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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
I don't think "major" is needed. Major implies a size issue and there are legitimate small retailers that do pass for FL and FA articles for other items. じん ない 04:35, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Should we list any publisher's websites here? Some of them have rather obtuse URLs, and some (particularly Japanese *looks at Kodansha*) don't make it very obvious where the best place to search is. Thoughts? 「 ダイノ ガイ 千?!」(Dinoguy1000) 19:10, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
I just checked the site Themanime to find a bit of reception for Vegeta, but it seems the site is dead or something. Did they change the url or could there be an archived website? Regards. Tintor2 ( talk) 15:19, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Should we perhaps group them together with sub-groups for the specific language since most users will be looking for English sources who come here (unable to speak the other language)? じん ない 22:26, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
How about adding iSUGOI to the genaral anime site list. Their reviews are pretty solid and they seem like they're run by some awesome people. Alan Walker22 ( talk) 01:58, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Are sites used by an established, reliable source themselves reliable? It would seem to logically follow.
In this article [1] manga.about.com refers to Anime Diet, Anime Almanac, Huffington Post, and Anime News Network as sites whose opinions on the movie Ponyo are worth noting. - moritheil Talk 14:33, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
The guidelines for online reliable sources state that Anime News Network's encyclopedia section cannot be considered a reliable source because it is user edited. However, I am having a hard time finding an online reliable source for cast and production information on various anime series - such as who the voice actors were, music and art directors, character design, and so on. Such information is sorely needed to reach Good Article or Featured Article status - heck, even a Featured Article of this project, Madlax, includes references to ANN's encyclopedia section - references 15-20. Can a more experienced member of this project point me to an online reliable source that has this sort of information? Thanks! - BloodDoll ( talk) 01:00, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
I'd like it if we could take the entries in Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Online reliable sources#Unreliable and break the hyperlinks.
Currently my CSE grabs every link on the page for its whitelist, and has no way of knowing that some of the outbound links are unreliable. I have manually blacklisted the current links, but I'm not sure whether that will take precedence over the whitelisting.
Since people shouldn't be going to those sites in the first place, they may be causing problems at the CSE, and we may be giving those sites additional traffic or Google juice (who knows whether the NOFOLLOWs really work), there's good reason to unlink them. Thoughts? -- Gwern (contribs) 22:52 21 November 2010 (GMT)
Can the database be used for citing a voice actor's psuedonym(s)? I ask because this source is being contested. The page appears to have been on this listing since its inception. How was its reliability established anyway? Thanks. -- 生け 花 22:17, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
I have noted that Billy Aguiar (former contributing writer for Newtype USA) has written manga reviews for CBGXtra.com and I like to know if the reviews are RS and should they be given any weight. – Allen4 names 03:05, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
I find it really, really sad that the powers that be have decreed that ANN is unreliable and must be purged, while retailer promo pages are considered reliable and are extensively used to prove "notability." They're very reliable for
flogging their own product, but not much else.
The really sad part? I learned years ago that ANN is a lot more reliable than Wikipedia about anime. What's that old line about taking the beam out of your own eye before trying to take the splinter out of someone else's?
98.237.211.114 (
talk) 18:03, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
ANN is reliable with news, not with their own pages.they just like wiki but they don't have much freedom. Bread Ninja ( talk) 18:13, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
First off, let me thank you for your concern about the Wikipedia. I can certainly understand why you would label it a "commercial establishment bias", when a decent source of information, such as ANN's encyclopedia, is apparently marked unusable, while commercial sites are allowed. There are, however, some aspects of this issue that I think you are missing. For one, the term "reliable" (much like the term " notable") is rarely used in the plain dictionary sense among Wikipedians. Rather, in most cases, when we say a source is "reliable", what we actually mean is that the source is "reliable for the intents and purposes of Wikipedia". That we don't want to use ANN's encyclopedia as source for our articles doesn't mean that we think our encyclopedia is better than theirs. We know that the opposite is the case. And we know that Wikipedia will never be reliable as per our own standards. We can't expect our readers to trust anything written in any of our articles. I certainly never will. The best we can do is to provide top notch sources to our readers to verify the information for themselves. And that's where the problem lies. ANN's encyclopedia may be good, but it's not good enough.
