This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 |
I stumbled upon this uncategorised category: Category:Suzuka Files. I have no idea where to link it to WP's category structure but I bet some of you do. Also maybe it's name could be improved to Category:Suzuka or Category:Suzuka (manga)? Enjoy! - Nabla 12:40, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Confusing Manifestation 23:27, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Images on List of Planetes episodes (and fatured status) have been called into question. Might need new images or better rationales. These rationales must speak to why the particular image was chosen to identify the episode - a simple copy-and-past rationale that is the same on all images won't do.
Additionally, after several failed amendments to ban screenshots from episode lists, images on other Featured Lists are now being removed by some administators. See the administrator board at WP:AN#Clean up for the featured ones for examples and surrounding discussion. -- GunnarRene 18:18, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
It seems that this random selection of admins wants to have individual episode articles rather than lists, so I guess that's what we need to go for now. Either that or seeing if Citizendium would accomodate fair use to the same extent that Wikipedia in theory does, and if out-of-process actions become the norm there too. I was here to build a free encyclopedia, not some in-universe fan site, so I'm not really interested in going over to some wiki devoted to only to anime.-- GunnarRene 18:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
My complaint is not the removal itself, but the total disregard for established procedures. We didn't know our stuff was going away until it was gone. We didn't get to participate. It's ridiculous. -- Masamage ♫ 21:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Eventually, all fair-use images will go the way of the dodo bird. -- Farix ( Talk) 22:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Should a catagory of "Otaku Anime" be added for series which are markeeted to anime otaku? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Anymouse1 ( talk • contribs) 05:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC).
Since we have a Magazine Archive, I thought it would be useful to have a Reference Library as well, listing anime-related books which could be used as references for articles. Please go add any books you have (or add your name next to those already listed). Thanks! ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihon joe 19:54, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Can I get whoever drew Wikipe-tan to draw me a custom version for my user page?
perfectblue 20:08, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
...Okay, that is awesome. -- Masamage ♫ 18:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
I propose a section devoted to the different Manga/Anime trade magazines. Because there are several that I can think of right off the bat.
1) Newtype 2) Anime Insider 3) Shonen Jump —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Amaraiel ( talk • contribs) 06:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC).
Are there any opinions on converting the Digimon, Dragon Ball, Gundam, Sailor Moon, and Visual Novels projects into task forces à la WP:MILHIST? It seems like this project's doing a good job of providing centralized support material (e.g., the Magazine Archive and Reference Library) and assessment. What can the child projects do in these regards that wouldn't be duplicative? I see that Farix proposed something similar before, but that nothing came of it. Is this because it wouldn't be worth the effort?-- Monocrat 05:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Just my two cents on the project. When I say the project in this writing, it refers to all articles of an anime related spectrum. The whole seems to be going over well, with a high article quality on average. However, most anime and manga articles are written from the point of hardcore anime fans (in the sense that they see Japanese animation as pure, and make a heavy criticism of western animation and Western animation infleunced by anime), and contain material far too thick for unacquainted laymen to get around. Also, the project makes too much of a distinction between anime and other cartooning (for example,never using the words comic or show). Beyond that, the project is generally fine. ( 80.247.146.169 16:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC))
I've taken the additional liberty of drafting a revised scope. The "Fandom" part is relatively weak, but I don't have much in the way of experience there. Also, on the assumption that anything notable in one language is notable in another, I've expanded the draft scope to include non-English distributors and voice actors. This might result in a few additional lists, but it seems the right thing to do in terms of principle. I'll defer on it, however. Thoughts welcome.-- Monocrat 19:32, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
In response to the queries, how about: "Media belonging to the same franchises as the above, including video games, visual novels, live action versions, audio dramas, soundtracks, and stage shows and musicals (such as Bleach (musical) or Tenimyu)." This is more general and removes concerns about the path of adaptation.-- Monocrat 20:11, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Sorry I'm a bit late to respond, but the old scope description was much better. Also, so far we've been mostly about the anime and manga themselves, and not so much about working on bio articles for directors, voice actors, etc. Our structure guidelines, main focus, etc really isn't for bio articles. I'll expand on my reasons in a moment. -- Ned Scott 03:10, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
On the subject of people within the scope of the project, there's something that bothers me about the voice actors. If the project does not cover "anime voice actors that speak in neither Japanese nor English" then why do characters pages like Haruhi Suzumiya and Tenchi Masaki list the credit?-- Nohansen 22:37, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
What is the policy regarding one-shot manga and very short series by notable authors? One-shots by non-notable authors I assume could just go up for deletion.
Specifically I'm thinking of Hiroaki Samura, who currently has an article for his work Emerald (manga) despite the piece being all of 65 pages long, and a similar page for his one volume anthology Ohikkoshi. Neither of these articles will probably ever get beyond stub length, unless of course someone went and did a blow-by-blow retelling of their entire plots. Should they perhaps be merged with the author's page?
