This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
To-do list for Blade of the Phantom Master:
|
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
The wikiproject does not consern itself with purely non-Japanese works. This series has been included because it includes a Japanese anime movie.
Even though the artist and illustrator are both Korean, the comic series is first published in Japan, not in Korea. Does this make it a manga or is it all right to leave its categorization as a manhwa? -- 9muses 16:59, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
By one definition, that actually makes it manga. Those who draw manga need not be Japanese, the requirement is that it's first published by a Japanese company in Japan. -- GunnarRene 20:19, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
I added subheadings to this section in an attempt to organize it. Hopefully this won't become too unwieldy. I admit the split between main and supporting is arbitrary though, so I'm very open to shifting them around. I did make a point to include characters who, though they only appear for a few pages, play a significant in the story development. (For example: Mong Ryong, who was Sando's lover and whose headband Munsu wears.) -- 9muses 03:22, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Also, I haven't seen the anime, so I don't know if there are any differences between the comic and anime characterizations. These descriptions are based on the comic depictions. If someone has seen the anime, please point out any variations. -- 9muses 15:57, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Great. I have not watched or read either, so I put up an expansion request for you. :-) -- GunnarRene 16:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
It's never explicitly stated (at least until the end of volume 6, which is as far as I've read) what Miss Hwang's sando is, just that it's "special." It looks a lot like a small Eastern-styled dragon, but it's definitely not an ordinary animal. -- 9muses 16:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
People, should we split off the character section into a separate article? it's getting bigger and it'll get bigger, since there's many characters to come in this ongoing series... Boshiaki ( talk) 20:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
A few questions:
Suggestions and input would be appreciated. :) -- 9muses 00:04, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Apparently, ADV changed the name of the anime to Blade of the Phantom Master: Shin Angyo Onshi. Should we change the page title to reflect that? (Here's the listing on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Blade-Phantom-Master-Angyo-Onshi/dp/B000LPQ6CU/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-2564833-6580668?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1191021406&sr=1-1) - 9muses 23:23, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
I've added most of the Korean spellings, if anyone sees any misspellings please correct them. Thank you. :) Talchum ( talk) 05:15, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
I was thinking that since there is so many historical references and folk tales in SAO it would be nice to have the stories gathered under one heading. I'll work on that in the future. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Talchum ( talk • contribs) 22:31, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Given the edits of yesterday and today, 61.119.138.171 ( talk · contribs) and 211.129.140.247 ( talk · contribs) seem to be the same person, one of which vandalized manhwa article yesterday. Regardless of this, the creators are all KOREAN, and their art world is introduced to Japan, so his/her claim that the work is originally of Japan is not add up. They're already very famous in South Korean and some of their work exported to the US and Europe. This series may have Korean creators but it is originally published in Japan under the guidance of a Japanese editor.. If so, any books published in Japanese become Japanese one? That is very illogical answer and I presented the compromised version as "a cartoon and animation created by Korean manhwa writer and artist..... published by Japanese manga magazine. if he/her does not present a proper logic here, I would revert it to the compromised version and go to ask a third opinion here. Regards. -- Appletrees ( talk) 19:02, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
However, I wanted to end a tendentious edit warring, so I present a compromised version as "a cartoon and animation series created by Korean manhwa artist, and writer...published by a Japanese manga magazine", but the other Japanese anon keeps insisting that it is a manga.