As for the other side of your argument, commercial sites and their conflict of interest: True. Commercial sites tend to be biased towards their own products. But the solution to biased statements and sources in Wikipedia is not to introduce statements and sources with an opposing bias, it's to get rid of the original bias. Note that "reliability" is not like a certificate that is handed out to a source, which then can be used indiscriminately. After all, you don't call your physician, when you want to have your car repaired. It's the same with sources. When you want to know if a certain manga is any good, you visit a review website, not the website of that manga's retailer. On the other hand, if you're interested in how many volumes of that manga have been release and when, the retailer's website is the better choice. Lastly, I'd like to point out to you that such sources cannot be used to establish a subject's notability, because they don't qualify as "independent". See WP:GNG for details.
Hope this was of help. Good raise 08:18, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Chris Beveridge from Animeondvd and Mania move to thefandompost. Shouldn't it be added here? I guess it's pretty obvious it should, but I don't know where it could be. Tintor2 ( talk) 00:18, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
After checking a few links to AnimeVice.com, I've noticed that most of the links are to their wiki, which contains user generated content. It also appears that a lot of their other content is also user generated, but a more through investigation should be conducted before it is explicitly listed as a unreliable source. — Farix ( t | c) 11:32, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
This is what I'm about to add for AnimeVice under situational:
— Farix ( t | c) 11:34, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I would like to submit that http://www.lupinencyclopedia.com/ be considered a reliable and accurate source. While a fan site, like Nausicaa.net, all the information provided on the site are accurate. The value of this site is great, as it provides cast information and production staff information for all specials and TV series, as well as information on games, manga, music, and recent news. The reviews section may be the only section that may not qualify as usable for sources, but everything else is accurate and reliable. Reed Nelson, who provided audio commentaries and detailed notes for Lupin III DVD releases by Diskotek Media (see here and here), sources the site on his website lupinthethird.com -- AutoGyro ( talk) 02:26, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
As usual & as espected, there was a discution back then about that subject. Bother from time to time to look inside the archive, re-inventing the wheel is a bother. -- KrebMarkt ( talk) 04:44, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
I would like to hear a discussion on whether insidescanlation.com is a reliable site or not. It was created by a fan named "gum" regarding the US scanalation community.
Insidescanalation lists three interviews conducted with figures from the industry. I was only able to barely verify one of them, the one with Simon Jones from Icarus Publishing: [2]. Though it's hard to tell really. AngelFire3423 ( talk) 06:43, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Why exactly is this not on the list of realiable source? It may be Dragon Ball Z/Akira Toriyama specific, but it'd always been an accurate source for information. I saw someone revert an edit because of it was used, saying blogs are not reliable sources, etc, and they replaced it with an ANN source. Both Daizenshuu EX and Kanzentai, before the merger and after to become Kanzenshuu, were very reliable sources to fans. They always double check their information, and even ask and look for proof when they hear a rumor. It's probably one of the best news site that is DBZ-specific. Is it the fact that it's a *fan* site that's the issue? || Tako ( talk) 17:52, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Deletion Anything nominated for deletion in the video game Wikiproject, has a link to the custom Google search that goes through only what they agree are reliable sources. [3] Very helpful. The anime and manga project need this as well. The current custom search I'm aware of doesn't include all approved reliable sources, and keeps having a lot of unreliable ones show up in it. Anyone know how to set this up? Everyone agree it'd be a good thing to have? Dream Focus 00:25, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
I agree, this sounds like a great idea. Lucia Black ( talk) 03:37, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Serdar Yegulalp is the new(?) About.com anime/manga Guide. [4] Should we add him to the list or assume by his title his articles are fine? He is a media writer for all sorts of technology publications like Information Week. - AngusWOOF ( talk) 05:22, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
About.com links to their review. Go to the third series and click review. DragonZero ( Talk · Contribs) 07:41, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
