Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga: Difference between revisions
→Move discussion for The Star of Cottonland: new section |
|||
| Line 428: | Line 428: | ||
Please come participate at [[Talk:The Star of Cottonland#Correct title for this article - 7 August 2020]] Thanks! ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<span style="color:darkgreen;">日本穣</span>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<span style="color:blue;">投稿</span>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]] · [[WP:JA|<span style="color:maroon;">Join WP Japan</span>]]!</small> 20:57, 7 August 2020 (UTC) |
Please come participate at [[Talk:The Star of Cottonland#Correct title for this article - 7 August 2020]] Thanks! ···[[User:Nihonjoe|<span style="color:darkgreen;">日本穣</span>]] · <small>[[Special:Contributions/Nihonjoe|<span style="color:blue;">投稿</span>]] · [[User talk:Nihonjoe|Talk to Nihonjoe]] · [[WP:JA|<span style="color:maroon;">Join WP Japan</span>]]!</small> 20:57, 7 August 2020 (UTC) |
||
== Potential edit war for The Legend of Snow White article == |
|||
I think I might be having a potential edit war regarding the translation of the Japanese title for series. I have started a discussion in the article's [[Talk:The Legend of Snow White|talk page]] and could use a few more opinions on the matter. [[User:Sarujo|Sarujo]] ([[User talk:Sarujo|talk]]) 21:03, 8 August 2020 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 21:03, 8 August 2020
 | Anime and manga Project‑class | ||||||
| |||||||
Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/WikiProject used
|
|
Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76 |
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Proposal for "[year] in anime" articles
I would like to do a proposal on how the format "[year] in anime" articles should be standardized, using the "[year] in rock music" and "[year] in film" articles as a point of reference. We should things like include notable events (such as the premieres and finales of anime TV series or films), key awards of the year, and notable deaths. If there are any other ideas, please post here. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 09:36, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Sjones23: I think a table with the content of 2020 in anime, but formatted like the one at List of American films of 2020 for would be useful. I suspect that most of page traffic to the "XXXX in anime" articles is driven by readers who want to see the offerings of a given season, and the current tables make that a bit hard (excluding TV finale dates would help clean up visually). Awards and notable deaths would also be sensible additions. — Goszei (talk) 03:24, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Animate
Just a note that Animate now redirects to a disambiguation page per Talk:Animate (disambiguation)#Requested move 23 June 2020 and all links to that must be changed to Animate (retailer). lullabying (talk) 08:01, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
- Animate actually redirects to animation not the dabpage.--69.157.254.92 (talk) 20:58, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for the correction; my point still stands on changing links to Animate (retailer). lullabying (talk) 21:32, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
- All the links have been changed. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 01:21, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for your help! lullabying (talk) 02:34, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
- All the links have been changed. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 01:21, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for the correction; my point still stands on changing links to Animate (retailer). lullabying (talk) 21:32, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Reliable review sources and long-running/popular blogs/small websites
Are long-running blogs/websites like THEM anime that has been active since 2003 reliable enough to be cited in the reception section? Where do we draw the line, particularly when we are dealing with blogs/sites that have been running for many years and have multiple authors? I don't think a single-author blogs are reliable, but when they cross into small portals/sites... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:55, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Piotrus: Per WP:ANIME/RS, THEM Anime is reliable. For others, you may have to use the talk page on the sources page I just linked to see if other editors agree. lullabying (talk) 02:58, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:12, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
I created Category:Anime based on manhwa. Anyone feels like creating the Category:Anime based on manhwa for the Chinese counterpart? We may also need categories for anime and non-anime animation series based on those as well as on the novels. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:06, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
I support this idea. 👍🏻 Ainz Ooal Gown (talk) 09:39, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
Italicizing non-English words
Per discussion at Talk:Yaoi#Italicizing, the template used for romanized Japanese words should be {{lang|ja-latn|yaoi}} instead of italicizing. Should we start using the template for shojo, shonen, josei, etc.? lullabying (talk) 00:16, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