By one definition, that actually makes it manga. Those who draw manga need not be Japanese, the requirement is that it's first published by a Japanese company in Japan. by GunnarRene ( 61.119.129.25 ( talk) 08:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC))
This work belongs to a relatively small portion of comics who were created by non-Japanese but published first in Japan. I doubt there's not a lot of Wikipedia precedence to go on. But I don't see that as a central issue at all. The goal here is to write a great article about this work. Labels should serve only to help the reader understand the subject better, not to cubbyhole or lay claim. I would fully expect the words "manhwa" and "manga" to both be used in this article, because they'll serve to enhance its understandability and help fans of both types of media find the article. Focus on what's important here and be done with the dissection of which comic subgroup it belongs to. Possible sockpuppetry notwithstanding, there haven't been an excessive amount of disruptive edits lately. (Okay, I looked again and there kind of have been. But my message goes out to all the editors of this article, not just those who are actively participating in the discussion, so the message doesn't change.) And for those that do occur, there's the "undo" feature. :) --
hamu♥hamu (
talk) 15:50, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
I know this work firstly published on manga weekly magazin, so this version is a manga version. Appltree said that this version was translated into manga from manhwa, but he didn't make any citation that the manhwa version when and whom and where was published. Or at least it is necessary for saying this work was translated from manhwa to manga to cite that first manhwa manuscript copy was written before manga version was published. As there aren't any citation, particularly we don't know manhwa version was published or not published, there are only manga version, we have no other choice to say this 'version' is manga. We should wait the citation of manhwa version, by him or anyone. Jazz81089 ( talk) 11:03, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Look, Jazz, who are the many of us? By far, you're the only one to blank the manhwa mention, and even if you're not the anon, the two can be not "many". Therefore, you're not speaking on behalf of many people that I don't see in here but speaking of your own point of view. Before the content dispute happened, some of editors above questioned whether the work should be only manga. Even though the disruptive anon sporadically reappeared to blank the Korean mention and manhwa, other editors always restored the info, so I'm not the only or first one who insists on adding the manhwa category back. That does never happen. So please say a thing irrelevant matter.
As you keeping emphasizing that the work is special in Japan because it is the first and only cartoon that gained a huge success even though it was created by Korean manhwa artists with Korean folktales. That means that the work is also very special to Koreans because the work got a big success other than in South Korea. Besides, by the definition of manhwa, it does not only refers to cartoons published on paper, but animations, so the mahwa category is perfectly fine being here, given that the animation is created from the collaboration by a Korean and Japanese animation company which is already referenced in the article. Therefore, the work can be Korean animation as well. You also remember that the cartoon was sold 2.2 million copies including 1.5 million in Japan and 0.5 million in South Korea. You also may acknowledge that Japanese population are triple than South Koreans as well as the fact that the Korean cartoon market is smaller than the Japanese cartoon market. Manhwa in South Korea is really a subculture unlike Korean films, so their success is enough to warrant them to be exposed on famous South Korean newspapers. Besides, you're insisting that Korean manga author would be perfect, but as you know that in Japan, Koreans are divided to many categories depending on their nationality and residence period, and historical, and political matters such as Zainichi Korean. I've heard that many Zainich Koreans become "mangaka" in Japan with their Japanese name, and their works could be called "manhwa" due to their nationality? Nope, their works are solely under manga category unless they forsake their acquired styles in Japan and starts to draw manwha style and their success starts in South Korea.
Back to the point, the Korean manhwa artists may embrace some of Japanese manga features for Japanese readers which can be referred to as "localize". In interviews with them, they said they need a translator for their works to be published in Japan due to their inability to speak Japanese fluently. They could not speak any single word in Japnaese when their work was first published in Japan. Their work style does not change in Japan according to manhwa critics' analysis. (I will add relevant references later, but you do have to add reference for your claim as well, since the article does not have enough citations.)
Besides, manhwa/manga are originally translated into Korean cartoon/Japanese cartoon, so the lead section like an cartoon and animation created by Korean... is NPOV. In Korean Wkipedia, due to the same sharing of the Chinese character, manga/manhua are called "일본만화 Ilbon manhwa" / "중국만화 Jungguk manhwa" (Japanese cartoon/Chinese cartoon), and that goes by all the same manner in Japanese and Chinese Wikipedia. So cartoon and animation does not cause any useless dispute.
Well, I'll be very busy for my real life until tomorrow and have to translate required references later, so you can have much enough time to prepare for your claim than me. I have another matter to deal with other editors in Wikipedia too. -- Appletrees ( talk) 21:13, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Sockpuppetry is not really a good move to resolve the dispute here. Here are all your history, and you appeared here to the specific one from 8 month break? Besides, Azukimonaka ( talk · contribs) appeared at Pyrus pyrifolia article as well. The contribution history does not explain your appearance and editing.
-- Appletrees ( talk) 21:08, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I have spent many hours creating a custom infobox, just for this article. It is based on the anime & manga infoboxes, but removes country-specific language like "anime" or "manhwa". This series was created by Koreans, and was published more-or-less concurrently in both Japan and Korea. It was a joint project between South Korea and Japan. I will include sources for this fact in the article body when I finish copyediting it.
