on Urobuchi's:

何しろシナリオが濃密で面白く、コンテを切るのが楽しくてたまりません。

"As you can see [from Urobuchi's comments], the script is very rich and intriguing (濃密で面白く)," so Fujimori finds working on the storyboards to be unbelievably fun (楽しくてたまりません).

自身の映像体験の原点―今と比べると規制のよほど緩かった昭和の時代劇や刑事物、あるいはテレビ放送されていたニューシネマやマカロニウエスタン等にみなぎっていた何が起こるかわからない油断のならなさを現在的にアップデートしてフィルムに定着させることが、今回の目標でした。

Speaking from Fujimori's own experience with media from his early days (自身の映像体験の原点), he is trying to recreate the experience of watching period dramas and criminal dramas that aired during the Showa era and update the experience for the present time. Because of looser regulations, New Cinema and macaroni western programs that aired on television back then were full of surprises, and audiences didn't know what would happen next.

作画や仕上げ、背景、撮影もしっかり作品を支えてくれ（時代劇で大変なのに本当に頭が下がります）、クールで抑制の効いた音響演出でより大人っぽくなったフィルムはなかなかの見応えだと思っています。

Revenger is well-supported by animation (作画), finishing (仕上げ), background art (背景), and photography (撮影). "Doing a period drama is very difficult, so I have to bow my head at the work done." (Basically, he respects the work done by all the departments in making the period drama visuals a reality.) The cool and restrained sound production (クールで抑制の効いた音響演出) makes the film more mature. "I think it's quite a sight to behold."

利便事シークエンスの容赦ないテンポ感の気持ち良さ、根底にある無常感、そして利便事屋たちがふと見せる優しさをぜひ堪能してください。

(Machine translation won't do this well because it can't understand that 利便事 = ribenji, or revenge, and 利便事屋 = Ribenjiya, the store that acts as a front for the Revenger organization.) Fujimori hopes audiences will enjoy how pleasant the merciless tempo of the revenge sequences feel, the underlying sense of how fleeting a life is, and also the kindness showed by members of the Ribenjiya group.

Maaya Sakamoto, who sings the ending theme song, gives her own perspectives:

この物語に登場する人々は皆、不器用ながらも懸命に生きています。

The characters in this story have awkward personalities, but they live their lives to the fullest.

でも業を背負って生きるということは、ずっと過去にとらわれているということでもあるのかもしれません。

However, living while carrying karma on their backs means that they are forever stuck with the burden of their pasts.

彼らの心を包み込み、浄化するような曲にしたいというイメージで、私の最も尊敬する作詞家である岩里祐穂さんに歌詞を書いていただきました。

Sakamoto asked Yūho Iwasato (岩里祐穂), the lyricist she respects the most, to write the lyrics with the image of wanting to create a song that would envelop and purify the hearts of the characters.

止まったままの時間を動かす、優しくも力強い楽曲になったと思います。

Time has stopped for these characters, and it's a gentle yet powerful song that's able to move it once more.

この曲に合わせて、とても穏やかで優しい印象のエンディング映像を作っていただけたことをとてもうれしく思っています。

Sakamoto is happy that animators created an ending sequence that is calm and gentle to match the song.

—Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 03:31, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the help.Tintor2 (talk) 18:58, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Another edit war in the Witch of Mercury.

This time, it is a user with a clear conflict of interest who, due to his openly right-wing views, is trying to remove or protest the indication of criticism of capitalism in the show, as it causes him to protest as an attempt to "claim communist propaganda in the show."] The user has already been warned multiple times for an edit war in other articles, mostly political and cultural, so I don't think this will end quickly. Previously, he just tacitly reverted his edits, ignoring clarifications from me, now he re-reverted his edits, citing the formal need to support statements with footnotes, ignoring that the mentioned is already contained in interviews with the creators and can even be seen directly in the show itself. Although judging by his answers, I generally doubt that he watched it (he also tries to deny such intentions by saying that Bamco is a large corporation, which is generally quite ironic for anyone who lives in the same world as Disney). I just don’t know what to do with this article anymore, this is the fourth edit war in the last month or two. Maybe even protect her until people's enthusiasm subsides? Solaire the knight (talk) 14:22, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

@Solaire the knight: I moved your message here as its likely to garner more replies. My suggestion is WP:ANI if you think this particular user is being WP:DISRUPTIVE. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:24, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm just tired and want the user to be banned. He is clearly trying to get this information removed due to a politically motivated conflict of interest and is simply using any formalities to continue the edit war, ignoring any clarification. The number of stubborn edit wars around this article has already squeezed all my strength out of me. Solaire the knight (talk) 17:42, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

I mean, when you feel up for it you should address the issue where something can be done about it. That is my advice here, especially if you have already exhausted all your other options. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:45, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

It just doesn't help when the opponent is too stubborn in defending their edits in any way and too inexperienced or bigoted (or both) to somehow understand the complaints about it from the outside. I've been on Wikipedia since 2008 and I always try to reach out to opponents, but I just don't know what to do with such people. They simply ignore attempts to resolve the dispute peacefully. Solaire the knight (talk) 17:49, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm trying to solve this through a discussion, but it looks like the user is just a total newbie and doesn't understand how the wikipedia rules work at all. I already see references to tv trops as an authoritative source or an attempt to justify the absence of something in the show based on the author of the Japanese Wikipedia translation. The user also continues, either deliberately or incredibly sincerely, to deny that criticism of the excessive power of corporations is a criticism of capitalism. This is just an absolute mixture of conflict of interest and not understanding the mechanisms of Wikipedia. Solaire the knight (talk) 14:11, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Chivalry of a Failed Knight

There is an ongoing discussion regarding Nagi Arisuin's gender at the Chivalry of a Failed Knight talk page. It can be found at Talk:Chivalry of a Failed Knight#Nagi/Alice's gender. Input from project members would be appreciated. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 09:16, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

• There is currently a dispute resolution opened for the topic as well. lullabying (talk) 22:55, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
• There is currently a RFC for this situation at Talk:Chivalry of a Failed Knight#RFC on Gender of Character Nagi. lullabying (talk) 05:02, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Any possible sources of Kensho Ono on how he feels about Giorno and how he prepares and portraying him?

Hello! Well, I'll be going to sleep after putting out this message, but I wanted to ask if there are any Japanese articles on Kensho Ono about anything related to Giorno, since he voiced the character. I never knew any ounce of the Japanese language making it impossible for me to search for them, not to mention I don't know any notable Japanese websites, so I want to ask if you know such articles existing since I'm still writing Giorno's draft. Lovelyquirks1 (talk) 14:37, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

The trick is to use three keywords when you search: Japanese name of the VA, Japanese word for interview (インタビュー), and the Japanese name of the series. VA name and series name can be easily found in their respective articles. In this case, I entered "小野賢章 インタビュー ジョジョの奇妙な冒険" on Google, and found a couple of interviews, such as this one from Oricon. Harushiga (talk) 14:58, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

If you have an official English-language version of the manga, it might, just might have supplemental materials including interviews with VA's and stuff like that. I know the Evangelion manga has stuff about Asuka's Japanese VA in it. Erinius (talk) 17:58, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

okay! Thank you all for your advice! Lovelyquirks1 (talk) 04:58, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

I always find stuff in Natalie Tintor2 (talk) 14:40, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

How do you know that an article is ready to be nominated into WP:GA and/or WP:FA?

Hello everyone! I plan for Jotaro Kujo and the Stardust Crusaders pages to reach into WP:GA articles and in the future, it ever I reach enough WP:GA nominations, I want for Phantom Blood to become WP:FA. Other than adding more in-depth sources and explanation regarding in creation ans development and reception, how do you know that something is ready to be WP:GA and/or WP:FA? Lovelyquirks1 (talk) 02:59, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

GA and FA have their own set of criteria (WP:GACR, WP:FACR) and if you feel like the article meets those respective requirements, then it's probably ready for nomination. If you want to ask for feedback before nominating, request a peer review. You can also request for the article to be copy edited at WP:GOCE. Harushiga (talk) 03:11, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

A GA review can feel relatively low-stakes (compared to FA), and nominating one article for it will hopefully give you insight in what the requirements are. At the very least, every paragraph should be cited (optionally outside of plot synopsis), your articles don't follow this just quite yet. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:02, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

This shouod be split into 2 wiki projects

I think this should be split into wikiproject anime and wikiproject manga 71.169.160.200 (talk) 10:10, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

WikiProjects exist as a way for editors to more easily collaborate and discuss things - so although anime and manga are two distinct topics, there's enough overlap between the two (and not an overwhelmingly unworkable amount of activity on the project discussion page) that it makes sense to keep them together.--Alexandra^IDV 13:19, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Help with German magazine Koneko

Some time ago, I got help with accessing a review of the manga Crossplay Love from the German magazine Animania. I've recently been made aware of the existence of another German manga/anime magazine, Koneko, which I think could also contain coverage of that same series due to it having gotten a German release (under the title Anziehend anders). I have already reached out to the publisher to ask if they've covered the manga, but haven't received any response. If it exists, I would very much like to use it in that article.

Is anyone here able to access to this magazine - possibly through your library - and able to check if there exists any relevant coverage? The manga premiered in Germany in April 2022, so you would likely only have to look at issues around #109 (Mar/Apr 2022) for this.

Thank you, Alexandra^IDV 13:37, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

• @Doc Taxon: Pinging you since you were the one who helped me with Animania last year (thank you again!), just in case you happen to have access to Koneko as well.--Alexandra^IDV 13:47, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

FYI Koneko is mentioned at List of manga magazines published outside of Japan. I think it's the same magazine. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:42, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Help with Yaoi hole

I am trying to write an article about yaoi hole, a sexual expression in yaoi manga and novels, but I am stuck, I cannot improve it any further myself.

If any editors who are knowledgeable in the area of anime and manga and are willing to add, proofread, and correct my article, I would appreciate your help with a Draft:Yaoi_hole 狄の用務員 (talk) 11:15, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

I can't give you any major help but I could do some proofreading stuff and minor improvements. Also, your current article's sourcing shows notability, so you should be able to move it to main article space. Erinius (talk) 09:52, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

I deeply appreciate your cooperation. The structure of the article appears to have changed significantly, and although my English skills do not allow me to judge precisely, I believe the value of the article has improved greatly. As I noted on the talk page, there is a small question about the use of shiramine's source, and I will attempt to resubmit the article once this question has been resolved. Thank you for your support. 狄の用務員 (talk) 04:53, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

I am very sorry that the proofreading you did for me was not fully collected. I hope that as society's understanding of yaoi hole grows, a fuller description will be restored. Thank you so much. 狄の用務員 (talk) 08:44, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone's help, the draft has been successfully moved to the main page. I would like to conclude the request now. I sincerely appreciate your cooperation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 狄の用務員 (talk • contribs) 08:34, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

List of A Certain Magical Index characters split discussion

There is an ongoing discussion on Talk:List of A Certain Magical Index characters (scroll down to the bottom of the page) about whether Shirai Kuroko should be a standalone article. Despite being started over a year ago, it has attracted very little attention. Perhaps some of those who frequent this page would be willing to head over there and give their input. Partofthemachine (talk) 03:34, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Storyboard Artist/Animation Director/Art Director Discussion

The eastern pipeline is very crazy when it comes to how a show should work. Apparently I learned that storyboard artist have more power than directors in the East. Some anime love crediting so much animation directors which is insane and there are art directors at Toei Animation, thus different styles depending on episodes. I have discussed this issue with some other users before and I do like to hear thoughts from others. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 01:11, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Since Animation Director and Art Director has less important rules than Storyboard Artist (their job is still important) in eastern Animation (or Anime) and since we have to consider the width of the episode tables and we also have the new Vector 2022 Skin to deal with (which has lesser width for the whole page) plus Mobile platforms... In my opinion if we are going to add casts beside from Episode director and writer we have to consider which one is more important and that rule is Storyboard. for example by comparing

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Urusei_Yatsura_(2022_TV_series)&oldid=1136956570

and

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Urusei_Yatsura_(2022_TV_series)&oldid=1136967131

It's obvious that the latter one looks better, less cramped and also less confusing and I'm still using the 2021 vector, I don't even want to think what the first one looks like for a mobile user. So long story short we should have episode director and writer and if we are trying to add extra that should be Storyboard Artist. More than that as much as it's important will just make the table look messy, cramped and confusing, adding many columns to tables specially for episode tables is not a good idea even if those casts are important, the only solution is to prioritize their rules. Also we have the matter of the numbers of each of them, Episode director, writer and storyboard most of the time each have one person, two at most. but when it comes to Animation Director most of the time it's three or more which just adds another reason as to why Storyboard Artist should be chosen for episode table instead of Animation Director. now if we are going to add Art director to all of these I don't even think the title of the episode will be visible by that time. So the way I see it's a matter of which ones we should prioritize to be in a episode table. since 3 columns consisting Episode director, writer and let's say Storyboard is already a lot then I don't see this to be a wise choice to add another column for Animation Director which it self has a lot of personal in it.