- Personally I prefer
{{transl|ja|yaoi}}which has the same output but is less clunky to type. If you're going with {{lang}}, even though the script subtag is case insensitive, by convention it is capitalized as "-Latn". If we're applying it widely, care should be taken for the individual words that it's appropriate (e.g. shouldn't be used for "anime"). Opencooper (talk) 14:59, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Article titles and subtitles
Several anime titles have English names that have subtitles (one example being Bofuri: I Don't Want to Get Hurt, so I'll Max Out My Defense.). In many cases the article is at the full English title (an example being the aforementioned Bofuri), while in others (such as Haganai and Oresuki) the article title is at the short title without the subtitle, with the subtitle only being mentioned in the lede. MOS:ANIME does not say anything about subtitles in article titles, only suggesting that the article be located at the most-commonly used English name. MOS:SUBTITLE suggests that subtitles are usually to be avoided in article titles and instead going with the most commonly-used titles, although suggesting that they may be permitted in more modern works where the subtitle is an essential part of the name. Given that there seems to be inconsistencies with how the WikiProject handles these situations, should there be a guideline of some kind on how to treat English anime titles if there's a subtitle? Should this be on a case-by-case basis, should the subtitle be dropped (especially for long titles), or should the status quo remain? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:46, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: This was brought up a little while ago at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Archive 73 § Our articles and WP:SUBTITLE by User:Opencooper, who helpfully produced a list of long article titles. I agree with the consensus that there are several good candidates for shortening, but that this should be examined on a case-by-case basis. — Goszei (talk) 01:27, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
- I see a case by case basis as the best option though I believe there wouldn’t be much opposition to removing really long subtitles since there is much less less of a chance that common name of the work would include it. In fact a move from Hensuki: Are You Willing to Fall in Love with a Pervert, as Long as She's a Cutie? to simply Hensuki recently occurred without any opposition.--69.157.254.92 (talk) 05:24, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah, from the previous discussion, the general idea seemed to be that it would have to be done case-by-case. That's not to say we couldn't offer general guidance that editors try to determine if the common name includes the subtitle. As a rule of thumb, if the main title is already long or unique, the subtitle isn't often needed or used. Opencooper (talk) 20:13, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
- I see a case by case basis as the best option though I believe there wouldn’t be much opposition to removing really long subtitles since there is much less less of a chance that common name of the work would include it. In fact a move from Hensuki: Are You Willing to Fall in Love with a Pervert, as Long as She's a Cutie? to simply Hensuki recently occurred without any opposition.--69.157.254.92 (talk) 05:24, 15 July 2020 (UTC)
Lead sections for Latin titles
Certain anime/manga titles (a small minority) are rendered in Latin characters in the original (though they often include equivalent kana in their logo). Some examples include:
- Angel Beats!; see ja:Angel Beats!
- Aria (manga); see ja:ARIA (漫画)
- Banana Fish; see ja:BANANA FISH
- Beastars; see ja:BEASTARS
- D.Gray-man; see ja:D.Gray-man
- xxxHolic; see ja:XXXHOLiC
My question is: How should these special cases be handled in the lead sections of our English articles? For a standard case like JoJo's Bizarre Adventure (see ja:ジョジョの奇妙な冒険), we do this:
JoJo's Bizarre Adventure (Japanese: ジョジョの奇妙な冒険, Hepburn: JoJo no Kimyō na Bōken) is a Japanese manga series written and illustrated by Hirohiko Araki.
Considering that, I think that a lead sentence like the following is misleading, since technically the original title is Angel Beats!, and the Japanese pronunciation of that is エンジェルビーツ! / Enjeru Bītsu!:
Angel Beats! (Japanese: エンジェルビーツ!, Hepburn: Enjeru Bītsu!) is a 13-episode Japanese anime television series produced by P.A.Works and Aniplex and directed by Seiji Kishi.
Possible alternatives that make note of this distinction would be:
- Removing the nihongo:
- Angel Beats! is a 13-episode Japanese anime television series produced by P.A.Works and Aniplex and directed by Seiji Kishi.
Placing Latin characters in JP field (two variations):
- Angel Beats! (Japanese: Angel Beats!) is a 13-episode Japanese anime television series produced by P.A.Works and Aniplex and directed by Seiji Kishi.
Angel Beats! (Japanese: Angel Beats!, Hepburn: Enjeru Bītsu!) is a 13-episode Japanese anime television series produced by P.A.Works and Aniplex and directed by Seiji Kishi.- As pointed out by Opencooper, this is bad practice. — Goszei (talk) 21:05, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
- Moving the nihongo to a footnote:
- Angel Beats![a] is a 13-episode Japanese anime television series produced by P.A.Works and Aniplex and directed by Seiji Kishi.