The infobox I've created acknowledges the binational, joint nature of this series. I have carefully studied Wikipedia naming coventions for Korean and Japanese names -- please don't change their name order! I have also studied Wikipedia's standards for usage of flags. In this infobox, they serve to clarify events happening in one country or the other (such as local comic publication). Flags are not to be used with individuals' names simply to denote their nationality. This not only goes against the spirit of WP:FLAG, it serves absolutely no purpose, particularly in the context of a joint project. Please don't add Japanese or Korean flags anyplace they aren't already present! The animated film was created jointly by two studios -- it was done hand in hand and does not pertain to activities in one country or another. Thus, no flags.
Please don't revert this infobox to the anime & manga one. Its use of neutral language in this unique case is in the spirit of WP:NPOV, one of the fundamental principles guiding Wikipedia. hamu♥hamu ( talk)
I've added a new lead paragraph for the article, in which I've tried to use neutral, matter-of-fact language, and I've added in some sources. I'm going to take a look at the sections that come after the plot overview and characters next.
I believe this article could be structured following the page layout section of the manual of style for anime & manga articles. I've looked at some Featured and Good articles from anime & manga, and I think the characters section for this article is currently a bit long. That doesn't mean there's too much information! It just means it's worth considering creation of a "characters of" page for the series and then present only the most prominent characters in the series article. Take a look at Tenjho Tenge versus List of Tenjho Tenge characters as an example. Who goes on what page is a great topic for discussion among those of you here who are big fans.
Please chime in with your suggestions, ideas, info sources, or anything else you think would enhance the article, and please take a look at any changes I've made for accuracy, completeness, and grammar. Copyedit and improve, but please keep in mind what is and isn't supposed to go in the lead for an article of this kind, and please don't add in unneeded descriptive words that could cause contention or be possibly interpreted as POV or nationalistic, and that aren't needed to actually improve the readability or understandability of the subject matter to the reader. :) Thanks everyone for your passion and hard work. -- hamu♥hamu ( talk) 21:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
p.s I changed my screen name for some reason. -- Caspian blue ( talk) 21:42, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Rewrote and rearranged sections for Series origins, Comic, and Animated film. Please peruse, improve, and question! Also, I found three sources that reported plans for the film to be shown at New York Comic Con in Feb 2007, "two months" before release onto DVD. Can't find anything to confirm it actually happened, and I wonder only because ADV released the DVD in Nov 2007, nine months after NYCC, so I thought the project might not have been ready for the NYCC screening. Anyone got info! -- hamu♥hamu ( talk) 10:37, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I have noticed that the series is called Shin Angyo Onshi throughout the body of most of the article. Do you guys think it's better to use either the "offical" English-release name of Blade of the Phantom Master or the translated title of New Royal Secret Commissioner? Also, a lot of items and concepts are referred to by a (usually) Japanese word. Should we shoot for a translated English term, when possible? I realize that a greater number of English-speaking fans probably are familiar with the Japanese title and terms than with the Korean, due to the scanlation of the manga into English, but because of this article's history...you know. :) Also, regardless of that decision, non-English terms should be italicized when initially used, and I think the translated and Korean terms are imperative for inclusion during the word's initial usage. The talk page is the perfect place for everyone to chime in with what word means what, and all that good stuff.-- hamu♥hamu ( talk) 22:41, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Changed references in general body of article from Shin Angyo Onshi to Blade of the Phantom Master. Left angyo onshi and mahai as is, for now, with some copyediting and first-use italicizing, until we find/agree on proper terms to use. Question -- are the "horse medallions" actually called mahai or is mahai the rank designation of the medallion wielder? I did some streamlining of the angyo onshi subsection, and may have fouled that up. Original text said medallions were called mahai, and that also the rank was Ordinal + mahai. I can read some Japanese so I'll see what I can find if no one is sure. ((is the MA in MAHAI "horse"?))-- hamu♥hamu ( talk) 01:26, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
I dont see any reason whatsover to call it "Blade of the Phantom Master". This only serves to confuse readers who are going to try searching for a manga series(the predominat work, most people not being aware of the movie, which only covers a tiny portion of the story) called "Blade of the phantom master" and finding nothing. The series isnt even about sword fights...Munsu breaks many stereotypes, such as using guns because they are more effective than swords(most series would have ex-generals/swordmasters use swords and beat gun users anyway), and i have no idea what a phantom master is(the series is about an angyo onshi, whom is basically an investigator...). The title has nothing whatsoever to do with the content of the series, and doesnt even have anything to do with the manga/manhwa series. If you want to use teh title "Blade of the phantom master" it should be included in the article as the title of the english language movie, not as a name for the overall series. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Question2 ( talk • contribs) 16:40, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
The link for this source, which looks promising for series origin info, is now dead. Anyone willing to search for a possible archival or alternate location of the article?