Another example would be this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tomo-chan_Is_a_Girl!&oldid=1136602795

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tomo-chan_Is_a_Girl!&oldid=1136890820

again the latter one looks better in my opinion.

The only solution I can think of for this matter and let's just say that we should and have to add every single important cast for episodes (which is wrong) is to add a whole new table just for other cast that couldn't be in episode table. Might look a little weird so sticking to the current formula we already have for 99% of the Animes is a better choice and just choose the Most important rule after Episode director and writer, which is Storyboard Artist. This will also build consistency between anime pages. Again we are talking about eastern Animation (or Anime), all of this could have been wrong if we were talking about the western animation.

Finale word, I'm not against adding more Information but sometimes we have limitation in what we can add and in that time we just have to prioritize which one is a better option and in eastern Animation (or Anime), Storyboard Artist has a more important rule than Animation Director/Art Director. Parham.es (talk) 14:08, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

I get that animation directors my not have much in value, but they could get front-credited in the episodes, like for UY 2022 for an example. The problem is that a a half-hour episode can get away from crediting four animation directors to 13 animation directors. Sure there is chief animation director which just lists two or three people usually, but another user said to me that they could credit a lot of people at times, plus a chief animation director is credited in every episode for UY 2022, but with co-Directors except for episode 2. Pretty ridiculous right? You use 2022 vector but I use 2010 vector. Besides how the website is formatted will the articles change much? Maybe per what you said. Animation directors can still get inserted with shows like SpongeBob and 1981 UY, because those usually have one animation director per episode, but most modern anime love to credit a lot of them. Onimai is an exception but the AD table is removed. Plan to readd when the anime ends because usually an episode has one animation director, episode 4 has three animation directors but it’s not much if anything really. For UY 2022, I only have the ADs temporarily removed until further notice. I just want to the table to look like the 1981 anime. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 15:15, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Well I am using 2010 Vector too (I mistakenly said 2021) and that is the point, If it looks cramped and chaotic for me then god bless other users and none registered users but as I said 3 times it's not just a matter of width and space, we are talking about eastern animation here. You want to add it to SpongeBob? go right ahead, it's not an Anime and surly not within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga. It's a Western Animation with different principles and whole other stuff but let's just say we have to add Animation Director, the best way to implement it is to use Footnote or better say Template:Efn. It is the best solution for things like this in my opinion, we want to add things but can't for whatever reasons. An example is this:

look at the titles of Classroom of the Elite Season 1, this was what it was in the past:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Classroom_of_the_Elite_(season_1)&oldid=1094250882

and now it looks like this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Classroom_of_the_Elite_(season_1)&oldid=1110139918

We had to use the Quotes but using them would make the title section of the table look chaotic so by implementing Template:Efn problem was solved. This can also be done for Animation Director and other stuff. this way the structure of the table won't even change.

Adding more Info is a good thing but how to add it and how to do it is even more important. As much as I hate the new skin and no offense to mobile useres but small screen is the worst, but in the end we as the editors do have the responsibility to consider everyone, whether it's a user with 2 inches phone or a user with 40 inches wide monitor, what we add is for EVERY single one of them. you want to add the whole crew? go right ahead, As a matter of fact why not? but episode table is not the place for that and as I said Template:Efn is the best solution. It's on the table without being on the table. this is one of the most Important purposes of it anyway so why not take advantage of it.

And for the last time we are not just talking about space and width here as much as it's important, it's also a matter of the difference between Eastern production pipeline and Western production pipeline, and As I said the best way is first to use Template:Efn which always solves many problems or add a new table which is a little weird to be honest. Using Footnote or Template:Efn is my suggestion. Parham.es (talk) 17:26, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

I don't really know what's going on and I dont feel like rereading the conversation, but I think it's just circumstantial depending on the credits themselves. For REC, I added the animation directors under the notion that I could just list Yoshida's writing credit and Nakamura's storyboard credit (which he did across the whole series by himself) in the prose. And since each episode only had 1-3 animation directors, it didn't crowd the space with too much information or make the table look bad. In the case of RWBY: Ice Queendom, although Ubukata wrote all of the episodes himself, one of the episodes had up to 10 animation directors, so I thought it wouldn't be worth doing so for the sake of readability. Other older cases like Mahoromatic I used directors, writers, and storyboard artists since the writer was never the same, even though the series had minimal animation directors (1 or 2 per episode max). So, I guess a sort of "hierarchy" I used when thinking about what roles to encompass in the tables without it becoming too inaccessible would be: director <- writer <- storyboard artist <- (chief) animation director. 'Animation directors' according to the eastern pipeline are, of course, different from that of the western pipeline; and their importance isn't felt in the processing and directing like the three other roles, but they are very important as well. But again, it's not possible to win it all.

I've often wanted to include outsourcing studios in the tables too, but there's an issue of overcrowding the tables regardless, so I've also decided to just include that in the prose (which you'll see on Mahoromatic). Sarcataclysmal (talk) 03:04, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

By the way, an "art director" (bijutsu kantoku) is a main production role and the person responsible for managing/directing the backgrounds to the entire work, which isn't relevant to this discussion, in case anyone was confused or something. Sarcataclysmal (talk) 03:11, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

I only added it in this discussion because different art directors are credited in Toei Animation productions. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 17:06, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're referring to. I don't know of any works with different art directors across different episodes other than anthology-type works like Phoenix 2004, or if the art director changes part-way through the season/changes depending on the seasons. Sarcataclysmal (talk) 07:48, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Want to know? See List of Delicious Party Pretty Cure episodes. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 16:49, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Are you sure that's meant to be interpreted as "art director"? That just says "art", and Iida is credited as the series' "art chief" (チーフ美術). Sarcataclysmal (talk) 10:28, 5 February 2023 (UTC)

I basically said the same thing and Just added a suggestion that If we REALLY had to add more than director, writer and storyboard artist, we can use Template:Efn, results would be something like the titles in Classroom of the Elite episode table. It won't change the structure of the table and you can as much info as you want. It's that or add a whole new table for other casts which is a little Inappropriate. Parham.es (talk) 10:36, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments

See Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Project-independent quality assessments. This proposes support for quality assessment at the article level, recorded in {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and inherited by the wikiproject banners. However, wikiprojects that prefer to use custom approaches to quality assessment can continue to do so. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:33, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Lizzie Freeman

Hey there. I just created this article and would like to ask for help in expanding the article. It's my first time making an article for a dub actor (I'm more used to writing articles for seiyuu) so I'd also like some feedback on what I made. Thanks! Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:34, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

My only comment is that separating sections by "Anime" and "Web series" is a bit awkward. All three of those series right now are anime, the only difference between them is that one is a "Web series" and the others are television series. Sarcataclysmal (talk) 03:50, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

I just fleshed out the filmography. I would recommend looking for additional roles (preferably sourced by non-primary sources) and writing more biographical information. Link20XX (talk) 05:06, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Article or list

I nominated Psycho-Pass (season 1) to GA but the project lists it as a list despite the title. Should the article remain as an article or be moved to a list? I'm kinda confused with the naming convention used by the project. Tintor2 (talk) 23:18, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

This one should remain as a list. List of Puella Magi Madoka Magica episodes is pretty much the exact same content as Psycho-Pass (season 1), and is a Featured List. Sarcataclysmal (talk) 21:31, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

What should the title be then? Tintor2 (talk) 21:47, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

I don't think the title of the article itself needs to change. I.e., Kingdom (season 1). Sarcataclysmal (talk) 22:26, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

WP:TV usually lists these as articles, but they're generally much more robust than just a list of episodes and releases. See for example Grey's Anatomy (season 17), Better Call Saul (season 6), Star Trek: Discovery (season 3), Rick and Morty (season 3). ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 22:44, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

I guess it just depends on how much content and the veracity of the content outside of the list itself that is present. Sarcataclysmal (talk) 23:55, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

This page has zero prose outside of the lead section, so by its very nature it cannot be considered an article. Maybe a stub if you ignore the lists :p ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:00, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Studio Tables

On my sandbox, I've made a table derivative of the current Shaft page's production table. The goal of this table has two things: to simplify the overbearing information of the "Note(s)" column, which is otherwise unnecessary as the reader can simply click on the hyphenated link to find out about the series, and to create a somewhat studio-centric table stylization that adds "Animation Producers" to the column. However, Goszei, who created the table, made a decent point about the credit's inclusion in that the articles for these series themselves don't list "animation producers" despite our agreement that the role is probably worth mentioning due to the significance of that person's job. I won't reiterate the full rationale, but you can find it here. The tl;dr is: animation producers don't have much coverage likely due to a lack of English-langauge sourcing on credits until recently, and likely due to a lack of proper understanding of the credit in the English-speaking world until recently (it's like a line producer but more important). Though they aren't featured on pages or the infoboxes themselves, the different production lines (as can be seen as OLM, Inc.'s different "teams", each led by an animation producer) and sub-cultures within studios is worth depicting on studio production tables, in my opinion. The provided link on that talk page to Sakugablog exemplifies one animation producer (Shouta Umehara from CloverWorks) and the importance of his work for the projects he manages, and you can find comments from industry creators, like Vinland Saga director Shuuhei Yabuta, discussing the importance of the job and the value of knowing them when it comes to a studio's work.

I wanted to know if anyone else has any particular thoughts on the subject. Sarcataclysmal (talk) 01:22, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Leiji Matsumoto in ITNC

The death of Leiji Matsumoto has been proposed as a candidate for the In the news section on the Main page. I encourage members of this WikiProject to contribute to the discussion of the nomination and help improve the quality of the article during this process. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 22:24, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

If anybody needs information about Matsumoto's life there is an interview with Animerica here. The challenge though is finding the issue of the magazine.Tintor2 (talk) 00:25, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Anime Feminist is a "political" source?

At Talk:Cardcaptor Sakura: Clear Card#Political piece added as reception, there is a currently discussion, with some editors claiming that Anime Feminist should not be added as a source in the reception section of the Cardcaptor Sakura: Clear Card page, claiming it is not "notable", "helpful", and the site is not "reputable", so outside input would be appreciated. Historyday01 (talk) 21:22, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

@Historyday01: Now that you say it, somebody removed it from Revenger (TV series) with similar reasons.Tintor2 (talk) 22:33, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

The site is listed as reliable at WP:A&M/RS. --Mika1h (talk) 22:50, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Hmm, that is good to know. I might use that to add to more reviews to other pages too. It does seem to be an unfortunate trend on some anime pages, which don't have reception sections, which is not necessarily a good thing. Historyday01 (talk) 01:28, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Importance of awards?

Among the four awards Jujutsu Kaisen 0 (film) won in Crunchyroll 2023, three of them included two different voice actors for Yuta Okkotsu and one for Maki Zen'in. Still these three actors are not from English regions or Japan. While Yuta has been featured in notable articles and might not need these awards, Maki doesn't have that much of coverage. Should we add the award to English Wikipedia? It kinda confuses me since in Spain, the movie was awarded too but for best movie. Kinda reminds me of the D.Gray-man which apparently got a big award in France. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 22:56, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

I would think that adding awards is worthwhile. I mean, awards are added for non-anime shows ALL the time, and for people, so I don't see any issue with adding/mentioning awards they won on their pages. Historyday01 (talk) 01:40, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Tintor is talking about awards for non-Japanese/English individuals. At the 7th Crunchyroll Anime Awards, Yuta Okkotsu's Castilian and German dub voice actors won separate awards for Best VA Performance, while the Portuguese VA was also nominated in the same category. Are these worth mentioning in the EN Wikipedia? Harushiga (talk) 02:14, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

List of isekai works

This list is just massive with over one thousand entries that are just not referenced, many of which seem to be entirely based on personal interpretations (particularly the non-Japanese works, which I'm not sure is appropriate to add). On top of that, many of these also don't even have articles. I think this list has a serious issue where it does not present a coherent concept of what an isekai is, and beginning in January 2022, its scope was massively expanded specifically to include non-Japanese works. The list has ballooned since the beginning of 2023 as well.

I've already removed a significant chunk of the article based on it not being reference or being referenced to two listicles or more fluff pieces that were in the end comparing the works to isekais (or were tongue in cheek). I think for the list to continue to exist, it needs to be cleaned up with a proper minimum inclusion standards and a defined scope, with proper standards for what is considered a useable reference (I don't think The Mary Sue or CBR is good reference for "this is an isekai" especially for a non-Japanese work, for example). ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 03:51, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Most of the articles listed in the 'By genre' group of Template:Lists of anime and manga suffer from similar issues and various simply don't cite any source at all. I personally don't see a special use for this kind of articles that do not already provide the categories of the respective genres, and I feel that it would be better to delete those who are unsourced/poorly sourced. Xexerss (talk) 04:20, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Sailor Stars reviews

Although putting this in the article's talk page might make more sense, I wanted to get the opinions of users heavily involved with anime topics. I wish to gradually improve the article of Sailor Moon's final season, Sailor Stars, but I'm not sure how the critical response section should be handled. While most of the season adapts the "Stars" arc from the manga, the first 6 episodes make up an anime exclusive arc. Should the "Reception" section approach the season as a whole, or have the two arcs separate? PanagiotisZois (talk) 13:11, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

I guess if possible, the two arcs. I kinda did that to the article Danganronpa 3: The End of Hope's Peak High School as the anime was divided into two story arcs.Tintor2 (talk) 14:34, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Pretty Rhythm/Pripara/Kiratto Pri-Chan/Waccha Primagi!/Aikatsu

Anyone else interested in editing articles relating to these three animes? I noticed that articles about these animes need extensive editing (especially the character lists)- e.g. removal of OR/fancruft, extensive copyediting etc.