This appears a lot more for the J-pop and K-pop media rather than anime, but should there be mention of referencing blog sites that translate or source Japanese articles? Example: A Tokyohive article that announces the release of a Japanese single will typically contain translated information from a Japanese reliable source like Eiga, Natalie, or Oricon. While the English authors are buried in anonymity (I never put in their usernames as authors), I have been making two cite webs with the first pointing to the English article with a footnote to the second site, and then the Japanese cite web right afterwards. Is this useful? Should I combine them into one cite web? - AngusWOOF ( talk) 02:25, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Is the Behind the Voice Actors website considered a reliable source? I saw some additions to the Jamie Marchi article where someone insisted on adding their voice acting awards from their website without references (I relented and had to go in and dig up the actual references), and have found a Funimation blog that recognizes the site. I only considered the Staff Choice picks as legit; there was a People's Choice category which just polls their subscribers, but it is difficult to say whether the actor gets a physical award or just nice online press. - AngusWOOF ( talk) 20:32, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
videovista.net movie reviews - reliable website? It does list its reviewers [13] and seems to be backed by a magazine site Pigasus Press which publishes magazines like Premonitions. - AngusWOOF ( talk) 17:55, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Anybody ever checked the website [14]? It has some recognition as noted here. Tintor2 ( talk) 20:11, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
No one commented on this topic... Probably here is a better place for asking, is it? Gabriel Yuji ( talk) 18:13, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Just noting I've added Comixology to "Situational" [20]. Not sure what you guys think. Gabriel Yuji ( talk) 21:16, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
The comics village links should probably be updated to point to http://manga.jadedragononline.com/village which was also updated a little up till 2013, (the move is noted here: http://web.archive.org/web/20140102201910/http://comicsvillage.com/) especially since clicking on any of the wayback links doesn't work because of robots.txt. Opencooper ( talk) 14:12, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
This has some of his old reviews prior to joining ANN. [21] AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 00:50, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
I was trying to figure out why Manga UK was blacklisted, and saw THIS which was just that IP editors were using it to "spam" the articles? Was the blog site not reliable? What about retail information from Manga Entertainment? AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 19:35, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
www.crystalacids.com
Like BTVA, this has been used as a shortcut to looking up every actor's individual role in an episode or series.
Reasons for:
1. Provides records of cast lists per episode for older shows pre-2008 or so.
2. Verified by staff and insistence that they do not just take information off the internet, despite having a form available for corrections. http://www.crystalacids.com/faq/#different
3. That it isn't currently updated indicates the effort to maintain it stopped around the time BTVA and other databases were vetted.
Reasons against.
1. Unclear who staff is.
2. While there is voice matching and audio clips, there is no screenshot of actual credits like with BTVA.
If this is considered non-RS, recommend wherever it is used be commented out so that filmographies can at least refer to it to look up the actual episodes for closing credits. AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 08:49, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
http://jfdb.jp/en/ is managed by Japan Foundation and UniJapan, the later of which sponsors the Tokyo International Film Festival. Has some film information since 2002, and some anime. It doesn't look like it has many titles so I don't know how useful it is, but at least it is a candidate for RS? AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 02:36, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Today I found the site Anime Now when looking at Anime News Network's article about Nadessico. It seems like a "young" website but I haven't found a place of that site where they address themselves. Regards. Tintor2 ( talk) 14:30, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
I hope it is just a dropped database at https://www.animepro.de/ and they can restore from backups, otherwise the links will need to be fixed and I am not used to adding an encoded URL to the end of WebCite URL such as http://www.webcitation.org/6lg2K5zEv?url={{subst:urlencode:https://www.animepro.de/anima/db/9610_midnight-secretary-gesamtausgabe-manga}} and thus I may forget from time to time. – Allen4 names ( contributions) 04:43, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
I recently found this website and their contact info says they are kinda related to THEM Anime Reviews and Anime News Network. The writers have worked for about a decade. What do you think? Regards. Tintor2 ( talk) 23:29, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
I was cleaning up .hack//Sign, when I came across Anime Dream, an anime music-focused site. It's a defunct site right now but it's affiliated with RPGFan [38] (a WP:VG/RS used in FAs like Persona (series), Secret of Mana and Drakengard (video game)), who itself seems to have a focus on music (although it has reviews on games themselves). Their chief editor, Nicole Monet Kirk [39], was also a member of RPGFan [40] and her reviews for Sakura Wars and Kingdom Hearts (on Sora (Kingdom Hearts)) are used here, as well as some Dragon Quest interview [41] [42]. On the other hand, it may be a problem the fact "Anime Dream accepts just about anything from readers; reviews, news, pictures, movies, music, downloadables, links, and release dates" (although this doesn't necessary imply that they don't read and revise the submissions). And the one who reviewed .hack// soundtracks was "Yushiro", who is not listed as a staff member. I'm tempted to say it's a reliable source, but it's kind of dubious situation. Gabriel Yuji ( talk) 19:09, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
