Talk:Tsundere

Archive

Re: Junachi ... I don't really get this archive feature, but I have two issues with this:

1. Please show the main discussions that was here before you archive it, as right now it's completely empty.
2. The discussions about individual examples (such as the very lengthy Haruhi) are completely irrelevant as the content is inappropriate for the article AND the list section was removed. Only the discussions that really pertain to the article itself should be archived, if you want to do that. --Mizst (talk) 11:49, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

It's completely empty because I archived it. The archive can be viewed in the archive box on the right; just click on the 1. On Wikipedia, we archive all the discussions on a talk page that have been resolved or are old. We do not indiscriminately delete or remove any discussions; we archive them. The fact that certain discussions may be deemed irrelevant now is inconsequential as the record of that discussion may be useful to future editors. Please see WP:ARCHIVE for more.--十八 23:58, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Actually I'm under the impression that I was acting under the principle in WP:REFACTOR to remove "Superfluous" content, which is "entirely and unmistakably irrelevant." Furthermore, new editors who come in and see these list discussions (while missing the comparatively small list removal discussion) may wonder why there are excessive amounts of example discussion but nothing in the article. But well, archiving as you did isn't bad anyhow. As for the empty discussion page, I realize it's simply my own preference that it shouldn't look so empty but now it's not empty anyway. --Mizst (talk) 02:16, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but then there's a whole section on this at WP:RTP#Refactoring vs. archival which states Especially since 2006, the Wikipedia community has more and more preferred wholesale archival of talk page discussions instead of summarizing, as archival preserves a fuller record of discussion, does not lead to accidental (or disruptive) misrepresentation of other editors' opinions, and does not inadvertently remove material that may turn out to be needed later. This is exactly what I said above, how the past discussions may be useful for the future. I've always been against the unnecessary removal of talk page content when it could easily be archived.--十八 04:29, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok I understand. --Mizst (talk) 06:07, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

More Examples

Adding more examples to this article could help clarify the definition and show how the term applies in popular culture.--darkfeline 04 Aug 2009 17:14:14 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.187.238.83 (talk) 00:14, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

While that may be generally true, the main problem with that is the notability of the examples and how well they can be sourced with reliable sources.--十八 04:21, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't really think Germany (from APH) is tsundere. Should we keep him on? I also think it would be fit to add England, as he is VERY tsundere (towards America, at least), and a rather good example. --67.220.6.244 (talk) 01:01, 23 April 2010 (UTC)toast_is_awesome

Germany is sourced in the cite given, and England is not. As I said last August, if it's not sourced by a reliable source, then it shouldn't be added.--十八 01:43, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

So, could we add England if we cited sources? I don't exactly understand. --205.215.177.159 (talk) 17:13, 23 April 2010 (UTC)toast_is_awesome

There area already 11 examples of tsundere characters, there is no need for any more. In fact, the current list should be trimmed down substantially. —Farix (t | c) 20:31, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Yandere

Since both these terms end in -dere would it be appropriate for each to link to the other in a 'see also' for related articles? This isn't necessary for finding it since both are in the 'female stock' category but these seem more related than with the other stocks. Also, since this stereotype is actually in the opposite order of Tsundere (as in, Tsundere starts off aggressive and turns loving, whereas this starts off loving and turns crazy) does anyone know if keeping 'dere' at the end was influenced by the popularity of Tsundere? Just based on the order one would think it would be 'dereyan'. But then, looking at it, this would not make a portmanteau since both share "der" so that is probably why it is this way and works better since it shares more of a resemblance to yanderu and is familiar to those who know tsundere which seems to be a more widely used term. Tyciol (talk) 17:41, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

"Yandere" is the accepted term, and I've never seen anything like "dereyan" to describe this archetype. A see also section is okay.--十八 22:33, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah I wasn't disputing it was accepted, just trying to figure out the etymology (like why chosen in the first place) and proposing it must be the portmanteau factor as well as reference to tsundere (which my guess is preceded it since it's more popular) for why. I'll add the 'see also' section. Tyciol (talk) 01:09, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Plural Form