I've already removed so much fancruft from List of Pretty Rhythm: Aurora Dream characters, List of Aikatsu! characters etc, but I still think there's plenty more cleanup to be done.

Shadow of the Starlit Sky (talk) 20:09, 10 March 2023 (UTC)

Hey, there, as stated on my talk page, I don't really see much of a problem with most of the Pretty Rhythm articles aside from the character pages, since I've extensively edited the main articles, the episode lists, and even created articles for some of the songs featured in the show. I'd love to help on the other Pretty series articles but I'd have to watch them first. lullabying (talk) 08:09, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Ok, no problem. Shadow of the Starlit Sky (talk) 15:47, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

But then, the Kiratto Pri Chan/Waccha Primagi articles are in need of cleanup and extensive copy-editing, IMO. Pri Chan has some grammar errors and I think Waccha PriMagi might have some copyvio.

Shadow of the Starlit Sky (talk) 15:50, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Lupin III requested article move

Hello, I have requested a move from Arsène Lupin III → Lupin III (character). Input and discussion welcome at Talk:Arsène Lupin III#Requested move 20 March 2023, thank you! —Mashed Potate Jones (talk) 05:42, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Giorno getting his own article

Hello! I ask a discussion in Talk:List of JoJo's Bizarre Adventure characters on whether Giorno is deserving of his own article or not since I already made the draft but was declined but was declined because the previous iteration was cut down to a redirect without discussion. Thank you! Lovelyquirks1 (talk) 02:33, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Put together a draft page of sorts for "Genjitsu no Yohane: Sunshine in the Mirror"

There isn't much there yet, but it can be accessed here. Once it has enough sources and there is more information, I'm going to move it to the mainspace. It is just way too soon for that at this point. Historyday01 (talk) 20:59, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

List of Soaring Sky! Pretty Cure episode Review

I would want someone to make this episode list permanent and make sure the citations are correct https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Soaring_Sky!_Pretty_Cure_episodes&redirect=no Ckng9000 (talk) 15:41, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Currently a redirect, but previous versions can be looked at. Note that notability should be in use if you want this article in the main space again. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 17:14, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

notabilty warning is already on page. All pretty cure episodes have notability warnings. Ckng9000 (talk) 17:08, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Informal RfC on "Yaoi" article name

I've started an informal discussion on the talk page for yaoi regarding the name of the article. Comments from editors are welcome and encouraged. Morgan695 (talk) 22:17, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

Proposed episode split for Bofuri

I an thinking there should be an episode split for Bofuri since there are two seasons Ckng9000 (talk) 01:50, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

If you're referring to the infobox, I went ahead and split it since the staff between the two is noticeably different, and there are a lot of producers for each season. So, I don't want to clutter a single parameter with like 15 producers. Sarcataclysmal (talk) 09:15, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments

Quality assessments are used by Wikipedia editors to rate the quality of articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project decides to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:03, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Help with cleanup required at certain articles + translation

Hi all. I need help translating the source at Anpanman#Retail_sales. Whether or this statement is true "Retail sales of Anpanman related products grossed an annual revenue of at least ¥150 billion consecutively for nearly 30 years." according to this Yahoo! Japan source. [5] Also the One Piece needs attention at the One_Piece#Merchandise section which created by User:Maestro2016. One Piece is a good article so I think this section should be removed.(given how its calculated) Timur9008 (talk) 07:42, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Yuricon reliability

Just leaving a note here to say I opened a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Online reliable sources to seek a consensus concerning the reliability of Erica Friedman and her website Yuricon as a source in articles. silvia (BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) (inquire within) 20:34, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Rudeus Greyrat role

I tried expanding Rudeus Greyrat with at least season 1 material but got reverted. The user for some reason edited My user page over My talk with warnings of more reverts but I have no access to My computer. Now the section is small paragraph that just describes the character for some reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tintor2 (talk • contribs) 14:15, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Funimation

A discussion at Talk:Funimation is taking place about moving Draft:Crunchyroll, LLC into the mainspace. Any input will be appreciated. Link20XX (talk) 15:05, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Junkers Come Here anime

I learned today that Junkers Come Here has two anime adaptations, the 1995 movie and a 1994 OVA. Our page seems to be conflating the two, since it says the movie was previously shown on TV, but I think that actually applies to the OVA (Anime News Network also seems to have the two conflated currently). The Japanese Wikipedia page seems to have much better coverage of the topic, including both anime, but I'm relying on Google Translate to look at it since I can't read Japanese. I was hoping someone who can read Japanese could use the Japanese page to expand the English page. Calathan (talk) 14:45, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

There are no refs in the OVA section of the Japanese wiki. Hard to expand without them. --Mika1h (talk) 15:22, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

I was hoping some of the sources would at least mention the OVA. Regardless though, the Japanese article seems to have a lot more citations than ours. Even if it can't be used to source information about the OVA, if the sources are reliable, they could be used to expand our article. For instance, our article doesn't describe the source novels at all outside a mention in the lead. Calathan (talk) 17:08, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Question about capitalization in fictional occupations, races and other nouns

I have a question regarding the consistency of the capitalization in fictional groups. Since the Jedi article uses "a Jedi" and not "a jedi", List of Dragon Ball characters uses "a Saiyan" and not "a saiyan", Hunter × Hunter uses "a Hunter" and not "a hunter", I'm confused about whether in articles like Jujutsu Kaisen and Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba, for example, we should write "Jujutsu Sorcerers" (instead of "jujutsu sorceres") and "Demon Slayers" (instead of "demon slayers"), respectively. For real-life groups like pirates and ninjas, it seems that nobody questions the lowercase use in the Naruto and One Piece articles, respectively. I'd like to know if there is a Manual of Style to solve this issue or what anybody else thinks about this. Xexerss (talk) 00:27, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

My general thought is that it depends on whether the work and/or the world itself treats or frames it as if it is a proper noun. "Jedi" and "Saiyan" are the name of a people (broadly construed in the former, literally in the latter), so that contributes to proper noun capitalization, and I'm not familiar with Hunter x Hunter, but I (perhaps mistakenly) presume the work treats "Hunter" as a proper noun (i.e. the specific profession) vs. the common noun "hunter" (i.e. a huntsman). ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 01:32, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

the work treats "Hunter" as a proper noun (i.e. the specific profession) - are there real-world examples of this? I don't really get how "Hunter" could be a proper noun, even if it does have a specific meaning in Hunter x Hunter. Erinius (talk) 02:54, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

The first example that comes to mind is there is "coast guard", which as a common noun refers to the general concept of such an organization that is not always named using that phrase, and "Coast Guard", a specific coast guard organization, i.e. United States Coast Guard. I am (again possibly mistakenly) assuming that "Hunter" refers to someone belonging to a specific organization doing specific work in a similar way and that the work itself consistently treats this as distinct and as a proper noun. I'm generally suggesting to be consistent with the work itself. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 03:24, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, that makes sense. Erinius (talk) 20:59, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Heavenly Delusion author

While expanding Heavenly Delusion I found that the author has been writing manga for a long time here and specifies a lot his private life. I don't remember who created manga artists article but there sure is a lot of potential for Ishiguro. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 04:17, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Anime and manga franchise management at Wikidata

Moved from Portal talk:Anime and manga

 – Goszei (talk) 23:51, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

I point out this post of mine on Wikidata concerning the subject in question. I'd like to know your opinion. --84.220.172.209 (talk) 16:41, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Regular political vandalism at G-Witch

Moved from Portal talk:Anime and manga

 – Goszei (talk) 23:48, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Please protect the article Mobile Suit Gundam: The Witch from Mercury from anonymous edits for at least a couple of weeks. Anonymous has been vandalizing the article for several days, removing various pieces of text with the abstract "removal of irrelevant information." Judging by the content of the deleted text and checking the history of edits of anonymous authors, we are talking about some kind of politically motivated vandalism. Solaire the knight (talk) 07:50, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

@Solaire the knight If you are requesting a page protection then this is not the right place. Post a request at WP:RFPP. Centcom08 (talk) 00:01, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Moving ANN to 'Reliable'

Hi everyone, I started a discussion at the A&M/RS page about Anime News Network. Please comment! Axem Titanium (talk) 21:37, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Attack on Titan plot summary discussion regarding Eren's motives

I have been told to link this thread here to reach relevant people. I've been working to get the plot summary changed on Attack on Titan's page since I do not believe it accurately describes the character Eren's motivations. Link to then new thread is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Attack_on_Titan#regarding_request_to_remove_Eren's_motives

but before replying to this thread, I highly recommend that you read this prior thread to avoid treading old ground https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Attack_on_Titan#Semi-protected_edit_request_on_1_May_2023 AOTEditor (talk) 03:23, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

General description of anime episodes

Increasingly, I'm noticing that episode lists of popular anime are regularly meaninglessly rewritten, either out of an attempt to describe what is happening in the episode as much as possible, or because of an attempt to describe any scenes in the desired way. Sometimes even just finely rewriting the text back and forth, since 3-4 people filling the list are constantly changing the little things in the text. Does the project have any rules about this? And is it possible to create some kind of warning to warn users about unnecessarily excessive descriptions and rewrites? Solaire the knight (talk) 10:26, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Frequent re-writes/additions to plot summaries tend to be par for the course for currently-airing series; things tend to stabilize once the season ends and casual contributors move onto the next thing. Overly detailed plot summaries can be culled per WP:PLOTSUMNOT, but as for plot summaries that include subjective analysis, they likely need to be judged on a case-by-case basis per WP:DUEWEIGHT. For example, the final paragraph of the plot summary for The Heart of Thomas references a rape that is not explicitly stated in the text itself, but which is readily apparent to any reader who is able to infer basic subtext, and has been commented on by multiple secondary sources. In other cases where reader interpretation is divided, usually the best solution is for the plot summary to dryly summarize the plot in plain and direct language, and note differing interpretations in an "Analysis" section. Morgan695 (talk) 16:54, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

A: I understand that this is the norm for topical series. This is what worries me, because people spend too much time either needlessly rewriting the level of replacing "high" with "not low", or describing things in more and more detail, turning the synopsis of episodes into a review on TVTropes. So, are you suggesting that we limit ourselves to a short synopsis to avoid any abuse? Solaire the knight (talk) 21:52, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

The problem of describing spoiler information in current shows

Please draw the attention of the project participants to this thread. I would like to know more about the attitude of other users to "spoiler" information and the tradition of covering it in articles, especially about currently broadcast shows. I repeatedly tried to draw my opponent's attention to the fact that we should not report the events of the new episodes as sensational hot facts, let alone put them at the very beginning of the character summary (not to mention that some of it was obviously original research based on information taken too literally), but judging by the lack of answers on his talk page and the tone of the answer addressed to me in the discussion itself, the user is initially configured for confrontation. Solaire the knight (talk) 06:14, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

WP:Spoiler may be a worthwhile read to those involved. Curbon7 (talk) 06:24, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

The question is not about whether to remove spoiler information or not. The issue is that the user tends to report it after each new episode as something sensational and hot, as if we were editing a fandom wiki. While attempts to point this out and rewrite his information in a calmer tone, not to delete, are perceived by the user as censorship and aggression. With derivatives of this rude tone and rudeness. Just imagine if I put the famous "Spike dies" at the very beginning of the description of Spiegel as a character, and then accused of censorship anyone who tries to describe it in a less tendentious way. Solaire the knight (talk) 07:50, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Ah I think I understand. I do not edit in this field, but I think it is self-evident that the plot should consist of the broad overarching plot of the series, not the play-by-play of each episode. Curbon7 (talk) 18:35, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Agreed there. From the few anime series I've done, and the many video game articles, a broad summary tends to work better regardless of any other issues. Wikipedia isn't a Wikia after all. Sounds like the user has...issues. --ProtoDrake (talk) 18:57, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Then how would you advise to describe new information from the show in articles? Add at the end like "in the second season it turned out that the killer was a butler" or something like that? I usually write in such a way that it logically follows from the description, and not at the very beginning. Solaire the knight (talk) 20:02, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

I would suggest working the information naturally into the prose, if it must be included at all, and then do a proper rewrite for consistency and ease of reading when the story or storyline is concluded. Bear in mind, my few experiences with major editing on anime series are a rewrite of Cowboy Bebop (mostly gone now, I fancy), Blood-C (which has seen some expansion since it passed GA) and Samurai Champloo, all old. Also Nier: Automata Ver1.1a and Brotherhood: Final Fantasy XV, which are special cases. My advice may not be most applicable in this instance, especially as I'm not a Gundam person. --ProtoDrake (talk) 20:19, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

That is, if I understand you correctly, you generally support the idea that character development through the plot should be presented gradually and in neutral language, in order to avoid cases where just by looking at the description of the character, the reader instantly sees the whole set of important events for a couple of seasons of the show? Solaire the knight (talk) 21:05, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

I guess so. I think it might depend on the size of the show. I imagine something like One Piece will eventually need a very curt summary to get across its plot in any reasonable length of time. Anime and manga isn't my strongest suit in the Wikipedia space. --ProtoDrake (talk) 21:12, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Oh, One Piece. I can't even imagine even a brief description of the character's fate after 1000+ episodes and films, not to mention the disputes that are familiar to our time about the identity or motivation of the characters. Solaire the knight (talk) 21:19, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Appropriate manhwa sources?