I've been wondering if the site Artifice would be a reliable source. Some of its writers seem quite experienced like Candice Evenson. Tintor2 ( talk) 16:03, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
I'm not too sure about this. The site has a section about how they compare themselves to "Anime News 'something'" but they allow people to join as noted here. Tintor2 ( talk) 23:00, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
I was going through the list of reliable Japanese sources, and while it seems most editors have agreed that Eiga.com (situational, as while they do report articles, their movie rankings are user-submitted), Natalie, and Animate Times are reliable, I didn't see them on the list. Should they be added?
Also, since 2.5D musicals seem to be growing, would you consider Spice and Entertainment Stage as reliable articles? I found that they usually report upcoming events and have interviews with the actors and directors of the productions. lullabying ( talk) 18:34, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
I've started seeing some articles citing http://manga.tokyo but would you consider them reliable? All they do is translate articles from Japanese websites and no notable industry professional has contributed to the website. lullabying ( talk) 21:20, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
The website Biggest in Japan happens to be written by Richard Eisenbeis, a Kotaku writer who I think is also related with Anime News Network. Would his reviews be approved? Tintor2 ( talk) 23:18, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
While copy-editing Ride Your Wave, on two different occasions, Oneofus.net was used as a review ( link here). The website is not notable and I'm not sure if any of the authors are. lullabying ( talk) 21:46, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
I was going through Mistress Fortune and noticed there were some reviews from Comic Book Bin and Sequential Tart. How valid can these be used as sources? I'm more lenient towards Comic Book Bin but Sequential Tart doesn't seem to have much industry connections and seems like a blog. lullabying ( talk) 16:59, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi, guys. I've noticed recently Knowledgekid87 removed Ex magazine from the reliable sources list. He did it correctly since no one commented on his proposed discussion. However, I disagree with the removal. My point is: Ex was a major outlet inside the anime community; it was produced by the Society for the Promotion of Japanese Animation, the same organization that organizes Anime Expo, as informed the Los Angeles Times. That's not enough, of course. My evidence: Anime News Network reported when the magazine stopped updating (which itself shows some notability) and commented that "EX.org managed to stay ten steps ahead of other websites". As the news notes, it had important industries ties, interviewing people like Scott Frazier. Protoculture Addicts also seem to have used it as a source (if this is true, see the table at the end of page 5). If anyone has other copies of PA and is able to check if it's mentioned in other issues, it'd be cool. It's also cited multiple times in Mamoru Oshii's biography by Brian Ruh (published by Palgrave Macmillan), as you can see here. Not sure how relevant it is, but apparently the Dutch university KU Leuven also recommends an Ex article. Last but not least, although a little anecdotal maybe, an Ex review was used by Viz Media in the backcover of No Need for Tenchi. Those are probably not the best evidences in the wolrd but, considering that it ran from 1996 to 2002, most material must be available only in print media. Gabriel Yuji ( talk) 22:06, 1 December 2019 (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 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
I don't think "major" is needed. Major implies a size issue and there are legitimate small retailers that do pass for FL and FA articles for other items. じん ない 04:35, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Should we list any publisher's websites here? Some of them have rather obtuse URLs, and some (particularly Japanese *looks at Kodansha*) don't make it very obvious where the best place to search is. Thoughts? 「 ダイノ ガイ 千?!」(Dinoguy1000) 19:10, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
I just checked the site Themanime to find a bit of reception for Vegeta, but it seems the site is dead or something. Did they change the url or could there be an archived website? Regards. Tintor2 ( talk) 15:19, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Should we perhaps group them together with sub-groups for the specific language since most users will be looking for English sources who come here (unable to speak the other language)? じん ない 22:26, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
How about adding iSUGOI to the genaral anime site list. Their reviews are pretty solid and they seem like they're run by some awesome people. Alan Walker22 ( talk) 01:58, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Are sites used by an established, reliable source themselves reliable? It would seem to logically follow.