| last = Okada | first = Shin'Ichi | coauthors = T. Ohikoshi and M. Nakamura | title = Changing Places | work = Jijigaho | date = 2005-11 | url = http://www.jijigaho.or.jp/app/0511/eng/sp08.html
I was lucky enough to find an archival location for the broken Korea Times links. Official websites for the movie (www.munsu2004.co.kr and www.shin-angyo.com) are dead and the archived versions at the Internet Archive seem to be useless. :( -- hamu♥hamu ( talk) 23:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
If you find existing articles on characters from Blade of the Phantom Master, or plan to create an article on a character, group of characters, or a "characters of" article, drop a note here! This can help ensure consistency between all the articles and that all character articles get linked from this article. :)
Please do not edit interwiki links to correct spelling, capitalization, romanization, etc. These links point to articles on foreign-language Wikipedias, and should point to this article's partner on those Wikipedias. This means that the link's target has to match the foreign article's title, and arbitrarily changing the link to correct spelling etc. will result in a broken link. — Dino guy 1000 17:19, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
It is very important to this type of work that when and where was the first appearance. I expect someone to cite them!! Jazz81089 ( talk) 19:44, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Publication in Indonesian, via Level Comics, has been listed in the infobox for some time, but Level's website is absolutely useless and I can't find a thing on it about anything they publish. The Indonesian wiki had no additional information. So, in order to please everyone, I've removed it from the article. Can we all work together to find something that confirms release of the series in Indonesian and, hopefully, the name under which it was released?
I've obtained the Thai title but don't know how to romanize it. It is ตุลาการทมิฬ ฉบับพิเศษ - anyone? For now I've just left the local name out. -- hamu♥hamu ( talk) 08:58, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Help with romanization of Russian title, anyone? ПОВЕЛИТЕЛЬ ПРИЗРАКОВ Thx! -- hamu♥hamu ( TALK) 21:46, 15 June 2008 (UTC) edit: Done! -- hamu♥hamu ( TALK) 20:15, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Also, found references to the series on Indonesian publisher's site, but it's just amongst a list of new releases for such-and-such date. Right now I can't find anything "cleaner," so while this is ugly, it is at least reliable and I've reinstated the Indonesian release info into infobox and "Comics" section of article body. Also found "better" links and more detailed info on Japanese serialized publication, purely by chance. Am actively looking for similar data for Korean publication. Until then, a general link to the Daiwon's website is up, and the series can be searched. Not ideal, but it works for now. -- hamu♥hamu ( TALK) 20:15, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
I realized reading the wiki article before reading the actual series that this article on the manga is full of vicious spoilers which I believe are not necessary as far as relevant information on this series is concerned.
If no one has any objection to it, I would like to remove the plot spoilers placed in the character descriptions (mostly on Sando and Munsu). If I have time later, I will also rewrite the descriptions to be more, well, descriptive lol.
Really enjoyed the series though. Definitely one of my favorite! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ironstove ( talk • contribs) 02:09, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
I am still waiting for an explanation as to why the title is called "Blade of the phantom master". Shin Angyo Onshi obviusly does NOT translate to "Blade of the Phantom Master". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.65.245.3 ( talk) 17:27, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Blade of the Phantom Master. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://animeondvd.com/news/pr.php?pr_view=1148{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://websunday.net/gx/sakuhin/yan.html{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://skygarden.shogakukan.co.jp/skygarden/owa/sol_detail?isbn=4091573010When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:14, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
To-do list for Blade of the Phantom Master:
|
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
The wikiproject does not consern itself with purely non-Japanese works. This series has been included because it includes a Japanese anime movie.