I want to preface this by that I'm aware that the WikiProject does not cover manhwa, but I want to know what reliable sources one would recommend when it comes to such a topic. I've been trying to look for sources to add to the article pages for The Boxer and Terror Man, but I can't seem to find any sources. If only Korea had a site like Natalie. SimonLagann (talk) 10:32, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

List of One Piece characters

Hello, WikiProject,

This article has been subject to a great deal of IP editing, sometimes adding and then removing information, and I think it could use a review by an experienced editor. I know absolutely nothing about the subject and believe that most of these manga articles go into way too much detail so I'm not the best person for the job. If anyone is familiar with this subject, I'd appreciate the help. And if you think this article should become a redirect to the main article, I wouldn't necessarily object to that either. Thanks in advance for any help you can supply. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:06, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

it definitely deserves its own article. I'll have a look at it Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 21:11, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Spoilers in lede

Scrapped Princess has had a substantial spoiler in its lede for years. I finally fixed it, but do we have any kind of protocol for spoilers in lede. I know Wikipedia:Not censored but does thart apply here? Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 19:40, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

WP:SPOILER is the relevant guideline. CandyScythe (talk) 21:16, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm not familar with that work but considering the guidelines of WP:Lead, you could revise the lead to a simple introduction to the readers. For example, Attack on Titan's lead only focuses on Eren's quest rather than his discovery in the later chapters about the areas or his transformation in the final arc.Tintor2 (talk) 21:34, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

original sourcing of the Wikiproject:Anime and manga Mascot

My apologies for placing this here but I was wondering if we could fix the upload date of the old fan rendition of Wikipe-tan since you can see it being used all the way back in 2006 here on this page but somehow the origin date is from 2009? Revermb (talk) 14:45, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

There's no error. The version you see now was posted to the internet in 2009 and uploaded to Commons in 2009. The image that was in use in 2006 was a different one, which was deleted from Commons in 2007 as a duplicate of c:File:Wikipe-tan full length.png. -- ferret (talk) 15:02, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

ComiPress as a reliable source

Per this discussion at X (manga), does anyone have any insight into the use of Comipress as a reliable source? It's not listed on the WikiProject RS list, but they seem to pass the smell test to me; they collaborated with Takeo Udagawa on an official English translation of Manga Zombie, for example. Morgan695 (talk) 23:20, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

At the moment, the only "evidence" I have to support their reliability is that they were cited several times by Anime News Network:[6][7][8][9][10][11][12] Surely, there must be more compelling reasons than that, but at the very least, I think that they're fine to verify basic facts like dates, figures and similar stuff. The only issue I found is that in the citation from the X article ([13]) they have used the own Wikipedia as a source (it seems that our article just cited the translated interview part though). I have no idea of how many times they have done this, but perhaps we should exercise some caution before citing their articles. But as I said before, they're overall a fine source to me. Xexerss (talk) 05:27, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

They were also cited/referred to by Wired and Kotaku, which are both classed as reliable. DarkeruTomoe (talk) 13:39, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm with Xexerss on this one: they're generally good, but it's good to exercise caution in some cases. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 19:33, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Enzai: Falsely Accused

The article Enzai: Falsely Accused has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I was unable to find any reliable secondary or tertiary sources about the game (besides the Anime News Network press release), indicating a likely failure to meet notability guidelines.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. QuietCicada (talk) 14:31, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Pikachu

Pikachu has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:20, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Moving Draft:Ayaka: A Story of Bonds and Wounds to the mainspace.

Since Ayaka was moved into the draftspace, there has been numerous news articles about the anime, from those mentioning the removal of one Takahiro Sakurai from the cast to those revealing to when it premieres. I think it's now appropriate to move it into the mainspace. SimonLagann (talk) 19:32, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

I would recommend renaming the article as Ayaka (TV series) due to MOS:SUBTITLE and the fact that the original Japanese title doesn't have the subtitle. I also think this article still needs some work such as plot and reception because currently it looks like a press release where it just lists the cast and staff who worked on the film. lullabying (talk) 20:22, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Reception could come after the first episode premieres and ANN, as per usual, covers it during their preview columns. SimonLagann (talk) 20:28, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

The plot is mentioned in some of the articles cited in the draft, but I'm not good with paraphrasing. SimonLagann (talk) 20:57, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

I think the full title will be fine as a title; MOS:SUBTITLE states When the most commonly used name is ambiguous, the full title and subtitle might be suitable to be used as a form of natural disambiguation (see WP:NATURALDIS) and gives the example to use Orlando: A Biography over Orlando (book). Link20XX (talk) 21:49, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Utena

There is a request for Utena to be moved to Utena (city) at Talk:Utena. Thought this WikiProject might be interested. — Prodraxis {talk • contributions} (she/her) 21:31, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Crunchyroll LLC#Requested move 2 July 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Crunchyroll LLC#Requested move 2 July 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. UtherSRG (talk) 11:03, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Split discussion at Bakugan Battle Brawlers

Thought I might post here to attract some attention to the topic at Talk:Bakugan Battle Brawlers regarding splitting the information about the larger Bakugan franchise into its own article at Bakugan, which is currently a redirect at RfD. ― Synpath 23:48, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

Creating a page for "Genjitsu no Yohane: Sunshine in the Mirror" spinoff?

I posted about this a while ago, back in April, on here, but I'd like your thoughts on whether I should create a page for this spinoff from Love Live! Sunshine!! or if I should just incorporate it into the Love Live! Sunshine!! page. I came up with a draft page back in April, but was planning to add a bit more to the page to add in some more current information sometime soon. I look forward to hearing from you. Historyday01 (talk) 17:38, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

@Historyday01: It's premiered already and has reviews at ANN and Fandom Post ([14] [15]), and it's getting a video game in November ([16], [17]). So, feel free to improve it and move it to mainspace. ミラP@Miraclepine 23:03, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Great! I will do that when I have some time. Historyday01 (talk) 01:13, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Just created it, at long last, at Yohane of the Parhelion: Sunshine in the Mirror. I copied the text over from that draft, as its a sandbox, and I might use it in the future for some other series. Not sure who the directors, writers, or storyboarders are for each episode, though, and IMDB was no help in that (unsurprisingly).Historyday01 (talk) 22:02, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

@Historyday01: I've added the episode staff. Also, the official English title doesn't contain "of", so the article title should be Yohane the Parhelion: Sunshine in the Mirror. Harushiga (talk) 12:35, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Thanks for the tip. It does call it "YOHANE THE PARHELION -SUNSHINE in the MIRROR" on Crunchyroll, so I'll move it to "Yohane the Parhelion: Sunshine in the Mirror" that right away. Historyday01 (talk) 12:37, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Please upload for anime key visual for Yohane the Parhelion: Sunshine in the Mirror okay. Lovemuhcko (talk) 14:47, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

@Lovemuhcko:  Doing... ミラP@Miraclepine 18:01, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

 Done at File:Yohane the Parhelion anime key visual.jpg. ミラP@Miraclepine 18:54, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Royal Space Force: The Wings of Honnêamise

Royal Space Force: The Wings of Honnêamise has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:54, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Request

Hello. I request for the creation of the "List of manga" article containing all of the manga that has ever been done (translated and not) which is lacking because there isn't one yet. I have already asked for this at the talk page of the article of manga but no one did that. Please reply! Thanks! 186.109.170.149 (talk) 15:27, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

It's no wonder no one has planning on creating such article, because it would be absurdly and needlessly long. It's like asking for a single list of every film released or book published. Xexerss (talk) 15:37, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Well. It could be done, alongside the supposed "list of books", "list of comics", "list of films", "List of series", "List of music", "list of video games", "list of anime" and "list of documentary films"

They could remain incomplete, for all I care, but at least they are created because they are necessary 190.31.233.2 (talk) 06:37, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

The article was created before, but it was decided to be deleted because it seems that it was not really as necessary as you think it is. There are lists of comics, list of films and list of video games articles, but they don't have the unreasonable kind of content that you're requesting. Xexerss (talk) 07:00, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I think you can just turn this category article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Manga into an actual article of "list of manga" containing all of these manga. I imagine neither of the ones that I mentioned (list of books, list of films and so on) have ALL of the content that has ever been done. That's why I think that the supposed "List of manga" can be done even though it could remain incomplete. What do you think? 190.31.233.2 (talk) 15:19, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Just see this discussion and you will see why the article was deleted in the first place. I doubt that any editor with enough experience in Wikipedia will find your request plausible. Xexerss (talk) 19:59, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

See also: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of manga. Link20XX (talk) 17:10, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

An interesting situation with the source

The situation is this. We have a reputable source that confirms that the anime character was the first queer protagonist in the franchise, and it's easy to verify even without a source if you have even a smattering of knowledge. But the source was quick to announce this even before the character was canonically confirmed as a queer. So the question is, can the source be used to claim, if they were actually right, but wrote about it at the time of speculation, before actual confirming the sexuality of the character by the author? As I said, this is a pretty obvious point and most sources are talking about it, but adding this I was met with accusations that I was supposedly "appeal to woke people" and that the status of the first queer protagonist in a cult major franchise was supposedly not significant, so I have to look formal sources, many of which, to put it mildly, are too hasty with conclusions even before the initial development of romance between the characters. Solaire the knight (talk) 12:19, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Just say it as it is. "[Whatever source] observed that [whatever] before this was confirmed by [the thing]." small jars tc 19:53, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

So, just to point out that even before it was successfully confirmed directly, a number of media outlets had already named the character as the first queer protagonist in the history of the franchise? Solaire the knight (talk) 20:46, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I'd say that their claim that the character is queer before any canonical confirmation suggests that they're not reliable. And just from the name, you can assume Pride.com is going to be a biased source when it comes to LGBTQ+ topics, which is certainly acceptable in some matters, but doesn't lend them credit when we've seen them make a claim that isn't backed up.

They also list Kanji Tatsumi from Persona 4 as an LGBTQ+ character, though they do concede it's up for debate - it isn't confirmed in the source material. Their article on Sailor Moon and some other characters include some stretches too.

Some of their articles feel more like a tabloid than a reputable source, with posts like '14 Disney Channel Hotties Who Made Our Hearts Throb As Teens and 10 Times Celebs Talked About What They're Packing. DarkeruTomoe (talk) 22:21, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

The attempt is to source the phrase "first such protagonist in the franchise" specifically? I think it's fine to do that, because you (you general) are not using this source to back up that the character is queer (that's a separate source), you're using it to source "first". As I understand it, the intent is to go "Before [character] was confirmed queer by blah blah blah,[ref] X observed that [character] would have been the first queer protagonist in the franchise[ref]" (which is what SmallJars is saying). Whatever perceived bias of the source is, it isn't being used to cite that the character is queer, it's being used to cite that they are the first such protagonist in the franchise. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 22:38, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I wouldn't say it's a good source for that, at least in my opinion.

It notes that 'The Witch From Mercury (which is streaming now on Crunchyroll) is the only franchise show led by a female character and after watching the first episode, fans now know it’s the first queer one as well' under the headline 'Gundam’s First Female & Queer Protagonist is Here in The Witch From Mercury'.

The source doesn't claim they would be the first queer protagonist, but makes a definitive statement that they are and claims that the first episode proves as such, which is not the case as Solaire implied above about them being too hasty with the claim. So we've seen that part of their statement is inaccurate (based on the first episode) and another part was correct but actually based on no evidence so not reputable. That she's the first female protagonist has been repeated quite often, but 'only franchise show led by a female character' is also iffy when considering Mobile Suit Gundam SEED C.E. 73: Stargazer (as the Witch from Mercury page currently mentions) is an earlier show this could apply to. So as a whole, it seems like trying to use a bad source to evidence a point. DarkeruTomoe (talk) 22:58, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

I agree. I think it is fine to use the source for that phrase. Not sure why people are trying to say it is a "bad" source. Historyday01 (talk) 15:27, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Just to explain my POV on why it's not a good source for this situation:

1) The intent is to confirm a character is queer. As I understand it, this is correct, and I don't dispute that. But sadly Wikipedia policy doesn't actually care whether something is correct, but whether something is backed up.

