Talk:Devil Hunter Yohko

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Anime and manga (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
Wikipe-tan head.png This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime and manga related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-class on the assessment scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Initial Licensing And North American Release[edit]

Having just watched Devil Hunter Yohko and the director's commentary from the DVD, I went ahead and changed three statements I found in this article that contradicted or were contrary to uncited information in this article.

In the original article, the introductory paragraph stated: "ADV co-founder, Matt Greenfield, said the reason Yohko was chosen as the first release was because he and those involved thought it would be a "solid seller" because of how racy the show was." In the DVD commentary Greenfield states that he "couldn't exactly say that wasn't one of the reasons," for licensing the show, and goes on to make a case that it was more about establishing general credibility with older viewers. If someone has a citation for the quote I think it would be worth keeping here, but without any citation it seems a little sensationalistic and not in-line with his comments on the DVD.

The original introductory paragraph also stated, "The fact Toho had an American licensing branch was another major reason that Yohko was the first anime to be released by ADV." This seems to contradict what Greenfield said on the DVD, which is that the show's production origins were relatively easy to trace, but that "They never really anticipated there would be any kind of market for this sort of thing outside of Japan" and that "Eventually we managed to convince them that A) They did own the rights to it and B) That we really were serious about it." His statements on this topic are rambling and not 100% concise, but it doesn't sound indicative of working with an established "American licensing branch"?

Lastly, I replaced a statement made at the end of the summary of Episode 1 that, "This episode was clearly made for mature audiences (due to the pop scene and the frequent fan service). Subsequent volumes were toned down and aimed at a broader audience." Again the statement is uncited and in this case, "clearly" is a common weasel word. On the DVD Greenfield states that the original edits to Japanese episode 1 were made because the director wanted it to be "darker" (not necessarily "for mature audiences") and that in the end episodes 1 & 5 stand out as the dark episodes while episodes 2, 3, 4 (music video compliation) and 6 are much more light-hearted in nature.

Those are my observations. I'm curious to see what information previously and currently in the article are citable and if any of it is garbage. I'd like to see the article get tightened up and include some of these neat tidbits. --75.162.51.180 (talk) 01:34, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Looks like sound editing to me. Although the interview on the DVD is a primary source, it's better than no source for some of the statements you've removed/changed. Good job! ~PescoSo saywe all 03:00, 30 October 2008 (UTC)