The plural of tsundere is tsunderera (ツンデレ等), but this is not mentioned anywhere in the article. It would be a good idea to include it, otherwise the comparison to Cinderella isn't obvious.98.217.134.243 (talk) 08:21, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

I seriously doubt this as the Japanese language doesn't have plural forms for their nouns. And I have never seen any other reliable sources make a connection with Cinderella. So what are your sources? —Farix (t | c) 12:40, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

There are certain informal plurals for groups of people, such as -tachi (neutral) and -ra (v. informal / rude). This use fits the pattern. 216.174.213.195 (talk) 18:15, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

No valid references for article

This article has no valid references. Material that is being added is original research.

Ref 1) A broken link to "Matthew's Anime Blog". Even if were working, it would still be an invalid link.

Ref 2) A link to the homepage a university student's homespun dictionary project. That page doesn't mention "Tsundere", and even if it did, it would be a questionable reference, since it's just a student project.

Ref 3) The "Manichi Times" link simply goes to a Wikipedia article — that Wiki article doesn't mention "Tsundere", either.

Without the original Manichi Times article, there's no way of determining whether the references are encyclopedic. Given the tone of the rest of this article, it seems dubious.

In sum, nothing in this article reflects anything except opinions that cannot verified WP:V. This is one of Wiki's three core policies.

Article should add valid, reliable references, or be deleted. Piano non troppo (talk) 05:56, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

The link to the Mainichi Times Wikipedia article is a convenience link for those who wish to learn more about the Mainichi Times. Just because you can't get a hold of the newspaper, doesn't make it not verifiable by WP:V. If that were the case, we would have to disqualify journal articles from Wikipedia because not everyone can access them. --Malkinann (talk) 04:13, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

There's nothing convenient about a link to the wrong page with no indication of where to find the information. And there's a difference between scholarly publications that are not available online, and invalid references. There are no valid references in this that can easily be checked at all. It appears editors are using invalid references to support original research and unencyclopedic material. Piano non troppo (talk) 05:26, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

If people want to find out more about the Mainichi Times, they can, by using the wikipedia article - that is what I meant by calling it a 'convenience link'. The article in the Mainichi Times "Toymaker introduces portable TV with harsh audio guidance that gradually gets kinder" (published in the 2nd of February, 2007 edition) is a case of WP:Access to sources. It's not easy to access the article, but that lack of access ease has no impact on its verifiability. --Malkinann (talk) 05:48, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Quite. The Shimbun refs have everything you need to find the article: the newspaper, the day, the title, and even quotes if you have full-text search. (I didn't include page numbers, true, but I've forgotten why not; either LexisNexis didn't include them or they weren't there.) --Gwern (contribs) 14:38 12 November 2009 (GMT)

Saber and Horo as examples

This example has already been used as a joke to show how Wikipedia is "out of it", and should be fixed. The reference [1] is talking about characters having tsundere characteristics, not actually being the tsundere archetype. In fact, neither Saber nor Horo are actual tsunderes. Toosaka Rin, on the other hand, even appears as an image result on the first page of a Google search for just 'tsundere', and is referenced as an example in many of the top page results. Blog-type results are also aplenty.