2) The source listed 'confirms it', but as has been observed, could not back up that claim at the time of publishing. As such, this source is not reliable - it's making statements based on no/flimsy evidence. It goes directly against Wikipedia's outline of "Articles should be based on reliable, independent, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy". As a comparison, they could say 'Naruto's father is the 4th Hokage' when only the first chapter of Naruto had come out, and they'd be right... but they'd have no evidence of it aside from the face on the mountain looking similar to Naruto and tropes of orphan protagonists being of a noble line. If they said 'We suspect that Naruto's father is the 4th Hokage', that would be very different.

3) No source has been given above for the statement of them being queer aside from this, only stating that it's 'easy to verify even without a source'... but Wikipedia doesn't deal in unsourced statements.

4) While the statement mentioned was along the lines of "Before [character] was confirmed queer by blah blah blah,[ref A] X observed that [character] would have been the first queer protagonist in the franchise[ref B]", it could potentially be used for [ref B] alongside a number of other sources, but they've not sourced the [ref A] "confirmed queer" part with a reference.

5) Just generally, looking at that website it seems like a tabloid from several of the headlines more than a factual source...

6) There's a lack of staff listing or noted qualifications, editorial policy, or common factors that could point to reliability.

6a) While it doesn't list author bios or who works there aside from on the individual articles, looking into it a little by checking the first three writers I found, one only works there and at The Daily Dot, which notes here that "Some editors have objected to its tone or consider it to be biased or opinionated", another only works at Pride.com and the final one only works there and at a site no-one has ever discussed on Wikipedia at least, so it doesn't seem like it has much professional clout behind it in terms of journalism. And if there is, they've not made it clear. DarkeruTomoe (talk) 16:13, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

My understanding is that 4 is the situation going on. That the intent IS to use a ref A to confirm queer, and that THIS is ref B. Hence, why I don't see an issue. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 17:55, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

My understanding from the initial post is that this is being taken as a 'reputable source that confirms that the anime character was the first queer protagonist in the franchise' and they want to use it as a source. Admittedly, it's a rather long five clause question, so I could be misinterpreting:

>So the question is, can the source be used to claim, if they were actually right, but wrote about it at the time of speculation, before actual confirming the sexuality of the character by the author?

If Solaire has a reputable and solid Ref A, then it seems it would be simpler just to use that to state they're the first queer protagonist - saying that *and* saying there was speculation beforehand doesn't seem too important to the article IMO at least. But the initial issue was needing a 'formal source' for sourcing the 'the status of the first queer protagonist' judging from the first post, due to disagreements on various aspects of including it.

I'd still say that Pride.com isn't a great source, generally for the reasons outlined above making it not seem to meet Wikipedia's sourcing standards generally, but also because the source does not observe that they would be the first queer protagonist or post speculations, but they make a definitive and unfounded statement that they are. This article by Gizmodo would be a better source for it I believe, which is considered generally reliable and speculates rather than makes claims without evidence. DarkeruTomoe (talk) 18:53, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

To be honest, I wouldn't want to use Gizmodo because of its sensationalism and buzzfeed approach to news reporting. For example, in the past they, like Pride.com, have relied on fan twitter to support conclusions from new episodes of the show that hasn't ended yet. At this point, I've added a third source to the article that looks at the show's ending from a cultural politics point of view, with its own issues, but still in a more "scientific" style than trying to hype social media clicks out of it. But thanks for the example with Naruto, you perfectly understood the essence of the problem. Solaire the knight (talk) 20:33, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

The nature of the list of yuri works

Is it just me, or is this list gradually more and more duplicating the yuri category? The article was originally created by me to move a work's list from the original article about yuri as a genre, but since then it has simply become a potentially endless list like any list about an active and popular genre. The section about yuri as an extra element still contains some original information, but it's basically any anime that has queer female characters without affiliation with the genre (of course, mostly with links to episode reviews on anime resources). For example, Ika Musume is only listed due to the occasional mention that the show has a running gag with a minor character obsessed with an MC. In general, is it possible to somehow rewrite this? Because now it looks like a duplicate of the category and a more localized version of the list of lesbian characters in animation. Solaire the knight (talk) 20:43, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

I would remove any work that was not published under a yuri magazine. Having a category like "yuri as an element" doesn't mean the original work is classified as yuri. I would also remove licensing in other languages outside of English because this is the English Wikipedia. lullabying (talk) 21:03, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

I understand where you're coming from, but what about works that have never officially been yuri or even romance, but have always been widely discussed within the genre? For example, Kakegurui or Saki (lots of lesbian overtones and a lesbian antagonist in the first and copious amounts of pairings and symbolism in the second). This is speculative, yes, but such works are always known, if not for queer characters, then at least for subtext and flirting with the audience. Solaire the knight (talk) 07:40, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I would personally opt to add prose to describe how each listed non-yuri manga includes yuri elements. In doing so, a trim would be easy. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:58, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

That is, to remake a bare list into a cursory example of works that are outside the genre, but have a prominent element of it in it? Like "Witch from Mercury, an anime that received special attention as the first Gundam in the yuri genre, thanks to (description of nuances) ? Solaire the knight (talk) 09:07, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, though I'd leave the "central element" section unchanged and would try to limit this secondary list to items with particularly detailed reliable sourcing. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:32, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Then what could be a reliable source? I don't mind Erika Friedman as usual, but as Ika Musume's case shows, shows can be added with reference to her even if she once mentioned the show in passing. In general, as far as I can see from the CCS pages, we have a rather large problem with this topic. For example, the page about Li Syaoran simultaneously had bisexual categories and mentioned that his bisexual crush was the result of magic and was not considered real love. I can still understand when people consider Sakura bisexual or pansexual despite the quote of the authors taken out of context, but I was confused that the article had such categories despite their direct refutation in the text itself. Solaire the knight (talk) 08:40, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Compare List of yaoi anime and manga. Yuri on Ice has two men as lead characters who are implied to be in a relationship and have a huge yaoi fandom, but it is not yaoi. lullabying (talk) 09:00, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

It’s hard for me to say something because the list is as concise as possible, but it looks good (at least I don't see any shows here with minor gay side characters or fairly popular ships). As for Yuri on Ice, I don't think it's even "implied" as both men have rings and the authors have explicitly confirmed that they are engaged (I don't know about marriage). So it's practically a G-Witch with a more grounded relationship and no Utena. Solaire the knight (talk) 09:09, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

As the creator of List of lesbian characters in anime, which I think is what you are referring to here, I only created it in the process of creating similar lists for many other identities. I originally had intended to merge it with List of lesbian characters in animation, but later decided against it because they were so different. My impression was that List of yuri works was pretty broad, even broader than any other lists. But, in its current form, its definitely vulnerable to fancruft. A lot of lists like this are vulnerable to that. I've had the same issue with LGBTQ lists for a while, and am constantly removing unsourced and badly sourced content, which people just try and slip in. Historyday01 (talk) 15:16, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I think the main problem is that Japanese culture, or at least its anime incarnation, often either overuses romantic overtones in platonic friendships, or shows lesbian relationships too subtly compared to straight romance (hello G-Witch), or pretends that sexuality as such does not exist and most of the characters are metaphorically bisexual. This confuses people very much and makes us look for any hints or author's words in order to understand what was said. I used to laugh at the claim that anime often makes lesbian couples call each other friends, but over the years it doesn't seem so naive anymore. Solaire the knight (talk) 15:25, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Sakura's pansexuality or bisexuality

I recently cleaned up the articles about Sakura and Syaoran, as the information about their sexuality was mostly original research, and in the case of the latter, even directly contradicted the plot and the article itself (the show reveals that the attraction was caused by a magical aura and the article openly talks about it). But at one point I still want to bring it up here to get an outside perspective and avoid possible misunderstandings or disputes. And so, all of Sakura's canon love interests are heterosexual, her love for Tomoyo is explicitly confirmed as being different than romantic and the only time she was attracted to a female character was explained by a magical aura in the universe. But. You can often see claims on the internet that she is bisexual or even pansexual based on a couple of passages in CLAMP interviews where they refer to her as open-minded characters and refute the notion that her relationship with Syaoran was heteronormative, claiming that they loved each other as personality rather than age or gender, and that Sakura would probably love him even if he was a girl. Many take this as a direct confirmation of Sakura's bisexuality, or even directly refer to it as a statement that Clamp considers her bisexual. What do you think of it? Could this serve as a source beyond the fact that no other sources list her as bisexual (except for secondary sources, including those referring to the interview I mentioned), and in the show itself the character is not pursuing any lesbian love interest? Considering that CCS is one of those Japanese works where there are a lot of queer characters, but you never hear any talk of sexuality, since love is implied to have no boundaries, I also find it speculative that this interview could claim her as bisexual. Not to mention that the context of the answer implies that this logic applies to all characters in the work. For example, Tomoyo clearly continued to love Sakura if she was a boy. But will we then write that she is bisexual instead of the indisputably canonical lesbian? Solaire the knight (talk) 08:57, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Interesting interview. The character readings here are quite new to me. In particular, Li Syaoran currently claims "Syaoran constantly wonders whether his feelings towards Sakura and Yukito are true as which changes when Yue notes that his attraction with other types of magic caused his crush on Yukito which serves as an early coming-of-age," which I don't remember from the show at all. Either way, with this show, I think it's important to refer to common readings of the work. Clamp doesn't spell these sorts of things out and I don't think it's helpful to stick too closely to Clamp's own claims about the characters. In the case of this interview, they are saying that Sakura and Syaoran ending up together was unrelated to genre trappings ("young boy and young girl interact? Surely they must fall in love!"). I wouldn't read this as Clamp suggesting Sakura is bisexual. And a Sakura as bisexual reading is indeed not common for the show itself, while as I understand it Syaoran is consistently read as bisexual (though I haven't dived into the sources). ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 11:15, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Well, I'm not familiar with English-language sources, since I'm not an English-speaking person. But as far as I know, the reading of Sakura as bisexual or pansexual caused by this interview is quite common among queer fans and authors, as it serves as a kind of justification for why a show with such a queer-friendly premise almost does not follow the traditional ideas about the abundance of yuri subtext in a magical girl show. For example, now there are quite a few people who despise Mamoru and try to promote Sailor Moon as a queer show where all the female characters are bisexual etc. In general, the genre has long become a kind of lesbian analogue of the gay reading of the shonen genre. But I got sidetracked a little. I think the question with Syaoran doesn't make sense since the show itself directly refutes this, but in my opinion CLAMP's words about Sakura are still open to different views, so I'm wondering how many people agree or disagree with my view of the source. Solaire the knight (talk) 11:47, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

If I recall the show had a thing for giving teddy Bear presents to the person they. When Syaoran gives one to Yukito he transforms into Yue who makes him wonder who is truly the person he loves . This results into Syaoran wondering about it until he realizes it is Sakura. In the finale these two exchange their bears as a show of love Tintor2 (talk) 12:31, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I didn't quite understand what you meant, but neither the show nor I deny that at some point he had some kind of crush on Yukito. But the fact is that later in the show it is explained that this was caused by a magical aura, thanks to which Yukito attracted people who could use magic to him. The problem is that people ignore this in favor of speculating about the character's actual sexuality. Solaire the knight (talk) 12:38, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Well, on the previous version of the List of animated films with LGBT characters page, and previous version of List of animated series with LGBT characters: 1995–1999 cite the following sources for Sakura as pansexual:

• 2018 dissertation (says she is bisexual)
• ScreenRant, The Mary Sue, and official website for claim she had a crush on her teacher
• The February 2001 interview (which you cited in your first comment). This the same as the "Cardcaptor Sakura Memorial Book (in Japanese). Kodansha. February 2001. ISBN 978-4-06-324535-6." source listed on the List of animated films with LGBT characters page.

The aforementioned 2018 dissertation says Syaoran as bisexual, while the other sources are about his established relationship with Sakura. On the List of animated films with LGBT characters page, an ANN review is cited as further evidence of his bisexuality. Looking at it now, it is pretty thin, in terms of sourcing for his bisexuality, so I probably was hasty on that. Looking back, I suppose I saw that as sufficient and no one every questioned it, when I added it to the page, and I copied it over from the List of animated series with LGBT characters: 1995–1999 to save me time. In the original interview, I think we can at least say Sakura is queer and Syaoran had feelings for Yukito (I mean, Sakura pretty clearly had feelings for him too), based on this part from Ohkawa:

...Syaoran was, at first, attracted to Yukito...I took great care in how to portray all that. I mentioned this earlier, but the series’s main theme is explored through the main character, so think of how Sakura-chan acts. For example, when she found out that Syaoran was in love with Yukito, she didn’t look at him strangely...If Syaoran had been a girl, if they had been far apart in age, as long as he was still Syaoran, I think Sakura would have fallen in love with him...It’s not because Tomoyo-chan is a girl that she didn’t end up with Sakura. Of course Sakura does love Tomoyo, but it’s not the kind of love she has for Syaoran.