Even though the artist and illustrator are both Korean, the comic series is first published in Japan, not in Korea. Does this make it a manga or is it all right to leave its categorization as a manhwa? -- 9muses 16:59, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
By one definition, that actually makes it manga. Those who draw manga need not be Japanese, the requirement is that it's first published by a Japanese company in Japan. -- GunnarRene 20:19, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
I added subheadings to this section in an attempt to organize it. Hopefully this won't become too unwieldy. I admit the split between main and supporting is arbitrary though, so I'm very open to shifting them around. I did make a point to include characters who, though they only appear for a few pages, play a significant in the story development. (For example: Mong Ryong, who was Sando's lover and whose headband Munsu wears.) -- 9muses 03:22, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Also, I haven't seen the anime, so I don't know if there are any differences between the comic and anime characterizations. These descriptions are based on the comic depictions. If someone has seen the anime, please point out any variations. -- 9muses 15:57, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Great. I have not watched or read either, so I put up an expansion request for you. :-) -- GunnarRene 16:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
It's never explicitly stated (at least until the end of volume 6, which is as far as I've read) what Miss Hwang's sando is, just that it's "special." It looks a lot like a small Eastern-styled dragon, but it's definitely not an ordinary animal. -- 9muses 16:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
People, should we split off the character section into a separate article? it's getting bigger and it'll get bigger, since there's many characters to come in this ongoing series... Boshiaki ( talk) 20:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
A few questions:
Suggestions and input would be appreciated. :) -- 9muses 00:04, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Apparently, ADV changed the name of the anime to Blade of the Phantom Master: Shin Angyo Onshi. Should we change the page title to reflect that? (Here's the listing on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Blade-Phantom-Master-Angyo-Onshi/dp/B000LPQ6CU/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-2564833-6580668?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1191021406&sr=1-1) - 9muses 23:23, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
I've added most of the Korean spellings, if anyone sees any misspellings please correct them. Thank you. :) Talchum ( talk) 05:15, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
I was thinking that since there is so many historical references and folk tales in SAO it would be nice to have the stories gathered under one heading. I'll work on that in the future. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Talchum ( talk • contribs) 22:31, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Given the edits of yesterday and today, 61.119.138.171 ( talk · contribs) and 211.129.140.247 ( talk · contribs) seem to be the same person, one of which vandalized manhwa article yesterday. Regardless of this, the creators are all KOREAN, and their art world is introduced to Japan, so his/her claim that the work is originally of Japan is not add up. They're already very famous in South Korean and some of their work exported to the US and Europe. This series may have Korean creators but it is originally published in Japan under the guidance of a Japanese editor.. If so, any books published in Japanese become Japanese one? That is very illogical answer and I presented the compromised version as "a cartoon and animation created by Korean manhwa writer and artist..... published by Japanese manga magazine. if he/her does not present a proper logic here, I would revert it to the compromised version and go to ask a third opinion here. Regards. -- Appletrees ( talk) 19:02, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
However, I wanted to end a tendentious edit warring, so I present a compromised version as "a cartoon and animation series created by Korean manhwa artist, and writer...published by a Japanese manga magazine", but the other Japanese anon keeps insisting that it is a manga.