• http://myanimelist.net/forum/?topicid=26485
• http://myanimelist.net/forum/?topicid=32127
• http://myanimelist.net/forum/?topicid=39375
• http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Tsundere
• http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=tsundere
• http://www.lurkmore.com/wiki/Tsundere
• http://anime.osiristeam.net/defining/definition-what-is-tsundere/
• http://burogublog.wordpress.com/2008/06/10/define-tsundere-and-yandere/
• http://absolute.animeblogger.net/2007/06/21/top-5-tsundere-new-and-old-definition/comment-page-1/

- Dashiva (talk) 16:01, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Which of those is a RS? Not TVTropes or Urabn Dictionary, I hope. --Gwern (contribs) 16:49 30 March 2010 (GMT)

None of them are reliable sources except for the "Ask John" column. :) As for the complaint that the article didn't accurately reflect John's comments about Holo, well I don't think the new wording does a better job. I'll also state here that information on Wikipedia is about verifiability through reliable sources, not truth. We can verify that John classifies Saber as a tsundere. He is a reliable source as he writes for one of more established online anime retailers. Perhaps the attributions should be made more clearly, but it should not be changed because others disagrees. —Farix (t | c) 23:11, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I still find it odd, though. Try playing Fate/Stay Night for yourself (or even watching the anime) and see if you would classify Saber as a Tsundere over Tohsaka. I'm not saying that there was any violation of procedure here (verifiability etc, i am fully aware of) - just pointing out that popular established opinion differs greatly enough from this classification that nobody seriously follows it. i would like to emphasize that i am not pushing for a change in this article. i just find it odd, though.

As Farix has pointed out, wikipedia is about verifiability, not truth. An established source has (erroneously) classified Saber as a Tsundere, which makes it more important than if the truth is that Saber is/is not one. Well, I guess that's just how the system works.

Overmage (talk) 12:04, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

So THAT'S why Juhachi is so bent on reverting the "Saber to Rin Tohsaka" edits, which is pretty lame. But if said "reliable" source is incorrect, how the heck can it be considered reliable in the first place?Nintendo Maniac 64 (talk) 21:55, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

RSs are not reliable because they are correct; they are reliable because they are commonly accepted as often being correct. That this leads to occasional bad results is no surprise. --Gwern (contribs) 02:18 12 July 2010 (GMT)

Article cleanup

I recently cleaned up the "Terminology" section. This is the rationale for each of these changes. If you have objections to particular edits, let's talk about them here.

• diff - Removed Haruhi Suzumiya reference as part of an overly-long laundry list.

An edit I oppose because Haruhi is one of the most popular characters around and definitely one of the most popularly identified tsundere, more popular than any of the entries left in your beggared version. Not to mention it's an example of breaking the fourth wall, demonstrating tsundere is not an ultra-obscure neologism but a standard concept in the anime industry.

Oh, and what's with the Hetalia part of that edit? I thought the characters were personifications, and the 'German character' is just 'Germany'. Certainly our article does not engage in such periphrastic descriptions of him. --Gwern (contribs) 12:48 29 August 2010 (GMT)

How about making it "Germany" in quotes - anyone not familiar with Hetalia will think it is a typo otherwise. Regarding Haruhi, I have to simply disagree. That is a narrative topic sentence making a minor point ("Tsundere as a context is reflected in anime") : we don't need to stick in multiple explanatory examples interrupting the flow of the text. I've no objection to replacing the Lucky Star example with the Haruhi one if you think it's better, but we shouldn't be trying to overstuff the sentence like a blood pudding until it explodes all over the reader. Alternatively, we could remove both the Lucky Star and Haruhi examples to footnotes/references. Nandesuka (talk) 12:13, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

• diff - Removed (marked as) dubious citation to characters "not strictly classified as Tsundere".

What is dubious about this? Are you engaged on a one-man crusade against Ask John? If so, you have a buttload of articles to go deletionist on, because Ask John is a long-accepted RS.

And that description is exactly accurate. Did you actually read John's column? Try scrolling down to paragraph 3. --Gwern (contribs) 12:48 29 August 2010 (GMT)

If they're "not strictly classified as Tsundere", then they don't need to be stuffing up the blood pudding. Nandesuka (talk) 12:13, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

• diff - Shortened section on Rie Kugimiya (who has her own article, so we don't have to go into huge detail here).