Perhaps the compromise we can come to is that Sakura is queer and Syaoran is as well? I also wouldn't mind removing the part about the crush on the teacher, either, as that may be too much up to interpretation. Saying that Sakura is "a protagonist who had an open mind towards different family structures, different kinds of love, and different perspectives from society" may not be confirmation she is pansexual, or bisexual, but... can hint at possible queerness, I'd argue. Historyday01 (talk) 14:20, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I think it almost goes without saying that this show is very queer in general, and its characters are by extension, even if it doesn't use western queer language to describe anything. Those sources are good, thanks! ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 14:31, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Nobody argues that this show is pretty queer overall. But the problem is that this show is "pretty queer in the Japanese sense", which is why any particular sexuality is never discussed and love is seen as something beyond gender. For example, it's obvious to us that Tomoyo is a lesbian, but this is never discussed, not even in interviews. The author says only once that she did not make them a couple, not because Tomoyo is a girl, returning to the topic of relationships. Solaire the knight (talk) 14:40, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

In terms of "obvious to us that Tomoyo is a lesbian, but this is never discussed, not even in interviews", in the above interview says pretty clearly that Tomoyo is a lesbian... so I think that's pretty established, and don't think that's a stretch. Historyday01 (talk) 14:58, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

It's obvious from the show and it's obvious from the way the writers talk about her. But her sexuality itself never rises. That's what I'm talking about. Solaire the knight (talk) 15:06, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

That's fair. Historyday01 (talk) 15:08, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I mean, that's my thought too. I had heard that the Clear Card sequel (which is apparently getting another sequel) "removed" the queerness, but I don't really agree with that interpretation. My thought about the sources as well. Historyday01 (talk) 14:57, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I don't remember much of Clear Card, but from what I remember of the discussions back then, the main gripe was that Tomoyo didn't get a new love interest and was destined to either be a "perpetual" gay best friend with a crush on an MC or even be shiped with one of the male side characters. Who then got his love interest, but still (I even remember an article from AnimeFeminist where they implied that the show was homophobic because Tomoyo wasn't getting any development). It's just that people were misled by the fact that almost all the romance in the new anime focuses on two straight couples, one of which is canon. But judging by the announcements, this is definitely not the last CCS anime. Solaire the knight (talk) 15:06, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

That Anime Feminist article is the same one I was thinking of. Sometimes Anime Feminist is right on, but other times...they are off base. Like with ANN, it all depends on the writers. And I did see on social media they got some criticism of not writing about The Witch from Mercury. Historyday01 (talk) 15:10, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

For this reason, I am always skeptical of such resources. Politics is a separate conversation, but they often have a fairly obvious, albeit understandable, bias in this matter. For example, when they called the new Lupin homophobic, for the writer adding a joke where a female character teases the MC and his sitcom archenemy that they look like a gay couple with tension (which is ironic, years later the same person will write a couple of "progressive" yuri anime, including the aforementioned Witch). Because they thought that the character is annoyed by a gay joke makes a message that being gay is something shameful. Solaire the knight (talk) 15:20, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Well, as I said above, no one questions his very crush. The question is why this is, especially when it is further revealed that it was caused by magic. If you watch the show itself, only a Chinese girl (I already forgot her name) is presented as Sakura's love rival all the time, even playing the "childhood friend vs new girl" theme. But I don't mind describing it as "authors often interpret Sakura in this way etc etc" by linking to a major source that discusses and cites this interview. And add it somewhere in the evaluation section. But this will already be for the character page, not lists. Another conversation is whether you want to talk about magically induced bisexuality and whether that might be a reason to add the character to the list. Solaire the knight (talk) 14:40, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Hmm. Since there's so much debate, I'd be fine with that. By "evaluation section" do you mean Sakura Kinomoto#Reception and Syaoran Li#Reception? Or, did you mean another conversation. In terms of magically-induced bisexuality, I'm not sure if if that would qualify a character for the list. In some ways, I'm glad this discussion began, as it is giving me further determination to continue going through those lists of animated series with LGBT characters, and pair them down. I finished going through the 2020s list, and hopefully will get through the List of animated series with LGBT characters: 2015–2019 list at some point this month, if all goes well. Historyday01 (talk) 15:08, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

About Sakura, yes. If we have a wide discussion, but no direct confirmation, then why not? As for Syaoran, I'm not sure, but I think you can easily find sources discussing his crush on Yukito and how it was shown regardless of what it was caused by. I have a similar feeling. I have always been a supporter of the thesis that truth is born in a dispute. I will also try to rewatch the Clear Card again, perhaps this will somehow develop my view on the issue. It will also be possible to look at the Japanese Wikipedia and see how they describe things, but I'm not sure if we will find sources there. Solaire the knight (talk) 15:20, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I don't think it's appropriate to assign a specific identity label like "bisexual" or "pansexual" to a character unless the character is specifically described in those terms, either within the text of the work itself or by the creator(s) of the work. It would be a glaring omission for any article on Card Captor Sakura to not discuss the very apparent same-sex romance themes in that series, but a statement like "Sakura is bisexual" (or "Utena is a lesbian" or "Ash Lynx is gay") is, in lieu of an in-text or creator source directly supporting that claim in that specific language, POV. Morgan695 (talk) 20:09, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Well, I think that in the case of Ash or Utena, bisexuality is almost obvious, as both characters (especially if you accept all BF readings) show attraction to both sexes. But yes, even if the attractions seem obvious or reasonable for conclusions, we don't have any authorial evidence. Especially in the case of Sakura, when we have one general statement without clarifications known to me. Then what to do? Really move this to the reception section with reference to the media's interpretations? Solaire the knight (talk) 20:19, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

I would suggest stick to first party sources for these themes and leave the third party sources for reception. I did something similar for Clamp's Subaru who is one of the earliest gay protagonists highly recognized in the West. Tintor2 (talk) 20:46, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Subaru? I heard that the female character in the trio is also bisexual, but I didn't watch the anime and the description of the manga seemed confusing so I didn't get the point. For now, I have removed only the categories and the phrase "pansexual" from the paragraph with the citation of the authors. So it's all good, just create a paragraph discussing the character's sexuality in the reception part? Solaire the knight (talk) 20:57, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

It's been long but I remember that in the case of Syaoran Clamp was careful with how to write. They wanted to be careful with the fact his feelings for Sakura were more geniune than Yukito based on his actions. I think I have Clamp no kiseki where the authors discussed important events from their series and Sakura, X and Tsubasa were the most talked

I saw the opinion that the versions of the characters in Tsubasa can also be some kind of argument, since they are supposedly complete analogues of the original ones, but I do not know how true this is. Solaire the knight (talk) 20:59, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Since this is kinda getting too long, I'll send you a message to your talk page.Tintor2 (talk) 21:44, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Toei USA as the master licensee

As recommended by User:Xexerss to go here, I proposed an idea to amend several Dragon Ball, Sailor Moon and One Piece anime articles that the license holder of the three anime series is Toei Animation Inc., a U.S. subsidiary of Tokyo’s Toei Animation. Crunchyroll and Viz Media are the licensing agents as evidenced here, here and here. What do you guys think of this idea? 142.113.187.47 (talk) 11:10, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Template:Infobox animanga states that licensee corresponds to the English licensee of the series, which usually (as far as I know) refers to the companies that distribute the series in English-speaking territories and not necessarily refers to the master license holder. Xexerss (talk) 11:24, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Actually dude. There is a misunderstanding. Dragon Ball, One Piece and Sailor Moon are distributed by Toei USA anyway. Crunchyroll actually is the sub-distributor of OP and DB while Viz Media serves as a sub-licensee for the SM anime. I have checked the Toei Animation Inc. article and they actually distribute each of the series in North America. Not the other way around. According to LawInsider's definition of "sub-distributor", it means any Third Party or any Affiliate of Distributor that has entered into a written agreement with Distributor for the distribution of Products anywhere in the Territory. –—142.113.187.47 (talk) 11:49, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Yeah... about that, I only see one reference in that article, and it's not used to support the info about the distribution of those titles, so I wouldn't trust in the article. I never heard about Toei directly distributing these titles in English speaking territories, but I don't know, maybe someone knows more about it. At the moment, I don't think there are enough reasons to change the licensee in the infobox of these series. Xexerss (talk) 11:59, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

NOT one, but two and more than that. Toei Animation Inc. (see here) has distributed One Piece Film: Red. We need to have a vote to change it in order to have it amended.

"I never heard about Toei directly distributing these titles in English speaking territories" | Think again. They actually do technically for its US subsidiary. Crunchyroll and VIZ sub-distributed them in home video and streaming, except Studiopolis did the Sailor Moon dubbing for Toei via Viz. 142.113.187.47 (talk) 12:10, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

"Based in Los Angeles, Toei Animation Inc. is responsible for the program licensing of Toei Animation-produced series to North America, Latin America, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand. Toei Animation’s Los Angeles office also handles all categories of consumer product licensing based on its film and television properties within these territories."[18] After reading this, I think that it wouldn't be a bad idea to change the licensee with an appropriate justification and source, but I don't think that is necessary to mention the licensee status outside of English-speaking territories like in Latin America. And the explanatory footnotes in the infobox should be way more concise. Xexerss (talk) 12:40, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

That source is too vague though; it doesn't state directly that One Piece or Dragon Ball are published by them (outside of maybe the film in the press release), so it constitutes WP:SYNTH to apply it to everything. Additionally, there is no such thing as a "master license" and as such we should not use the that term anywhere. Link20XX (talk) 16:17, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

I see. Then I take back what I said. It seems that we don't need to make these changes after all. Does this apply to the Attack on Titan (TV series) and Attack on Titan: Junior High articles, where the IP made similar edits? Xexerss (talk) 20:18, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

I would support reverting those edits too, but for a different reason. While Kodansha has the international rights to Attack on Titan based on their standing in the production committee, Crunchyroll (formerly Funimation) is the company that licensed the series. Additionally, the note on Attack on Titan (TV series) is also partially inaccurate. It says the series is also available for streaming on Prime Video, Netflix, Hulu and Tubi, but it is not on Prime Video or Netflix (at least not in English-speaking regions outside of Asia), and while the series is on Hulu and Tubi, that's via their partnership with Crunchyroll (formerly Funimation), so it's disingenuous to list them in the licensor parameter since they haven't licensed the series. Link20XX (talk) 21:01, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Kingdom 2: Far And Away

Can somebody please create an article about Kingdom 2: Far And Away, which currently only has a mention in the first film's article. Despite being the highest-grossing live-action Japanese film of 2022, it still doesn't have an article a year and a week after its release. I'd do it myself but I can't read Japanese-language sources. There's a bunch which came up when I searched for its Japanese title (キングダム2 遥かなる大地へ) on Google News, and these are the only two English-language RSs I found. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 13:10, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

@Vortex3427: Sorry for taking time to answer. Yeah, we are kinda low with users who speak Japanese. The fastest thing to write when it comes a movie article is the plot section due to access to it. If you more or less understand what a Japanese article is meant to say, I'd suggest using google translate which sometimes works properly. I would suggest writing in a sandbox and then creating it when you think the article has enough weight for at least a start class article.Tintor2 (talk) 17:19, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Mobile Suit Gundam: The Witch from Mercury...again

Moved from Portal talk:Anime and manga

 – Link20XX (talk) 23:37, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, again. This time, one of the participants in the last dispute questioned the new media scandal surrounding the show (speculation about queerbaiting and censorship of homosexual content on the show flared up with new fuel after fans accused the showrunners of trying to erase the characters' same-sex marriage), opining that the media reason that forced the publisher and the official website to apologize and justify is controversial and we cannot link to geeks resources to demonstrate this. It even took me a while to explain why we use primary sources to validate official statements, or that we don't need a secondary source to validate official tweets or official streams. I'm just tired of any controversy around this article and this anime, does anyone want to take part in this as well? It just seems to me that this article and show is really "cursed" to be a constant thorn in the side of endless debate. Solaire the knight (talk) 23:13, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Based on a passing looking at the thread, the thing that needs to be proven is that this controversy is even worth including in the article in the first place per WP:WEIGHT, and weight is proven through secondary sources. The primary source indeed proves that the negative response exists. However, a primary source does not establish significance or worthiness for inclusion from an encyclopedic standpoint; those things can only be asserted through secondary sources. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 23:59, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Doesn't anyone have Pokémon on their watchlists?

Note: this notice is cross-posted at WT:VG, WT:JP, and here, as well as the WikiProjects on Pokémon and media franchises.