By one definition, that actually makes it manga. Those who draw manga need not be Japanese, the requirement is that it's first published by a Japanese company in Japan. by GunnarRene ( 61.119.129.25 ( talk) 08:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC))
This work belongs to a relatively small portion of comics who were created by non-Japanese but published first in Japan. I doubt there's not a lot of Wikipedia precedence to go on. But I don't see that as a central issue at all. The goal here is to write a great article about this work. Labels should serve only to help the reader understand the subject better, not to cubbyhole or lay claim. I would fully expect the words "manhwa" and "manga" to both be used in this article, because they'll serve to enhance its understandability and help fans of both types of media find the article. Focus on what's important here and be done with the dissection of which comic subgroup it belongs to. Possible sockpuppetry notwithstanding, there haven't been an excessive amount of disruptive edits lately. (Okay, I looked again and there kind of have been. But my message goes out to all the editors of this article, not just those who are actively participating in the discussion, so the message doesn't change.) And for those that do occur, there's the "undo" feature. :) --
hamu♥hamu (
talk) 15:50, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
I know this work firstly published on manga weekly magazin, so this version is a manga version. Appltree said that this version was translated into manga from manhwa, but he didn't make any citation that the manhwa version when and whom and where was published. Or at least it is necessary for saying this work was translated from manhwa to manga to cite that first manhwa manuscript copy was written before manga version was published. As there aren't any citation, particularly we don't know manhwa version was published or not published, there are only manga version, we have no other choice to say this 'version' is manga. We should wait the citation of manhwa version, by him or anyone. Jazz81089 ( talk) 11:03, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Look, Jazz, who are the many of us? By far, you're the only one to blank the manhwa mention, and even if you're not the anon, the two can be not "many". Therefore, you're not speaking on behalf of many people that I don't see in here but speaking of your own point of view. Before the content dispute happened, some of editors above questioned whether the work should be only manga. Even though the disruptive anon sporadically reappeared to blank the Korean mention and manhwa, other editors always restored the info, so I'm not the only or first one who insists on adding the manhwa category back. That does never happen. So please say a thing irrelevant matter.
As you keeping emphasizing that the work is special in Japan because it is the first and only cartoon that gained a huge success even though it was created by Korean manhwa artists with Korean folktales. That means that the work is also very special to Koreans because the work got a big success other than in South Korea. Besides, by the definition of manhwa, it does not only refers to cartoons published on paper, but animations, so the mahwa category is perfectly fine being here, given that the animation is created from the collaboration by a Korean and Japanese animation company which is already referenced in the article. Therefore, the work can be Korean animation as well. You also remember that the cartoon was sold 2.2 million copies including 1.5 million in Japan and 0.5 million in South Korea. You also may acknowledge that Japanese population are triple than South Koreans as well as the fact that the Korean cartoon market is smaller than the Japanese cartoon market. Manhwa in South Korea is really a subculture unlike Korean films, so their success is enough to warrant them to be exposed on famous South Korean newspapers. Besides, you're insisting that Korean manga author would be perfect, but as you know that in Japan, Koreans are divided to many categories depending on their nationality and residence period, and historical, and political matters such as Zainichi Korean. I've heard that many Zainich Koreans become "mangaka" in Japan with their Japanese name, and their works could be called "manhwa" due to their nationality? Nope, their works are solely under manga category unless they forsake their acquired styles in Japan and starts to draw manwha style and their success starts in South Korea.
Back to the point, the Korean manhwa artists may embrace some of Japanese manga features for Japanese readers which can be referred to as "localize". In interviews with them, they said they need a translator for their works to be published in Japan due to their inability to speak Japanese fluently. They could not speak any single word in Japnaese when their work was first published in Japan. Their work style does not change in Japan according to manhwa critics' analysis. (I will add relevant references later, but you do have to add reference for your claim as well, since the article does not have enough citations.)
Besides, manhwa/manga are originally translated into Korean cartoon/Japanese cartoon, so the lead section like an cartoon and animation created by Korean... is NPOV. In Korean Wkipedia, due to the same sharing of the Chinese character, manga/manhua are called "일본만화 Ilbon manhwa" / "중국만화 Jungguk manhwa" (Japanese cartoon/Chinese cartoon), and that goes by all the same manner in Japanese and Chinese Wikipedia. So cartoon and animation does not cause any useless dispute.
Well, I'll be very busy for my real life until tomorrow and have to translate required references later, so you can have much enough time to prepare for your claim than me. I have another matter to deal with other editors in Wikipedia too. -- Appletrees ( talk) 21:13, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
Sockpuppetry is not really a good move to resolve the dispute here. Here are all your history, and you appeared here to the specific one from 8 month break? Besides, Azukimonaka ( talk · contribs) appeared at Pyrus pyrifolia article as well. The contribution history does not explain your appearance and editing.
-- Appletrees ( talk) 21:08, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
I have spent many hours creating a custom infobox, just for this article. It is based on the anime & manga infoboxes, but removes country-specific language like "anime" or "manhwa". This series was created by Koreans, and was published more-or-less concurrently in both Japan and Korea. It was a joint project between South Korea and Japan. I will include sources for this fact in the article body when I finish copyediting it.