Thoughts on this? — Goszei (talk) 21:55, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
- I thought that we should used what kinda works for the site and the leave a note about how is it still is marketed. See List of Re: Hamatora episodes as an apparent example.Tintor2 (talk) 22:23, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
- I would just Nihongo and blank out the kanji section, like this:
- Angel Beats! (Hepburn: Enjeru Bītsu) is a 13-episode Japanese anime television series produced by P.A.Works and Aniplex and directed by Seiji Kishi.
- This is what we did with L DK. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:01, 24 July 2020 (UTC) updated 15:25, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
- You could alternatively do:
- Angel Beats![a]
Notes
- ^ The Japanese version has an English title and a pronunciation subtitle エンジェルビーツ! / Enjeru Bītsu!
- Hmm, good point, maybe it should all go to the footnote. I just realized the L DK example has a small pronunciation subtitle as well. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:12, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
- I support going Angus' idea; using nihongo to use English and Japanese pronounciation. Leaving them in footnotes isn't that bad either. Ainz Ooal Gown (talk) 09:38, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
- I don't think katakana or romaji are useful for these. The titles are English. The katakana is just there for Japanese readers, while we're on the English Wikipedia. There are always different stylizations going on with these covers (e.g. One-Punch Man), but we just need to worry about our own MoS. The footnote is only of interest to a narrow audience. Romaji is to aid us in pronouncing Japanese, and thus isn't useful for English. Also, while some of the alternatives listed aren't bad, please don't insert the Latin-script title in the JP field, as it is not Japanese-language text and would just serve to repeat the title (only in a full-width font). Opencooper (talk) 13:49, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Opencooper: I agree with this interpretation, as well. Are leads like the following acceptable, or are these stylizations (taken from the JP article titles) considered "Japanese-only stylizations"?
-
- Banana Fish (stylized as BANANA FISH) is a Japanese manga series written and illustrated by Akimi Yoshida.
- ×××Holic (stylized as ×××HOLiC; pronounced as "Holic") is a Japanese manga series written and illustrated by manga group Clamp. — Goszei (talk) 21:11, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
- There's also S.A which is pronounced "Special A." You might also want to discuss this with WP:JAPAN, since this will affect some of their articles too. lullabying (talk) 22:13, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
- Hmm, I am still a bit conflicted about the best way to implement this. I've just made some high-profile lead edits at One Piece, Hunter × Hunter, Gantz, and Dr. Stone if you all would like to review them. — Goszei (talk) 06:24, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Goszei: All-caps titles (as in Banana Fish and others) not be listed per MOS:JAPAN#Titles of media. Morgan695 (talk) 05:16, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Morgan695:
The titles of Japanese books, CDs, and other media products may incorporate typographical effects, punctuation, or capitalization conventions generally not used in reliable native English language sources. In all cases, this original title stylization should be included in the lead of the article.
Avoid using all capital letters (except acronyms/initials), all lowercase letters (a technical restriction), or alternating upper and lower casing in article titles.
- I believe you misread that section. Doesn't it forbid allcaps in article titles, but recommend always including the stylization in the lead? — Goszei (talk) 08:03, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Goszei: IMO, it just feels silly when it's not conveying any new information. There is obvious utility in noting specific stylizations in media like Chaos;Head or The Idolmaster, but you would never write "Lost (stylized as LOST)," or even "Neon Genesis Evangelion (stylized as Neon Genesis EVANGELION)", even though those titles do appear that way in some materials. Morgan695 (talk) 15:51, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Morgan695:
- @Goszei: All-caps titles (as in Banana Fish and others) not be listed per MOS:JAPAN#Titles of media. Morgan695 (talk) 05:16, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
Reliability of cal.syoboi.jp
I have created a discussion on a source's reliability at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Online reliable sources § cal.syoboi.jp, and would appreciate some input. — Goszei (talk) 07:37, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
Naming conventions for anime season articles
Recently, I found @SpectresWrath is moving anime season articles insufficiently (or incorrectly) to pages that are inconsistent for others. He told me that the new page names are the official titles, and I believe while it is applied WP:TVSEASON in some particular series, it is not good practice. For example, Date A Live series was named as "Date A Live (season X)", which works perfectly fine for template:Infobox television season, but he moved season 2&3 articles to Date A Live II and Date A Live III respectively without season 1. Then I felt season 1 is inconsistency (now still remain as "Date A Live (season 1)") for season 2 and season 3, so I moved the page to Date A Live I. However, that is not the end. He moved season 1 page to Date A Live (2013 TV series). Sure it applies MOS:TV, but fails WP:TITLECON. We need consistency in the anime season pages.