In this article [1] manga.about.com refers to Anime Diet, Anime Almanac, Huffington Post, and Anime News Network as sites whose opinions on the movie Ponyo are worth noting. - moritheil Talk 14:33, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
The guidelines for online reliable sources state that Anime News Network's encyclopedia section cannot be considered a reliable source because it is user edited. However, I am having a hard time finding an online reliable source for cast and production information on various anime series - such as who the voice actors were, music and art directors, character design, and so on. Such information is sorely needed to reach Good Article or Featured Article status - heck, even a Featured Article of this project, Madlax, includes references to ANN's encyclopedia section - references 15-20. Can a more experienced member of this project point me to an online reliable source that has this sort of information? Thanks! - BloodDoll ( talk) 01:00, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
I'd like it if we could take the entries in Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Online reliable sources#Unreliable and break the hyperlinks.
Currently my CSE grabs every link on the page for its whitelist, and has no way of knowing that some of the outbound links are unreliable. I have manually blacklisted the current links, but I'm not sure whether that will take precedence over the whitelisting.
Since people shouldn't be going to those sites in the first place, they may be causing problems at the CSE, and we may be giving those sites additional traffic or Google juice (who knows whether the NOFOLLOWs really work), there's good reason to unlink them. Thoughts? -- Gwern (contribs) 22:52 21 November 2010 (GMT)
Can the database be used for citing a voice actor's psuedonym(s)? I ask because this source is being contested. The page appears to have been on this listing since its inception. How was its reliability established anyway? Thanks. -- 生け 花 22:17, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
I have noted that Billy Aguiar (former contributing writer for Newtype USA) has written manga reviews for CBGXtra.com and I like to know if the reviews are RS and should they be given any weight. – Allen4 names 03:05, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
I find it really, really sad that the powers that be have decreed that ANN is unreliable and must be purged, while retailer promo pages are considered reliable and are extensively used to prove "notability." They're very reliable for
flogging their own product, but not much else.
The really sad part? I learned years ago that ANN is a lot more reliable than Wikipedia about anime. What's that old line about taking the beam out of your own eye before trying to take the splinter out of someone else's?
98.237.211.114 (
talk) 18:03, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
ANN is reliable with news, not with their own pages.they just like wiki but they don't have much freedom. Bread Ninja ( talk) 18:13, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
First off, let me thank you for your concern about the Wikipedia. I can certainly understand why you would label it a "commercial establishment bias", when a decent source of information, such as ANN's encyclopedia, is apparently marked unusable, while commercial sites are allowed. There are, however, some aspects of this issue that I think you are missing. For one, the term "reliable" (much like the term " notable") is rarely used in the plain dictionary sense among Wikipedians. Rather, in most cases, when we say a source is "reliable", what we actually mean is that the source is "reliable for the intents and purposes of Wikipedia". That we don't want to use ANN's encyclopedia as source for our articles doesn't mean that we think our encyclopedia is better than theirs. We know that the opposite is the case. And we know that Wikipedia will never be reliable as per our own standards. We can't expect our readers to trust anything written in any of our articles. I certainly never will. The best we can do is to provide top notch sources to our readers to verify the information for themselves. And that's where the problem lies. ANN's encyclopedia may be good, but it's not good enough.