Mentioning 3 characters is 'huge detail'? No doubt if only 1 or none were mentioned, you'd be on the warpath against it for being OR or synthesis or something. Absurd. --Gwern (contribs) 12:48 29 August 2010 (GMT)

Yes, in context of this paragraph, mentioning three characters is in fact huge detail. The topic of that sentence is that some voice actors specialize in tsundere; we give a link to one of those voice actors, and there's no need to stuff up the sentence with WP:ILIKEIT references to our favoritests animes ever. I can't really speak to the second part of your sentence since it seems to just be ad-hominem. Nandesuka (talk) 12:13, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

• diff - Shortened laundry list to three examples, which seems plenty adequate. Actually, one thing I did wrong here, arguably, was removing Lucky Star, which had a citation. I'd be game to replace one of the examples I left with Lucky Star instead, if people would rather do that.

That edit removed entries for Lucky Star, Genshiken, and Fate/stay night. 3 anime. If this is what you consider a laundry list, I suggest changing clothes more often.

Overblown rhetoric aside, I don't object to the removal of Genshiken (although I suspect that Genshiken discussed the concept of tsundere at some point, and that would be a fantastic resource for this article, given that it's, y'know, Genshiken) and I'm actually not that sure Saber of FSN really counts as tsundere, but removing LS really burns my noodles. --Gwern (contribs) 12:48 29 August 2010 (GMT)

Whahuh? Didn't you read what you just wrote a few paragraphs ago? In addition to the three that you mention, the laundry list also included Genshiken (elsewhere), Hayate the Combat Butler, Haruhi Suzumiya, Hoyo of Spice and Wolf, Shana from Shakugan no Shana, Louise from The Familiar of Zero, and Taiga from Toradora!. This of course just mentions the ones removed, not the ones that are still in the article - Lum, Naruto, Love Hina, Bakemonogatari, Hetalia, and Lucky Star. That's not just a laundry list, that's an entire laundromat. I guess I'm sorry I didn't use the phrase "part of a laundry list", like I did above, but I didn't really expect a "microblogger response" sort of reaction. Although I have conveniently divided up my edits for individual discussion here, let's keep in mind that the starting state of the article is that all of these edits were in a single freaking paragraph. A single, ridiculously long, overstuffed, completely unreadable paragraph. Nandesuka (talk) 12:13, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

• diff Rewrote the Galbraith bit for readability, and move it into its own paragraph, since it's really a subtly different topic from the previous sentences.

For this one, I'd actually want to remove the 'not limited to anime or manga'. All our examples are anime or manga or light novel-based, and offhand I can't think of any (live-action) TV or movie tsunderes. Do they even exist? Is Galbraith saying that or are we putting words in his mouth? --Gwern (contribs) 12:48 29 August 2010 (GMT)

One of the points of his article is that concepts in anime/manga bleed into real-world social contexts (e.g., maid cafes) Nandesuka (talk) 12:13, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Please feel free to critique these edits as you like. I do believe that wholesale reverting back to the earlier state of the article, which was abysmal (as reflected by its "Start class" status) is not acceptable. Nandesuka (talk) 15:35, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Funny, I would have said removing a good deal of content, which you must have known would be objected to, before discussing it is unacceptable. You want to remove cited content? The burden is on you. So, I suppose I'll give it a few days and then revert. --Gwern (contribs) 12:48 29 August 2010 (GMT)

Removing content that doesn't improve the article is always acceptable. It's an essential part of responsible editing. Nandesuka (talk) 12:13, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Mention of tsundere on Reddit.

Hi there Wikipedia.

I just wanted to let you know that on Saturday, October 8th, some guy mentioned tsundere on Reddit.

Link: http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/l4l42/what_are_some_small_considerate_things_you_do/c2pqgmu

I read the article, and saw that it needed a citation for mentions in mass media. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.109.0.201 (talk) 15:05, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Source

Escapist article. Enjoy! Axem Titanium (talk) 02:28, 7 March 2012 (UTC)