To do so, I first summaries there are four situations in terms of anime season articles:
- a) unnamed and without seasonal numbers (e.g. One Piece, Case Closed),
- b) unnamed but with seasonal numbers (e.g. Sword Art Online II, Strike the Blood III),
- c) named but without seasonal numbers (e.g. Sword Art Online: Alicization, The Seven Deadly Sins: Revival of The Commandments)
- d) named and with seasonal numbers (e.g. Food Wars! Shokugeki no Soma: The Third Plate, A Certain Scientific Railgun S(econd)).
It would be easy to name if a series is approached by only one situation, but what if there are multiple? I summaries there roughly are several scenarios as followings:
Scenario 1
Situations: a) and b)
Example: Strike the Blood
| Season | Situation | Official Name | Current Name | Naming as per MOS:TV | Naming as per WP:TITLECON | Alternative solution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | a | Strike the Blood | Strike the Blood (season 1) | Strike the Blood ( |
Strike the Blood (season/series 1) | Strike the Blood I |
| 2 | b | Strike the Blood II | Strike the Blood II | Strike the Blood II | Strike the Blood (season/series 2) | Strike the Blood II |
| 3 | b | Strike the Blood III | Strike the Blood III | Strike the Blood III | Strike the Blood (season/series 3) | Strike the Blood III |
| 4 | b | Strike the Blood IV | Strike the Blood IV | Strike the Blood IV | Strike the Blood (season/series 4) | Strike the Blood IV |
For this scenario, I believe the alternative solution is the best as it applies both WP:TVSEASON and WP:TITLECON.
Scenario 2
Situations: a) and c)
Example: The Seven Deadly Sins
| Season | Situation | Official Name | Current Name | Naming as per MOS:TV | Naming as per WP:TITLECON |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | a | The Seven Deadly Sins | The Seven Deadly Sins (2014 TV series) | The Seven Deadly Sins ( |
The Seven Deadly Sins (season/series 1) |
| Special | c | The Seven Deadly Sins: Signs of Holy War | The Seven Deadly Sins: Signs of Holy War | The Seven Deadly Sins: Signs of Holy War | The Seven Deadly Sins (season/series special) |
| 2 | c | The Seven Deadly Sins: Revival of The Commandments | The Seven Deadly Sins: Revival of The Commandments | The Seven Deadly Sins: Revival of The Commandments | The Seven Deadly Sins (season/series 2) |
| 3 | c | The Seven Deadly Sins: Wrath of the Gods | The Seven Deadly Sins: Wrath of the Gods | The Seven Deadly Sins: Wrath of the Gods | The Seven Deadly Sins (season/series 3) |
| 4 | c | The Seven Deadly Sins: Anger's Judgement | The Seven Deadly Sins: Anger's Judgement | The Seven Deadly Sins: Anger's Judgement | The Seven Deadly Sins (season/series 4) |
For this scenario, I believe MOS:TV perfectly applies here.
Scenario 3
Situations: a), b) and c)
Example: Sword Art Online
| Season | Situation | Official Name | Current Name | Naming as per MOS:TV | Naming as per WP:TITLECON |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | a | Sword Art Online | Sword Art Online (2012 TV series) | Sword Art Online ( |
Sword Art Online (season/series 1) |
| 2 | b | Sword Art Online II | Sword Art Online II | Sword Art Online II | Sword Art Online (season/series 2) |
| 3 | c | Sword Art Online: Alicization | Sword Art Online: Alicization | Sword Art Online: Alicization | Sword Art Online (season/series 3) |
I'll be honest, this scenario is the toughest. I have to point out that if the articles are named as per MOS:TV, i.e. Series title (20XX TV series), I found it somewhat impactical with the Template:Infobox television season.
original code
| ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
With the original code, it could be like this: {{Infobox television season
| bgcolour = #add8e6
| image =
| caption = first season anime key visual
| country = Japan
| network = [[Tokyo MX]]
| first_aired = {{start date|8|7}}
| last_aired = {{end date|2012|12|23}}
| num_episodes = 25 + 1 special
| next_season = ''[[Sword Art Online II]]''
| episode_list = [[List of Sword Art Online episodes]]
}}
| ||||||||||||||
adjusted code
| ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
To fix that, the code should be like: {{Infobox television season
| season_name = ''Sword Art Online''
| season_number = 1
| bgcolour = #add8e6
| image =
| caption = first season anime key visual
| country = Japan
| network = [[Tokyo MX]]
| first_aired = {{start date|8|7}}
| last_aired = {{end date|2012|12|23}}
| num_episodes = 25 + 1 special
| prev_season = N/A
| next_season = ''[[Sword Art Online II]]''
| episode_list = [[List of Sword Art Online episodes]]
| episode_list = [[List of Date A Live episodes]]
}}
However, the | ||||||||||||||
Given that the aforementioned reason, I would lean toward the WP:TITLECON one, unless someone could proper fix it.