As for the other side of your argument, commercial sites and their conflict of interest: True. Commercial sites tend to be biased towards their own products. But the solution to biased statements and sources in Wikipedia is not to introduce statements and sources with an opposing bias, it's to get rid of the original bias. Note that "reliability" is not like a certificate that is handed out to a source, which then can be used indiscriminately. After all, you don't call your physician, when you want to have your car repaired. It's the same with sources. When you want to know if a certain manga is any good, you visit a review website, not the website of that manga's retailer. On the other hand, if you're interested in how many volumes of that manga have been release and when, the retailer's website is the better choice. Lastly, I'd like to point out to you that such sources cannot be used to establish a subject's notability, because they don't qualify as "independent". See WP:GNG for details.
Hope this was of help. Good raise 08:18, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Chris Beveridge from Animeondvd and Mania move to thefandompost. Shouldn't it be added here? I guess it's pretty obvious it should, but I don't know where it could be. Tintor2 ( talk) 00:18, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
After checking a few links to AnimeVice.com, I've noticed that most of the links are to their wiki, which contains user generated content. It also appears that a lot of their other content is also user generated, but a more through investigation should be conducted before it is explicitly listed as a unreliable source. — Farix ( t | c) 11:32, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
This is what I'm about to add for AnimeVice under situational:
— Farix ( t | c) 11:34, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I would like to submit that http://www.lupinencyclopedia.com/ be considered a reliable and accurate source. While a fan site, like Nausicaa.net, all the information provided on the site are accurate. The value of this site is great, as it provides cast information and production staff information for all specials and TV series, as well as information on games, manga, music, and recent news. The reviews section may be the only section that may not qualify as usable for sources, but everything else is accurate and reliable. Reed Nelson, who provided audio commentaries and detailed notes for Lupin III DVD releases by Diskotek Media (see here and here), sources the site on his website lupinthethird.com -- AutoGyro ( talk) 02:26, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
As usual & as espected, there was a discution back then about that subject. Bother from time to time to look inside the archive, re-inventing the wheel is a bother. -- KrebMarkt ( talk) 04:44, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
I would like to hear a discussion on whether insidescanlation.com is a reliable site or not. It was created by a fan named "gum" regarding the US scanalation community.
Insidescanalation lists three interviews conducted with figures from the industry. I was only able to barely verify one of them, the one with Simon Jones from Icarus Publishing: [2]. Though it's hard to tell really. AngelFire3423 ( talk) 06:43, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Why exactly is this not on the list of realiable source? It may be Dragon Ball Z/Akira Toriyama specific, but it'd always been an accurate source for information. I saw someone revert an edit because of it was used, saying blogs are not reliable sources, etc, and they replaced it with an ANN source. Both Daizenshuu EX and Kanzentai, before the merger and after to become Kanzenshuu, were very reliable sources to fans. They always double check their information, and even ask and look for proof when they hear a rumor. It's probably one of the best news site that is DBZ-specific. Is it the fact that it's a *fan* site that's the issue? || Tako ( talk) 17:52, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Deletion Anything nominated for deletion in the video game Wikiproject, has a link to the custom Google search that goes through only what they agree are reliable sources. [3] Very helpful. The anime and manga project need this as well. The current custom search I'm aware of doesn't include all approved reliable sources, and keeps having a lot of unreliable ones show up in it. Anyone know how to set this up? Everyone agree it'd be a good thing to have? Dream Focus 00:25, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
I agree, this sounds like a great idea. Lucia Black ( talk) 03:37, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Serdar Yegulalp is the new(?) About.com anime/manga Guide. [4] Should we add him to the list or assume by his title his articles are fine? He is a media writer for all sorts of technology publications like Information Week. - AngusWOOF ( talk) 05:22, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
About.com links to their review. Go to the third series and click review. DragonZero ( Talk · Contribs) 07:41, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