Help is urgently needed at Talk:Pokémon. Any positive assistance is appreciated. Thanks! - Manifestation (talk) 15:20, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

One Piece 1071

Does episode 1071 of One Piece need a page? I’m not an OP fan, but I think that the episode is encyclopedic. After the release of the episode the Crunchyroll server crashed, and the episode has been also unofficially released in some European and American theaters. Redjedi23 (talk) 15:16, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

If it meets WP:GNG then it should have a page; regarding Crunchyroll's servers, they have crashed before upon uploading really popular series like Attack on Titan, My Hero Academia, or Chainsaw Man, so I don't think that really means much. Link20XX (talk) 17:38, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

it tends to be challenging to find reliable sources of an episode that was just released. A user managed to give the first half of Neon Génesis Evangelion articles but that required a lot of research Tintor2 (talk) 17:44, 7 August 2023 (UTC)

Looking at Google News, there's a lot to work with, but I'm not sure how many decent reliable sources are among these. The Polygon article is almost certainly good, but besides that it's hard to say. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 10:15, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

I'd say most of the content focuses on Luffy's new transformation. I added some tidbits to the article. Still, considering his previous forms are also popular I would recommend to search for an official image that gathers all transformations in one if we need an illustration.Tintor2 (talk) 01:47, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

I would wait, personally. It's getting a lot of immediate coverage at the moment, but it's unclear whether it will have WP:LASTING notability. Morgan695 (talk) 18:05, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Doraemon article

User:Bananado has been making some…curious edits and additions to the Doraemon article, most of them don't seem very good to me. I'm assuming good faith in these edits though, but I kinda gave up on intervening and try to fix them (not to mention that I don't want to be engaged in edit warring). So it would be helpful if anyone can help or have some kind of input to resolve this. Xexerss (talk) 22:55, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Establishing notability in characters

If you are aware, the game project has been merging a lot of characters for not passing wp:notability. While most GAs character articles have proper reviews from the series, the game project became a bit more critical in regards how to handle reception to the point I have been trying to expand the reception of GA character articles. Rather than having just reviews, the project wants articles to have proper sources that heavily focus on the characters besides just reviews. For example, Askeladd from Vinland Saga has several articles where reliable sources like Den of Geek analyze him and try to see them from different points of view. Comic Book Resources is also useful bad sometimes some come across as quite biased. Google Scholars are quite useful too when providing analysis on characters. For example, I tried expanding the reception of Vash the Stampede and Wolfwood from Trigun since they are often heavily discussed by scholars. If a character happens to be controversial like Rudeus Greyrat due to recent accusations of slavery approved or Suguru Geto for his confusing fate in Jujutsu Kaisen, it is possible to easily find articles solely focused on them. It's not a warning but I hope we can keep most articles, especially the GAs considering what happened to a lot video game characters articles who didn't pass such notability content. Happy editing.Tintor2 (talk) 22:26, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

Naming order of KODAMA Naoko

The Kodama Naoko article currently uses the last + first naming order. She is officially credited as such in her works' English language releases, probably since her name is written in katakana. However, third-party sources like ANN, Crunchyroll and some WorldCat entries continue to use the "conventional" first + last order. So which one of these has more weight? Should the article be moved? ~~lol1VNIO🕯 (I made a mistake? talk to me) 20:49, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Proposals for a category for Anime without English dubbings

To those who are maintaining the group, it is to our attention that we will suggest a new category of "Anime without English dubbing" (including Anime that had yet to or due to have English dubbing at any time, such as some of the 2023 anime) or "Anime without international dubbings" (for those that not yet given a dub other than English). It's about time that we will have these categories suggested so that some long-time anime fans may be surprised to see which anime had not given English dubbings at all or are long forgotten over time (Fandub do not count).

The reason of having these categories is because nowadays in our modern-day era of anime, almost most of the new anime had been in demand on being given English dubs over time. If the anime had been confirmed to have given an official English dub or so, the anime can now be removed from the list, fandubs does not count.

Subsequently, episode or anime movie articles for episodes without international or English dubbings can also be created as well, for a smaller scope of episodes which had not yet given a dub (such as the infamous Denno Senshi Porygon episode). What do you think?

Please hope that these proposals of the new categories will come to reality in Wikipedia, as nowadays that it is also culture and increasing trends. Thank you and happy editing! 203.78.15.149 (talk) 10:22, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Categories should be based on what can be cited to reliable sources, they should not be something that depends on the complete lack of sourcing. 216.30.147.90 (talk) 01:49, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

We would have to find sources for every anime release that has not received an English dub yet to include them in such category, which is frankly a waste of time and pointless. This also presumes the idea that every anime should receive an English dub is something objective and unanimously believed by everyone and we must prove that, which is quite far from the truth. Xexerss (talk) 02:23, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Additionally, I don't think that not having an English dub is defining enough to warrant such a category (coming from someone who almost exclusively watches anime dubs when one exists). Link20XX (talk) 03:21, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguating multiple manga with the same title

I've brought this up before, but nothing was changed so I figured I would bring this up again. Currently, MOS:ANIME does not provide any method for disambiguating multiple manga with the same title and several different methods have been used, such as year of debut, author, and genre. Based on the previous discussion and general usage, I am proposing adding the following paragraph to MOS:ANIME: When disambiguation is necessary between multiple manga, prefix the year of debut (Kamui (1964 manga) vs Kamui (2001 manga)). If this is insufficient to disambiguate the manga, use the author's name instead (Clover (Clamp manga) vs Clover (Toriko Chiya manga)). If this is implemented, then articles like Doubt (horror manga) that disambiguate based on the genre will have to be moved. Link20XX (talk) 20:44, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

In the case of Rurouni Kenshin we use years. The only two anime articles I created due amount of unique sources was X and Vinland Saga and we ended using Tv series. Is there a certain series bugging You? I can only think of remakes with the same name that can only be differentiated through the year Tintor2 (talk) 21:58, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Rurouni Kenshin's disambiguation comes from WP:NCTV, which clearly defines how to disambiguate beyond "(TV series)". There is not any particular series that bugs me, I just find it weird how inconsistent the disambiguation is and wish there was some kind of consistent standard to apply, since for manga there is not one. Link20XX (talk) 22:08, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

I agree with this method. Fortunately, there don't seem to be many cases where two series with the same title were released in the same year. Also, I don't think that is a good idea to disambiguate anime/manga titles based on their genres. Xexerss (talk) 23:31, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

AfD of note

Editors may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guyver: The Bioboosted Armor, where the reliability/usability of many of our most-used sources (like Anime News Network, IGN, THEM Anime Reviews, UK Anime Network, Otaku USA, and more) has come into question. Link20XX (talk) 15:10, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Shonen Jump+

About the Shonen Jump+ page. A user removed some content from the page stating in their edit summary that "these manga are published in other magazines and this page should be about manga exclusively published on that website". I reverted the edits, but I'm afraid I might enter an edit war over this. Should the Shonen Jump+ page focus on content exclusively published on the site or should it contain content that are also published in other magazines? SimonLagann (talk) 11:36, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

That the table in question is entirely uncited is probably the bigger issue here, but marking the titles that are published in other magazines with † or similar seems like a fair compromise. Morgan695 (talk) 16:04, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Determining the future of B-checklists

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council § Determining the future of B-class checklists. This project is being notified since it is one of the 82 WikiProjects that opted to support B-checklists (B1-B6) in your project banner. DFlhb (talk) 11:25, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Mai Fujisawa

Is this an article for us to cover in the WikiProject? I ask because Mai Fujisawa is currently a DYK. ISD (talk) 08:26, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I would say yes, she's known mostly for the Nausicaa song (what the DYK is about) but there's also 3 other Ghibli credits. --Mika1h (talk) 15:37, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Good. I've added the project now. ISD (talk) 16:20, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

YuYu Hakusho chapter number question

So the Viz Media version of YuYu Hakusho counts the special "Two Shot" story as chapter 64 (they don't put the number in front of it, they just label the subsequent chapter as 65 and continue from there), whereas the original Japanese version does not count it. List of YuYu Hakusho chapters follows the original Japanese and that is what I transferred to the references section of List of YuYu Hakusho characters. I just realized however, as I own the Viz version, that I used their numbers when I went through and cited everything on that characters page. That means the numbers used in that article for all chapter citations after "Two Shot" are ahead of the Japanese by one. I will go ahead and lower them if that is viewed as the best solution. But my hesitation in doing that is the fact that most people reading and editing English Wikipedia are most likely reading/referring to Viz's edition as that seems to be the only official English version. Should we just expect and trust all readers and future editors to know they don't match up? Maybe add an official editnotice to help that, or something similar? Or should we change the numbers in the references section of the characters page to Viz's numbers? Xfansd (talk) 23:31, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

I suppose that the best solution would be using the numbering of Viz's release in the chapters article and leave an explanatory footnote explaining that the "Two Shot" chapter was not numbered in the Japanese release, mainly for consistency's sake with the characters article, given that we usually edit according to what the official English releases indicate. Xexerss (talk) 01:29, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

OK, sounds good to me and no one else commented so I went ahead and did that. Feel free to reword the footnotes. Xfansd (talk) 21:04, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Dani Cavallaro

This person has written many books on the topic of anime, and has been cited in articles such as Angel's Egg. However, I am uncertain as to the quality of the source. The highest quality books would be peer reviewed books published by an academic press associated with a University and it appears that her publisher is not this. It's unclear what her education is, or if she has any association with any university. Basic biographical information can't be confirmed, and doing online searches find blog posts of people asking the same questions. Reading their work I see it's filled with jargon and purple prose rather than stating things directly.

This is certainly red flags and I would consider this person to be questionable as a source and I would not personally cite them, especially for facts. I can understand that there's a dearth of high quality sources for anime, but I would certainly avoid this person. Harizotoh9 (talk) 13:29, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. Cavallaro is not a high-quality source and, in my opinion, her works should be avoided if possible. Charcoal feather (talk) 18:48, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Her books have the superficial look of academic serious books, and there's often a dearth of sources for old anime/manga series so I can see why people would want to rely upon them. But her books appear to be low quality, and heavily cite online blogs, and lack the substance of high quality sources. She's cited on something like 42 pages according to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Dani_Cavallaro&limit=500 Harizotoh9 (talk) 19:32, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Fakemon

I assume this is an article to add to the WikiProject. Just checking, as Fakemon is currently top on today's DYK. ISD (talk) 06:29, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Takao Yaguchi

Many of his manga series are only in Japanese Wikipedia: ja:おらが村, ja:新・おらが村, ja:マタギ (漫画), ja:かつみ, ja:ニッポン博物誌, ja:ふるさと (漫画), ja:激濤 Magnitude 7.7. Can you translate them in English, and maybe also expand his own page and Fisherman Sanpei? Thank you very much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.207.175.7 (talk) 19:06, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Can you do it? 79.16.244.59 (talk) 10:58, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Broadcast delays of some minutes

@KANLen09: has been been adding notes in episode tables, concerning certain delays of a few minutes that don't really affect the actual broadcast dates, and these are mostly notes without references or very vague references at best. I have already explained why these notes don't contribute anything significant to the article. I suggested to initiate a discussion on the matter in order to reach a consensus. Since the user has been unwilling to do so and instead insists on adding these notes, I decided to start the discussion myself. Is there any relevance in highlighting these delays of a few minutes when they don't even impact the release dates? Xexerss (talk) 07:40, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Unless it changes the date, I don't see any reason to be doing it. As far as I'm concerned, there's usually not any sort of source for this either unless there's a brief mention in a social media post (maybe). Sarcataclysmal (talk) 08:34, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

There are always mentions according to the official sources, mainly X (Twitter) or on the schedules of the main network shows are aired on. I don't really understand the deal, and @Xexerss I've already told you as far as I'm concerned, BaldiBasicsFan started this whole debacle that is a back-and-forth issue before peeps like you (and others) came along. That's the reason why I recently started to add official sources to prove the rather "miniscule" changes that for everyone else, would not care about.

Maybe this is just me alone since I'm managing actual release times for another group outside of this platform, but IMVHO this should not be a problem that has now because of some "pet peeve" that has become a discussion to reach such consensus. I have been in this business for a few years now, just saying. KANLen09 (talk) 09:50, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

The only sources that you provided in the Under Ninja article for those notes is this one, which only serves to confirm the regular air time of the series, not to confirm any delays or whatsoever. Do what you want outside of Wikipedia, but this is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Also, you're the only editor I've seen adding these notes about delays of a few minutes, so I don't know how many readers really care to know this kind of information. It seems to fall into WP:FANCRUFT territory. Xexerss (talk) 10:15, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

What are the most vital (important) anime and manga?