Scenario 4
Situations: a) and d)
Example: The Seven Deadly Sins
| Season | Situation | Official Name | Current Name | Naming as per MOS:TV | Naming as per WP:TITLECON | Alternative solution | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | a | A Certain Scientific Railgun | A Certain Scientific Railgun (2009 TV series) | A Certain Scientific Railgun ( |
A Certain Scientific Railgun (season/series 1) | A Certain Scientific Railgun F | "F" as "First" (possible WP:OR) |
| 2 | d | A Certain Scientific Railgun S | A Certain Scientific Railgun S | A Certain Scientific Railgun S | A Certain Scientific Railgun (season/series 2) | A Certain Scientific Railgun S | "S" as "Second" |
| 3 | d | A Certain Scientific Railgun T | A Certain Scientific Railgun T | A Certain Scientific Railgun T | A Certain Scientific Railgun (season/series 3) | A Certain Scientific Railgun T | "T" as "Third" |
For this scenario, I believe the WP:TITLECON one is the best, as the alternative solution is actually WP:OR. In terms of the MOS:TV one, I would suffer the same issue as scenario 3's, so I do not recommend.
Other than the above, a simple flat-out solution is ignoring MOS:TV and WP:TVSEASON, while naming all articles in the "Series title (Season/Series X)" style for WP:TITLECON, but I don't think it is a good proposal. Unnamelessness (talk) 06:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Unnamelessness: Comment: I slightly favor using (season 1) for the first article over (20XX TV series), as shown in your "current Scenario 1" table -- to me, seeing (20XX TV series) signals to an unfamiliar reader that there is another series/season with exact same title from a different year [perhaps an earlier adaptation by another studio], rather than the fact that there is extra seasons. However, I think (20XX TV series) is an acceptable option, and preferable if it would preclude conflict with MOS:TV.
- I do not like your WP:TITLECON proposals, because people will definitely be confused by seeing a title like "A Certain Scientific Railgun (season 3)" instead of "A Certain Scientific Railgun T" -- AKA, the latter is by far the WP:COMMONNAME for the season. As for your "alternative" proposals, I am totally opposed to them because they are WP:OR, like you said. For example, "Strike the Blood I" or "A Certain Scientific Railgun F" are unacceptable because they are made-up titles that are 1) not used, let alone commonly used and 2) do not officially exist.
- P.S: Could you point out the exact section/quote of MOS:TV that recommends using (20XX TV series) instead of (season 1)? I can't seem to find it myself. — Goszei (talk) 00:57, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
- Goszei,
"If a television article already exists with the name of the show for which you are trying to create an article, use (YEAR TV series) in the title, if the years are different"
Unnamelessness (talk) 02:43, 2 August 2020 (UTC) - Goszei, If we use (season 1) for the first article (which was commonly used before), it needs to be consistent with the others; it just cannot be like A Certain Scientific Railgun (season 1), A Certain Scientific Railgun S, A Certain Scientific Railgun T. It has either to be A Certain Scientific Railgun (season X) for all seasons (WP:TITLECON), or to be A Certain Scientific Railgun (
2009TV series), A Certain Scientific Railgun S, A Certain Scientific Railgun T (MOS:TV). As far as I can see, the former format is commonly used in the TV season article. Unnamelessness (talk) 03:08, 2 August 2020 (UTC)- @Unnamelessness: Consider the following cases, which both currently exist:
- Goszei,
- Both of these structures make sense, and are also in keeping with MOS:TV. Now consider the case of Railgun:
- Now, MOS:TV says there should be a A Certain Scientific Railgun (TV series) article before List of A Certain Scientific Railgun episodes can exist. However, no such article exists.