This appears a lot more for the J-pop and K-pop media rather than anime, but should there be mention of referencing blog sites that translate or source Japanese articles? Example: A Tokyohive article that announces the release of a Japanese single will typically contain translated information from a Japanese reliable source like Eiga, Natalie, or Oricon. While the English authors are buried in anonymity (I never put in their usernames as authors), I have been making two cite webs with the first pointing to the English article with a footnote to the second site, and then the Japanese cite web right afterwards. Is this useful? Should I combine them into one cite web? - AngusWOOF ( talk) 02:25, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Is the Behind the Voice Actors website considered a reliable source? I saw some additions to the Jamie Marchi article where someone insisted on adding their voice acting awards from their website without references (I relented and had to go in and dig up the actual references), and have found a Funimation blog that recognizes the site. I only considered the Staff Choice picks as legit; there was a People's Choice category which just polls their subscribers, but it is difficult to say whether the actor gets a physical award or just nice online press. - AngusWOOF ( talk) 20:32, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
videovista.net movie reviews - reliable website? It does list its reviewers [13] and seems to be backed by a magazine site Pigasus Press which publishes magazines like Premonitions. - AngusWOOF ( talk) 17:55, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Anybody ever checked the website [14]? It has some recognition as noted here. Tintor2 ( talk) 20:11, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
No one commented on this topic... Probably here is a better place for asking, is it? Gabriel Yuji ( talk) 18:13, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Just noting I've added Comixology to "Situational" [20]. Not sure what you guys think. Gabriel Yuji ( talk) 21:16, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
The comics village links should probably be updated to point to http://manga.jadedragononline.com/village which was also updated a little up till 2013, (the move is noted here: http://web.archive.org/web/20140102201910/http://comicsvillage.com/) especially since clicking on any of the wayback links doesn't work because of robots.txt. Opencooper ( talk) 14:12, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
This has some of his old reviews prior to joining ANN. [21] AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 00:50, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
I was trying to figure out why Manga UK was blacklisted, and saw THIS which was just that IP editors were using it to "spam" the articles? Was the blog site not reliable? What about retail information from Manga Entertainment? AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 19:35, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
www.crystalacids.com
Like BTVA, this has been used as a shortcut to looking up every actor's individual role in an episode or series.
Reasons for:
1. Provides records of cast lists per episode for older shows pre-2008 or so.
2. Verified by staff and insistence that they do not just take information off the internet, despite having a form available for corrections. http://www.crystalacids.com/faq/#different
3. That it isn't currently updated indicates the effort to maintain it stopped around the time BTVA and other databases were vetted.
Reasons against.
1. Unclear who staff is.
2. While there is voice matching and audio clips, there is no screenshot of actual credits like with BTVA.
If this is considered non-RS, recommend wherever it is used be commented out so that filmographies can at least refer to it to look up the actual episodes for closing credits. AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 08:49, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
http://jfdb.jp/en/ is managed by Japan Foundation and UniJapan, the later of which sponsors the Tokyo International Film Festival. Has some film information since 2002, and some anime. It doesn't look like it has many titles so I don't know how useful it is, but at least it is a candidate for RS? AngusWOOF ( bark • sniff) 02:36, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Today I found the site Anime Now when looking at Anime News Network's article about Nadessico. It seems like a "young" website but I haven't found a place of that site where they address themselves. Regards. Tintor2 ( talk) 14:30, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
I hope it is just a dropped database at https://www.animepro.de/ and they can restore from backups, otherwise the links will need to be fixed and I am not used to adding an encoded URL to the end of WebCite URL such as http://www.webcitation.org/6lg2K5zEv?url={{subst:urlencode:https://www.animepro.de/anima/db/9610_midnight-secretary-gesamtausgabe-manga}} and thus I may forget from time to time. – Allen4 names ( contributions) 04:43, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