See related discussion at Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5#Anime and manga and feelf ree to join it :) _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:12, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Also Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/4#Add One Piece. Link20XX (talk) 04:17, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

I have replied. David A (talk) 08:52, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello. This is just a note that our discussion seems to have been moved to this location, and none of the former participants in our discussion noticed or continued to participate. David A (talk) 05:55, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Top-selling manga by series of 2023

I've seen various sites reporting the best-selling manga series of the year, supposedly based on an Oricon's report, like these two Comicbook sources [19][20]. I don't necessarily think that the numbers are fake, but the problem is that, on their site, Oricon only reported the best-selling manga volumes of the year.[21] The only sources I can find at the moment reporting the claimed figures of Oricon's best-selling manga series of the year, besides Comicbook (which is rather marginally reliable), are WP:USERG, so I'm not sure if it's okay to mention this in the articles of the series that figured on the list. Xexerss (talk) 16:43, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Yeah I can't find any source to back that number other than the aforementioned ComicBook.com article, something that cites said article, or Twitter. I also looked on Oricon but was unable to find the report they cited. Link20XX (talk) 18:10, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

@Link20XX: I found this article from The Beat, which is listed as reliable at WP:CMC/REF. The problem is that they're using an unofficial Twitter account as a reference (Shonen Jump News), and while I think that this Twitter account reports usually end up being true, is still a leaker, so I'm not sure if it's fine to cite the former. Xexerss (talk) 08:10, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

I don't think it should be cited per WP:CONTEXTMATTERS since the SJ Twitter is unofficial, regardless of whether their reports end up being true. Additionally, the Oricon article that Comics Beat links to lists three Blue Lock volumes in the top 30, with sales of 591,562 for one volume, 545,454 for another, and 483,803 for the last, which is about 1.5 million, quite far off from the 10 million number that was reported. Link20XX (talk) 16:50, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Yep, I supposed so. Just have to hopefully wait for Oricon to publish the official figures on their website at some point. Xexerss (talk) 17:20, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Lerche page deletion and merge

In case there's any interest here, I made a request to delete Lerche (studio) over here, with the general idea of merging it into Studio Hibari. If there's any other input anyone is interested in giving, feel free. Thanks Sarcataclysmal (talk) 05:06, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Proposal regarding season article naming

There is a proposal to change the naming conventions of TV season articles from the current practice of XXX (season 1) to XXX, season 1 or XXX season 1. As such a change would affect a substantial number of articles, you are invited to participate in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television) § Move TV seasons from parenthetical disambiguation to comma disambiguation. Thank you. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:19, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Update: Please see Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television) § Follow-up RfC on TV season article titles. Thanks. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:17, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Removal of images from the Fuatnari article

In mid December 2 images from the Futanari article were removed [[22]]. I personally don’t buy the all hentai is censored therefore any image in the aricle must be blurred to be culturally accurate argument and even if that was the case now that couldn't possible apply to the second image which doesn’t even show genitalia. I tried to revert the removal myself but a filter prevented me from doing so so if someone does agree with my stance can they please restore the images since I believe that any removal should be discussed first. 67.70.103.36 (talk) 07:56, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

In cass anyone is curious here is an earlier version with the images, it’s the bottom 2 [[23]].--67.70.103.36 (talk) 08:03, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Digimon Adventure (1999 TV series)#Requested move 10 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Digimon Adventure (1999 TV series)#Requested move 10 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 06:30, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Asking for help - manga article - Keishichō Tokuhanka 007

Greetings, Article Keishichō Tokuhanka 007 is tagged as Orphan, and Notability. For the Manga topic, I see many "List of..." and I'm not qualified to add article to one of those (to de-orphan). In addition, I'm clueless about it's Notability. Any help would be great. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 18:58, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

I did a quick search and couldn'f find anything useful. The only sources used in the article are two unreliable WP:USERG sites, so I'd say that the article should be nominated for deletion. Xexerss (talk) 19:36, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Hang on, let me also look into this with you. There are different ways/spellings to transcribe the japanese ō into english which might impact the search results that come up in english. I will confirm if I can find anything. --PeaceNT (talk) 22:36, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Ok, thank you, but what I searched were precisely sources in Japanese (not in English), and what I found was only stuff from retailers and such. I hope you can find something more useful. Xexerss (talk) 23:07, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Found this one 10 Most Underrated Manga For Romance Fans from Comic Book Resources. Included the manga with a short review [quote] "Keishichou Tokuhanka 007 is a refreshing diversion from shoujo tropes, bringing an exciting mystery-action element to the romance genre.". This is not a well-known manga for sure but does have some third-party coverage as it looks; we can keep article on this on wikipedia for any reader who might want to look it up. --PeaceNT (talk) 23:20, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

I added the ref to the article as a small claim to notability. JoeNMLC, thanks for bringing this here; I added a link so it should no longer be orphaned now. --PeaceNT (talk) 23:44, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Not really sure if that's enough to warrant notability, but whatever. Maybe there's more coverage out there in archived sites or something. Xexerss (talk) 00:28, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

 Done - Thanks for improving this article @PeaceNT and @Xexerss. Cheers! JoeNMLC (talk) 00:35, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Scope of Team Rocket

I would like to invite discussion over at Talk:Team Rocket#Whether to refocus this article. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:52, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Onimai: I'm Now Your Sister!#Requested move 31 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Onimai: I'm Now Your Sister!#Requested move 31 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 13:38, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Usage of original Japanese titles in lead sentences

Hello, I'd like to request some community input on what the consensus is for displaying original Japanese-language titles in the lead sentences of anime and manga articles. To be clear, I don't oppose including a work's original-language title in its article somewhere, but as a longtime reader and editor of WP, I feel like retaining an original title as a parenthetical statement in the lead sentence just clutters the article for the average English-language reader. This becomes especially messy when multiple verbose translations are included, as in Dragon Ball GT: A Hero's Legacy. Wouldn't this be easier for casual readers if it were a footnote? Is this standardized in the anime and manga community?

MOS:ANIME's brief guidelines on lead sections and article titles do not answer my question, and other resources such as MOS:TV and WP:OTHERNAMES are equally unhelpful. I also searched through this project's talk page's archives and found an RfC from 2014 that concluded that inclusion of these titles using Template:Nihongo foot is acceptable, but there doesn't appear to be a standard. This also overlaps with WP:WikiProject Video games to an extent, which does have a standard in WP:JFN.

For instance, both Dissidia Final Fantasy, a video game, and Final Fantasy: Unlimited, an anime, retain Japanese-language titles as footnotes, while Dragon Ball Z: Budokai, a video game, and Dragon Ball GT, an anime, both retain Japanese-language titles in prose. The related article about the Dragon Ball Z anime keeps the Japanese title in a footnote instead of a parenthetical. There seems to be a lack of consistency.

To me, the manual of style for anime should outline a standard for lead sentences based on consensus from this project's community. In no way do I want to diminish the original titles of the works, but I'm in favor of including the Japanese titles as footnotes instead of parenthetical statements. Wikipedia has made viewing notes and references more accessible for readers in recent years, so confining original titles to footnotes would not obscure them from people who don't make it to the bottom of the article.

I would like to know how the community feels about this. Your input is appreciated. — Paper Luigi ^{T • C} 04:10, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't think a universal approach is necessary. For longer titles a footnote should be used to shorten the lead, but for shorter titles just leaving them in the parentheses is fine. Link20XX (talk) 04:34, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

How long is too long? — Paper Luigi ^{T • C} 04:46, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

There is not any concrete number of characters; editors should use their judgment to determine when a title is too long. Link20XX (talk) 04:58, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Shorter titles are indeed less disruptive to the reader, but I disagree that it should be left to editors' discretion. Without a universal standard, selective editors can propagate their own styles without any justification but their own opinions. It's a loophole that needs to be closed. — Paper Luigi ^{T • C} 06:34, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

I agree with Link20XX. I think that in cases where titles are unnecessarily long for lead (e.g. more than a line), it would be preferable to use nihongo foot. In any other case just parentheses are fine. Xexerss (talk) 04:46, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

In cases where there's a short Japanese title, do you believe we should include leading phrases like "known in Japan as" before the Japanese titles, or should we stick to English-language titles followed immediately by the nihongo template text in parentheses? — Paper Luigi ^{T • C} 05:02, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Assuming the English and Japanese titles are not entirely different, I think just having the title with the kanji and romaji is fine for conciseness sake. In cases like My Monster Secret it makes sense to emphasize the other title, but otherwise we should keep leads more concise. Link20XX (talk) 05:09, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

I would say it would be justified in cases where the English title is far from a translation of the original title (like in The Saga of Tanya the Evil, Reborn!, Case Closed, or Zatch Bell!, to name a few), but I honestly don't know if this has been discussed before. Xexerss (talk) 05:15, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

How would you distinguish when a translated title is too different from the original translated title? This seems like something that should be left to editors' discretion, but that vagueness is the underlying reason for this post. I believe Japanese-language titles should be standardized as either parenthetical statements or, preferably, footnotes. Leaving the gate open to interpretation is already the norm, and I'm a proponent for a standard that's applicable to all anime/manga with English adaptations, regardless of translated title length or semantic differences compared to the original. — Paper Luigi ^{T • C} 06:27, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

I guess I understand your point, and I apologize if I didn't make myself clear with my answer, but I think this title issue is something that should be looked at on a case-by-case basis. Take into account that just a few years ago there was a discussion regarding titles with Latin-script title in the original release (e.g. Gantz, D.Gray-man, Bleach, etc.), and whether it was necessary to use 'nihongo template' for these cases (the consensus was no), then it seems to me that there are too many things to take into account before trying to apply a single rule for every anime/manga article. Regarding the translations, I was referring to quite obvious cases, such as the difference between "JoJo's Bizarre Adventure / JoJo no Kimyō na Bōken)" and "The Saga of Tanya the Evil / Yōjo Senki". Xexerss (talk) 07:18, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

That's true, and I understand how titles can differ quite a bit between languages. Literal English translations of Japanese titles were not at the forefront of my post, and it's honestly something I didn't think about until now. That's kind of along the lines of what I was going for, though. Regardless of what the title is in other languages, I wanted to get a consensus on non-English original titles being used in the lead sentence as a parenthetical or as a footnote. This is the English Wikpedia, after all. It seems like the consensus is that it's up to editors, and the criteria is based on title length or comparability to the English title. That's fine if that's what the community decides. I was aiming for a guideline that was a little more uniform, but if non-uniform guidelines are preferred, I will respect that. — Paper Luigi ^{T • C} 07:32, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

I thank you for bringing this up anyway, as it would be interesting if there were some written rules for each case with some of the aforementioned variations (length, similarity to the original title, etc.) to make it all less arbitrary. Speaking of which, and going a bit off topic, I think our Manual of Style is a bit outdated, and it would be great if someone could add some of the consensus that we have had here in the last few years. Xexerss (talk) 08:31, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

I do agree that we should clean up lede sentences this way, but finding a clear ruleset has proven almost impossible. I personally think we probably pretty much never need to display kanji in the lede sentence, but that's obviously not a big space concern anyway. Any time the hepburn romanization just morphs English words should also be relegated to the notes realm at best. When there's two distinct titles, I think we should always render both in some capacity. Whether to show the Japanese-language (hepburn) title in the lede... Personally I think it should be a case-by-case decision, but I recognize that this will result in some (hopefully minor) edit wars. I think English translations of Japanese titles can probably be relegated to notes as well? Unless there hasn't been an English release, perhaps.. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

You're right about the difficulty in finding a clear ruleset. No matter which way the community sways, it's a sure bet that not everyone will be happy with it. Regarding which translations should be included over others, I don't see myself in one camp or the other about it because I'm just not that informed. Really one could come to multiple conclusions about which translations belong in parentheses and which belong in footnotes, and that's pretty much how my thought process went while writing this reply. Since creating this topic, I've bounced around mentally from supporting nearly all non-English titles being included in footnotes (a la WP:JFN) to supporting only very different translations comparable to English titles in the lead to supporting every kanji title's inclusion in parentheses with any other titles in footnotes. Now it seems like I've circled back to where I was at the start of this post–with no idea how to handle this. — Paper Luigi ^{T • C} 06:07, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

I also don't think a universal approach is needed; this should be handled on a case-by-case basis. In my personal opinion, kanji characters that span a line of text (maybe 25+ characters?) would be higher candidates. But then again... everyone's screen size from laptops to PCs to phones, ect... is different. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:05, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Move 'Dream 9 Toriko & One Piece & Dragon Ball Z Super Collaboration Special!!' to 'Dream 9 Toriko x One Piece x Dragon Ball Z Super Collaboration Special!!'

(Discussion in Active on Talk:Dream 9 Toriko & One Piece & Dragon Ball Z Super Collaboration Special!!)

• The poster, and few sources like imdb, this fandom, and Crunchyroll use version with x's (however Crunchyroll source uses one with &'s also).
• Although cbr, some other fandom, this source, and animenewsnewtrok's encyclopedia mention use the name "Dream 9 Toriko & One Piece & Dragon Ball Z Chō Collaboration Special!!", with ann's encyclopedia mentioning one with x's as alternative title.
• Even if the name with &'s is the English title, there is no definitive source in article to prove this, and Toei Animation's official tweet announced the release in English with name in x's. Also the page shall be about original episode, and Japanese's episode's literal translation is one with x's.
• So what I suggest:

1. Either move this page to 'Dream 9 Toriko x One Piece x Dragon Ball Z Super Collaboration Special!!' OR
2. Still move the page but reason shall be WP:COMMONNAME OR
3. Mention the version with x's in English too.

Regards, ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 12:13, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Michele Knotz § Photo

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Michele Knotz § Photo. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:50, 17 February 2024 (UTC) Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:50, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Saki Fujita

I was wondering if we could give poor Saki Fujita's article some attention, as it's honestly sad to see that her article is a stub, especially considering that her voice is sampled for Hatsune Miku (which is a much better article). She seems to be too important to have her article be a stub. vghfr, harbinger of chaos 14:10, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

As long as there are reliable sources, we can expand it per the relevant policies at WP:BLP and WP:V. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:57, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

New template for hepburn romanji

Template:Hepburn
{{subst:Hepburn|keeki}}=>kēki
{{subst:Hepburn|toukyou}}=>tōkyō
{{subst:Hepburn|Oosaka}}=>Ōsaka

No more clicking the latin buttons :) subst only for performance reasons. DarmaniLink (talk) 14:19, 5 March 2024 (UTC)