- The current sitation is well-explained at the following discussion: Talk:List of Toriko episodes/Archive 1 § Requested move 26 October 2019, which ended with no project-wide consensus. Regardless of your opinion on that matter, the status quo and WP:ASTONISH indicates to me that (season 1) is the most sensible disambiguation, because it doesn't mislead a reader into thinking a first season article with (TV series) covers the entire series, like Sailor Moon (TV series) and Attack on Titan (TV series). — Goszei (talk) 07:07, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
- As for the WP:OR, I would say A Certain Scientific Railgun F is WP:OR, but don't think something like Strike the Blood I is WP:OR. It is naming in the style of "title name + seasonal number (e.g. The Amazing Race series). Unnamelessness (talk) 03:08, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
- MOS:TV only says to use "(20XX TV series)" if there's already another page at "(TV series)"
if a television article already exists with the name of the show for which you are trying to create an article
. That is, the year is there to disambiguate between two identically-named TV shows. Since there is only one released named simply A Certain Scientific Railgun (or the other examples) specifically, with no subtitles or numbers, there should be no conflict and they can readily reside at just "A Certain Scientific Railgun (TV series)". If that is the naming convention used, the year should be dropped from the title, as like Goszei says, it's potentially misleading. — Kawnhr (talk) 03:57, 2 August 2020 (UTC)- Kawnhr, I have no problem with dropping year or not. The actual question here is the inconsistency of article titles. Unnamelessness (talk) 05:15, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Unnamelessness: I disagree about Strike the Blood I, Date a Live I, and similar constructions. WP:TITLECON is trumped by WP:CRITERIA because titles must first and foremost be based on usage in sources. Quote from WP:TITLECON:
Where multiple titles are available, and where titles are equally usable in terms of recognizability, naturalness, preciseness, and conciseness [AKA the five WP:CRITERIA] then the title to be used should be consistent with titles used for similar or related topics in Wikipedia.
- Try Googling "Strike the Blood I", "Date a Live I", or "A Certain Scientific Railgun F" -- these titles have never been used by any reliable or official source, and have only rarely been used in irrelevant unreliable sources. — Goszei (talk) 06:01, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
- MOS:TV only says to use "(20XX TV series)" if there's already another page at "(TV series)"
Goszei You still don't get it, do you? Sure, "A Certain Scientific Railgun F" is bad, but the "I" there stands for the meaning of "(season 1)". The similar case: The Amazing Race 1 (original title The Amazing Race, but add an extra "1" for the consistency with the other seasons). Of course, you can say (season 1) is the most sensible disambiguation, then it should be (season 2), (season 3)... for the rest seasons as the fact that the roman numerals/numerical digits which follow titles undoubtedly stand for the meaning of "(season X)" (the Attack on Titan method and widely adapted by the TV sesaon articles). This is indeed the first scenario I've brought in and only applies to series of which their naming convention is [title name + season number]. A Certain Scientific Railgun, Sailor Moon and the like which have a unique naming system does not apply to here.
Having read that archive, I've got a feeling of the reason why anime TV season article titles are so inconsistency and hard to get consensus is that a) complexity (which is also why I've tried to bring in four different scenarios to solve in categorized discussion method) and b) a lack of certain policy which specifically rules the naming convention of anime and manga topic. I believe the project should create one. A third opinion would be really appreciated. Unnamelessness (talk) 09:34, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
The place where anime studio templates and categories should be
When an anime season received its own page, is it fine to move its studio templates and categories to its season page? I believe it should be, especially for the series like Date A Live—the different season is animated by a different studio (S1 AIC; S2 IMS; S3 J.C.Staff; S4 likely to be Geek Toys). But that leads to another problem. For some series which have already received twenty, thirty or even more seasons by the same studio such as One Piece, Naruto, Case Closed, it is impractical as their wikilink in the anime studio template is to their series' main page and that is the only one—to reach their seasons respectively, it needs to add a chunk number of wikilinks in their templates. Unnamelessness (talk) 06:52, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
Edit war on List of My Hero Academia characters
Most of the descriptions below each characters' names have been removed, and the page has been protected indefinitely for "repeated insertions of unsourced content", despite similar content being on every character list I could find. I think this is needed of more opinions than just me and the other party member. 72.219.72.215 (talk) 13:19, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
Move discussion for The Star of Cottonland
Please come participate at Talk:The Star of Cottonland#Correct title for this article - 7 August 2020 Thanks! ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 20:57, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
Potential edit war for The Legend of Snow White article
I think I might be having a potential edit war regarding the translation of the Japanese title for series. I have started a discussion in the article's talk page and could use a few more opinions on the matter. Sarujo (talk) 21:03, 8 August 2020 (UTC)