I would normally have conducted this discussion on the relevant talk pages, but none of them are particularly active and there may be cases beyond just those 3 articles that need discussed. -- tjstrf talk 18:33, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Digimon is facing a mass image cleanup task, started by the need to update images from using {{ Digimonimage}} to a more appropriate tag. Most of these images contain no source information at all, or fair use rationale. We've let it slide for a long time, and unfortunately there are 1,160 images that likely require updating. To assist in this task I've updated the project's banner, {{ WikiProject DIGI}} with a notice, and started an instruction page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Digimon/Images. I've only created a very basic page for now, and would really appreciate any help with improving the instructions page. -- Ned Scott 06:11, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Should we have spoiler warnings in articles or not? Discussion on Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Spoiler warning. -- Ned Scott 04:03, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Fan speculations are rampant in anime and manga, and these, according to standards on WP:ATT and WP:NOR, should not be in any articles due to its being original research by some fans, and its lack of attribution. Does that mean, any kind of fan speculations, even universally accepted by fans, should never be in WP?
A related question: I wonder how to remove such content on articles without angering editors.-- Samuel di Curtisi di Salvadori 12:19, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Some of you may remember a discussion (now archived) in which I proposed that, since the genres used to classify anime and manga are identical, we should merge Category:Anime by genre and Category:Manga by genre trees into a common Category:Anime and manga by genre, as is done already with many of the other anime and manga categories, to prevent overcategorization.
Nothing came of the discussion then, but I have finally gotten around to making a CFD nomination for the proposed merge. I have already listed the discussion on our deletion sorting page, but either nobody has that page on their watchlist or nobody cares about the merger, so I'm announcing it here directly.
Please feel free to express your opinion at the discussion, and if you haven't yet, please watchlist our deletion sorting page as well. Thank you. -- tjstrf talk 07:11, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Another way to deal with the problem of overcategorization is to reduce the number of genres listed for each property. Currently, people seem to list every genre possible, even if these are redundant. We should encourage people to choose the most appropriate two choices - only a few shows deserve more than two genre listings. For example, mecha > adventure > action > drama and mecha > science fiction > drama, so Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann does not need any of those larger categories once it has mecha. Mecha and Comedy are the only genre needed. The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya is a science fiction comedy, and the other genre are unneccessary. Seinen is not even a genre. It seems like we could codify some simple, easy to follow guidelines for how to decide what genre a show is, and limit the field from ballooning like this. Doceirias 18:43, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Could someone add it to our delsort page? I'm not exactly sure how to do this... (And, based on the hubbub about it being placed on hiatus by Seven Seas and spawning some major drama at ANN, I'm pretty sure it meets the notability requirements.) Kyaa the Catlord 06:00, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 |
I stumbled upon this uncategorised category: Category:Suzuka Files. I have no idea where to link it to WP's category structure but I bet some of you do. Also maybe it's name could be improved to Category:Suzuka or Category:Suzuka (manga)? Enjoy! - Nabla 12:40, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Confusing Manifestation 23:27, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Images on List of Planetes episodes (and fatured status) have been called into question. Might need new images or better rationales. These rationales must speak to why the particular image was chosen to identify the episode - a simple copy-and-past rationale that is the same on all images won't do.
Additionally, after several failed amendments to ban screenshots from episode lists, images on other Featured Lists are now being removed by some administators. See the administrator board at WP:AN#Clean up for the featured ones for examples and surrounding discussion. -- GunnarRene 18:18, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
It seems that this random selection of admins wants to have individual episode articles rather than lists, so I guess that's what we need to go for now. Either that or seeing if Citizendium would accomodate fair use to the same extent that Wikipedia in theory does, and if out-of-process actions become the norm there too. I was here to build a free encyclopedia, not some in-universe fan site, so I'm not really interested in going over to some wiki devoted to only to anime.-- GunnarRene 18:32, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
My complaint is not the removal itself, but the total disregard for established procedures. We didn't know our stuff was going away until it was gone. We didn't get to participate. It's ridiculous. -- Masamage ♫ 21:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Eventually, all fair-use images will go the way of the dodo bird. -- Farix ( Talk) 22:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Should a catagory of "Otaku Anime" be added for series which are markeeted to anime otaku? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Anymouse1 ( talk • contribs) 05:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC).
Since we have a Magazine Archive, I thought it would be useful to have a Reference Library as well, listing anime-related books which could be used as references for articles. Please go add any books you have (or add your name next to those already listed). Thanks! ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihon joe 19:54, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Can I get whoever drew Wikipe-tan to draw me a custom version for my user page?
perfectblue 20:08, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
...Okay, that is awesome. -- Masamage ♫ 18:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
I propose a section devoted to the different Manga/Anime trade magazines. Because there are several that I can think of right off the bat.
1) Newtype 2) Anime Insider 3) Shonen Jump —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Amaraiel ( talk • contribs) 06:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC).