The infobox I've created acknowledges the binational, joint nature of this series. I have carefully studied Wikipedia naming coventions for Korean and Japanese names -- please don't change their name order! I have also studied Wikipedia's standards for usage of flags. In this infobox, they serve to clarify events happening in one country or the other (such as local comic publication). Flags are not to be used with individuals' names simply to denote their nationality. This not only goes against the spirit of WP:FLAG, it serves absolutely no purpose, particularly in the context of a joint project. Please don't add Japanese or Korean flags anyplace they aren't already present! The animated film was created jointly by two studios -- it was done hand in hand and does not pertain to activities in one country or another. Thus, no flags.
Please don't revert this infobox to the anime & manga one. Its use of neutral language in this unique case is in the spirit of WP:NPOV, one of the fundamental principles guiding Wikipedia. hamu♥hamu ( talk)
I've added a new lead paragraph for the article, in which I've tried to use neutral, matter-of-fact language, and I've added in some sources. I'm going to take a look at the sections that come after the plot overview and characters next.
I believe this article could be structured following the page layout section of the manual of style for anime & manga articles. I've looked at some Featured and Good articles from anime & manga, and I think the characters section for this article is currently a bit long. That doesn't mean there's too much information! It just means it's worth considering creation of a "characters of" page for the series and then present only the most prominent characters in the series article. Take a look at Tenjho Tenge versus List of Tenjho Tenge characters as an example. Who goes on what page is a great topic for discussion among those of you here who are big fans.
Please chime in with your suggestions, ideas, info sources, or anything else you think would enhance the article, and please take a look at any changes I've made for accuracy, completeness, and grammar. Copyedit and improve, but please keep in mind what is and isn't supposed to go in the lead for an article of this kind, and please don't add in unneeded descriptive words that could cause contention or be possibly interpreted as POV or nationalistic, and that aren't needed to actually improve the readability or understandability of the subject matter to the reader. :) Thanks everyone for your passion and hard work. -- hamu♥hamu ( talk) 21:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
p.s I changed my screen name for some reason. -- Caspian blue ( talk) 21:42, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Rewrote and rearranged sections for Series origins, Comic, and Animated film. Please peruse, improve, and question! Also, I found three sources that reported plans for the film to be shown at New York Comic Con in Feb 2007, "two months" before release onto DVD. Can't find anything to confirm it actually happened, and I wonder only because ADV released the DVD in Nov 2007, nine months after NYCC, so I thought the project might not have been ready for the NYCC screening. Anyone got info! -- hamu♥hamu ( talk) 10:37, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I have noticed that the series is called Shin Angyo Onshi throughout the body of most of the article. Do you guys think it's better to use either the "offical" English-release name of Blade of the Phantom Master or the translated title of New Royal Secret Commissioner? Also, a lot of items and concepts are referred to by a (usually) Japanese word. Should we shoot for a translated English term, when possible? I realize that a greater number of English-speaking fans probably are familiar with the Japanese title and terms than with the Korean, due to the scanlation of the manga into English, but because of this article's history...you know. :) Also, regardless of that decision, non-English terms should be italicized when initially used, and I think the translated and Korean terms are imperative for inclusion during the word's initial usage. The talk page is the perfect place for everyone to chime in with what word means what, and all that good stuff.-- hamu♥hamu ( talk) 22:41, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Changed references in general body of article from Shin Angyo Onshi to Blade of the Phantom Master. Left angyo onshi and mahai as is, for now, with some copyediting and first-use italicizing, until we find/agree on proper terms to use. Question -- are the "horse medallions" actually called mahai or is mahai the rank designation of the medallion wielder? I did some streamlining of the angyo onshi subsection, and may have fouled that up. Original text said medallions were called mahai, and that also the rank was Ordinal + mahai. I can read some Japanese so I'll see what I can find if no one is sure. ((is the MA in MAHAI "horse"?))-- hamu♥hamu ( talk) 01:26, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
I dont see any reason whatsover to call it "Blade of the Phantom Master". This only serves to confuse readers who are going to try searching for a manga series(the predominat work, most people not being aware of the movie, which only covers a tiny portion of the story) called "Blade of the phantom master" and finding nothing. The series isnt even about sword fights...Munsu breaks many stereotypes, such as using guns because they are more effective than swords(most series would have ex-generals/swordmasters use swords and beat gun users anyway), and i have no idea what a phantom master is(the series is about an angyo onshi, whom is basically an investigator...). The title has nothing whatsoever to do with the content of the series, and doesnt even have anything to do with the manga/manhwa series. If you want to use teh title "Blade of the phantom master" it should be included in the article as the title of the english language movie, not as a name for the overall series. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Question2 ( talk • contribs) 16:40, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
The link for this source, which looks promising for series origin info, is now dead. Anyone willing to search for a possible archival or alternate location of the article?