I recently found this website and their contact info says they are kinda related to THEM Anime Reviews and Anime News Network. The writers have worked for about a decade. What do you think? Regards. Tintor2 ( talk) 23:29, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
I was cleaning up .hack//Sign, when I came across Anime Dream, an anime music-focused site. It's a defunct site right now but it's affiliated with RPGFan [38] (a WP:VG/RS used in FAs like Persona (series), Secret of Mana and Drakengard (video game)), who itself seems to have a focus on music (although it has reviews on games themselves). Their chief editor, Nicole Monet Kirk [39], was also a member of RPGFan [40] and her reviews for Sakura Wars and Kingdom Hearts (on Sora (Kingdom Hearts)) are used here, as well as some Dragon Quest interview [41] [42]. On the other hand, it may be a problem the fact "Anime Dream accepts just about anything from readers; reviews, news, pictures, movies, music, downloadables, links, and release dates" (although this doesn't necessary imply that they don't read and revise the submissions). And the one who reviewed .hack// soundtracks was "Yushiro", who is not listed as a staff member. I'm tempted to say it's a reliable source, but it's kind of dubious situation. Gabriel Yuji ( talk) 19:09, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
I've been wondering if the site Artifice would be a reliable source. Some of its writers seem quite experienced like Candice Evenson. Tintor2 ( talk) 16:03, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
I'm not too sure about this. The site has a section about how they compare themselves to "Anime News 'something'" but they allow people to join as noted here. Tintor2 ( talk) 23:00, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
I was going through the list of reliable Japanese sources, and while it seems most editors have agreed that Eiga.com (situational, as while they do report articles, their movie rankings are user-submitted), Natalie, and Animate Times are reliable, I didn't see them on the list. Should they be added?
Also, since 2.5D musicals seem to be growing, would you consider Spice and Entertainment Stage as reliable articles? I found that they usually report upcoming events and have interviews with the actors and directors of the productions. lullabying ( talk) 18:34, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
I've started seeing some articles citing http://manga.tokyo but would you consider them reliable? All they do is translate articles from Japanese websites and no notable industry professional has contributed to the website. lullabying ( talk) 21:20, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
The website Biggest in Japan happens to be written by Richard Eisenbeis, a Kotaku writer who I think is also related with Anime News Network. Would his reviews be approved? Tintor2 ( talk) 23:18, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
While copy-editing Ride Your Wave, on two different occasions, Oneofus.net was used as a review ( link here). The website is not notable and I'm not sure if any of the authors are. lullabying ( talk) 21:46, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
I was going through Mistress Fortune and noticed there were some reviews from Comic Book Bin and Sequential Tart. How valid can these be used as sources? I'm more lenient towards Comic Book Bin but Sequential Tart doesn't seem to have much industry connections and seems like a blog. lullabying ( talk) 16:59, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi, guys. I've noticed recently Knowledgekid87 removed Ex magazine from the reliable sources list. He did it correctly since no one commented on his proposed discussion. However, I disagree with the removal. My point is: Ex was a major outlet inside the anime community; it was produced by the Society for the Promotion of Japanese Animation, the same organization that organizes Anime Expo, as informed the Los Angeles Times. That's not enough, of course. My evidence: Anime News Network reported when the magazine stopped updating (which itself shows some notability) and commented that "EX.org managed to stay ten steps ahead of other websites". As the news notes, it had important industries ties, interviewing people like Scott Frazier. Protoculture Addicts also seem to have used it as a source (if this is true, see the table at the end of page 5). If anyone has other copies of PA and is able to check if it's mentioned in other issues, it'd be cool. It's also cited multiple times in Mamoru Oshii's biography by Brian Ruh (published by Palgrave Macmillan), as you can see here. Not sure how relevant it is, but apparently the Dutch university KU Leuven also recommends an Ex article. Last but not least, although a little anecdotal maybe, an Ex review was used by Viz Media in the backcover of No Need for Tenchi. Those are probably not the best evidences in the wolrd but, considering that it ran from 1996 to 2002, most material must be available only in print media. Gabriel Yuji ( talk) 22:06, 1 December 2019 (UTC)