Are there any opinions on converting the Digimon, Dragon Ball, Gundam, Sailor Moon, and Visual Novels projects into task forces à la WP:MILHIST? It seems like this project's doing a good job of providing centralized support material (e.g., the Magazine Archive and Reference Library) and assessment. What can the child projects do in these regards that wouldn't be duplicative? I see that Farix proposed something similar before, but that nothing came of it. Is this because it wouldn't be worth the effort?-- Monocrat 05:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Just my two cents on the project. When I say the project in this writing, it refers to all articles of an anime related spectrum. The whole seems to be going over well, with a high article quality on average. However, most anime and manga articles are written from the point of hardcore anime fans (in the sense that they see Japanese animation as pure, and make a heavy criticism of western animation and Western animation infleunced by anime), and contain material far too thick for unacquainted laymen to get around. Also, the project makes too much of a distinction between anime and other cartooning (for example,never using the words comic or show). Beyond that, the project is generally fine. ( 80.247.146.169 16:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC))
I've taken the additional liberty of drafting a revised scope. The "Fandom" part is relatively weak, but I don't have much in the way of experience there. Also, on the assumption that anything notable in one language is notable in another, I've expanded the draft scope to include non-English distributors and voice actors. This might result in a few additional lists, but it seems the right thing to do in terms of principle. I'll defer on it, however. Thoughts welcome.-- Monocrat 19:32, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
In response to the queries, how about: "Media belonging to the same franchises as the above, including video games, visual novels, live action versions, audio dramas, soundtracks, and stage shows and musicals (such as Bleach (musical) or Tenimyu)." This is more general and removes concerns about the path of adaptation.-- Monocrat 20:11, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Sorry I'm a bit late to respond, but the old scope description was much better. Also, so far we've been mostly about the anime and manga themselves, and not so much about working on bio articles for directors, voice actors, etc. Our structure guidelines, main focus, etc really isn't for bio articles. I'll expand on my reasons in a moment. -- Ned Scott 03:10, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
On the subject of people within the scope of the project, there's something that bothers me about the voice actors. If the project does not cover "anime voice actors that speak in neither Japanese nor English" then why do characters pages like Haruhi Suzumiya and Tenchi Masaki list the credit?-- Nohansen 22:37, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
What is the policy regarding one-shot manga and very short series by notable authors? One-shots by non-notable authors I assume could just go up for deletion.
Specifically I'm thinking of Hiroaki Samura, who currently has an article for his work Emerald (manga) despite the piece being all of 65 pages long, and a similar page for his one volume anthology Ohikkoshi. Neither of these articles will probably ever get beyond stub length, unless of course someone went and did a blow-by-blow retelling of their entire plots. Should they perhaps be merged with the author's page?
I would normally have conducted this discussion on the relevant talk pages, but none of them are particularly active and there may be cases beyond just those 3 articles that need discussed. -- tjstrf talk 18:33, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Digimon is facing a mass image cleanup task, started by the need to update images from using {{ Digimonimage}} to a more appropriate tag. Most of these images contain no source information at all, or fair use rationale. We've let it slide for a long time, and unfortunately there are 1,160 images that likely require updating. To assist in this task I've updated the project's banner, {{ WikiProject DIGI}} with a notice, and started an instruction page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Digimon/Images. I've only created a very basic page for now, and would really appreciate any help with improving the instructions page. -- Ned Scott 06:11, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Should we have spoiler warnings in articles or not? Discussion on Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Spoiler warning. -- Ned Scott 04:03, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Fan speculations are rampant in anime and manga, and these, according to standards on WP:ATT and WP:NOR, should not be in any articles due to its being original research by some fans, and its lack of attribution. Does that mean, any kind of fan speculations, even universally accepted by fans, should never be in WP?
A related question: I wonder how to remove such content on articles without angering editors.-- Samuel di Curtisi di Salvadori 12:19, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Some of you may remember a discussion (now archived) in which I proposed that, since the genres used to classify anime and manga are identical, we should merge Category:Anime by genre and Category:Manga by genre trees into a common Category:Anime and manga by genre, as is done already with many of the other anime and manga categories, to prevent overcategorization.
Nothing came of the discussion then, but I have finally gotten around to making a CFD nomination for the proposed merge. I have already listed the discussion on our deletion sorting page, but either nobody has that page on their watchlist or nobody cares about the merger, so I'm announcing it here directly.
Please feel free to express your opinion at the discussion, and if you haven't yet, please watchlist our deletion sorting page as well. Thank you. -- tjstrf talk 07:11, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Another way to deal with the problem of overcategorization is to reduce the number of genres listed for each property. Currently, people seem to list every genre possible, even if these are redundant. We should encourage people to choose the most appropriate two choices - only a few shows deserve more than two genre listings. For example, mecha > adventure > action > drama and mecha > science fiction > drama, so Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann does not need any of those larger categories once it has mecha. Mecha and Comedy are the only genre needed. The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya is a science fiction comedy, and the other genre are unneccessary. Seinen is not even a genre. It seems like we could codify some simple, easy to follow guidelines for how to decide what genre a show is, and limit the field from ballooning like this. Doceirias 18:43, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Could someone add it to our delsort page? I'm not exactly sure how to do this... (And, based on the hubbub about it being placed on hiatus by Seven Seas and spawning some major drama at ANN, I'm pretty sure it meets the notability requirements.) Kyaa the Catlord 06:00, 30 May 2007 (UTC)