| last = Okada | first = Shin'Ichi | coauthors = T. Ohikoshi and M. Nakamura | title = Changing Places | work = Jijigaho | date = 2005-11 | url = http://www.jijigaho.or.jp/app/0511/eng/sp08.html
I was lucky enough to find an archival location for the broken Korea Times links. Official websites for the movie (www.munsu2004.co.kr and www.shin-angyo.com) are dead and the archived versions at the Internet Archive seem to be useless. :( -- hamu♥hamu ( talk) 23:35, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
If you find existing articles on characters from Blade of the Phantom Master, or plan to create an article on a character, group of characters, or a "characters of" article, drop a note here! This can help ensure consistency between all the articles and that all character articles get linked from this article. :)
Please do not edit interwiki links to correct spelling, capitalization, romanization, etc. These links point to articles on foreign-language Wikipedias, and should point to this article's partner on those Wikipedias. This means that the link's target has to match the foreign article's title, and arbitrarily changing the link to correct spelling etc. will result in a broken link. — Dino guy 1000 17:19, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
It is very important to this type of work that when and where was the first appearance. I expect someone to cite them!! Jazz81089 ( talk) 19:44, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
Publication in Indonesian, via Level Comics, has been listed in the infobox for some time, but Level's website is absolutely useless and I can't find a thing on it about anything they publish. The Indonesian wiki had no additional information. So, in order to please everyone, I've removed it from the article. Can we all work together to find something that confirms release of the series in Indonesian and, hopefully, the name under which it was released?
I've obtained the Thai title but don't know how to romanize it. It is ตุลาการทมิฬ ฉบับพิเศษ - anyone? For now I've just left the local name out. -- hamu♥hamu ( talk) 08:58, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Help with romanization of Russian title, anyone? ПОВЕЛИТЕЛЬ ПРИЗРАКОВ Thx! -- hamu♥hamu ( TALK) 21:46, 15 June 2008 (UTC) edit: Done! -- hamu♥hamu ( TALK) 20:15, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Also, found references to the series on Indonesian publisher's site, but it's just amongst a list of new releases for such-and-such date. Right now I can't find anything "cleaner," so while this is ugly, it is at least reliable and I've reinstated the Indonesian release info into infobox and "Comics" section of article body. Also found "better" links and more detailed info on Japanese serialized publication, purely by chance. Am actively looking for similar data for Korean publication. Until then, a general link to the Daiwon's website is up, and the series can be searched. Not ideal, but it works for now. -- hamu♥hamu ( TALK) 20:15, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
I realized reading the wiki article before reading the actual series that this article on the manga is full of vicious spoilers which I believe are not necessary as far as relevant information on this series is concerned.
If no one has any objection to it, I would like to remove the plot spoilers placed in the character descriptions (mostly on Sando and Munsu). If I have time later, I will also rewrite the descriptions to be more, well, descriptive lol.
Really enjoyed the series though. Definitely one of my favorite! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ironstove ( talk • contribs) 02:09, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
I am still waiting for an explanation as to why the title is called "Blade of the phantom master". Shin Angyo Onshi obviusly does NOT translate to "Blade of the Phantom Master". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.65.245.3 ( talk) 17:27, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Blade of the Phantom Master. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://animeondvd.com/news/pr.php?pr_view=1148{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://websunday.net/gx/sakuhin/yan.html{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://skygarden.shogakukan.co.jp/skygarden/owa/sol_detail?isbn=4091573010When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:14, 21 July 2017 (UTC)