User talk:Sesshomaru/Archive 5

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 4

Archive 5

Archive 6 >

Vandalism

<Message removed. Please view this link, [1], if you wish to see why.> Lord Sesshomaru 15:27, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

ISBNs can be added to the actual refs. The only reason the section exists is because most Naruto articles lack references. Adding it to an article that does not have this problem is pointless. ~Snapper T o 20:52, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do not own the book, so you'll need to look elsewhere for that. Regardless, ISBNs are not required; even the link you provided me says that much. If you don't want to add ISBNs to references because it makes it look cluttered, I fail to see how stuffing a list of books that may or may not say anything on the subject will prevent that problem. If you feel the need to have that information available somehow you can make creative use of List of Naruto chapters; make shortcuts or something that you can link to from each reference. ~Snapper T o 21:21, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How does one know what happens in the manga every week without subscribing to Weekly Shonen Jump? Simple: scans of the material that someone uploads onto the internet. ~Snapper T o 02:13, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your only reason is that you want ISBNs, an unnecessary factoid you continue to desire for nonsensical reasons. I have suggested using List of Naruto chapters for this particular tidbit of information, yet you seem uninterested in using it. As I said in my edit summary, if you are going to insist on keeping the section at least make the effort to add the information you want it to give people. ~Snapper T o 20:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please

<Messages removed. Please view these links, [2], [3], if you wish to know why.> Lord Sesshomaru 18:50, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Concerns

As you remove valid concerns such as you did to this post, I am becoming concerned. Transparency is imporatnt part of this project. While there is no hard and fast rule, it is generally a good idea to not remove edits of good faith editors. I have NO reason to believe that this edit was done in bad faith and your treatment of this editor is a little dickish personally. Please make an effort to get along with this editor. I am sure you will erase this message as you erase all of my concerns, I however hope you choose to take it to heart. Thanks! Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:08, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

<Replied on user's talk page.> Lord Sesshomaru 20:09, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Superman

Thanks for asking. I've been away a few days.

It's just that the Comics Project "Exemplar" page specifically uses Superman as the example at "Comic Book Characters":

"Superman is a fictional character and regarded as the most influential and popular superhero of DC Comics. Created by Canadian artist Joe Shuster and American writer Jerry Siegel in 1932 and sold to Detective Comics, Inc. in 1938, Superman first appeared in Action Comics #1 (June 1938) and subsequently appeared in various radio serials, television programs, films, newspaper strips, and video games."

It just seems odd to have Superman used as the example of this wording on the exemplar page but not on the Superman article. And, really, unless you want to unilaterally go in and change Spider-Man, Batman, Captain Marvel (DC Comics) and dozens if not hundreds of other major comics characters, it makes Superman inconsistent with much of the rest of the Comics Project.

But if you want to do that, I'm not gonna fight. If you want inconsistence, fine. --Tenebrae 00:07, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shonen Jump

ISBNs are already listed in the Naruto chapters article, let that be one of their jobs while we concentrate on page numbers and other stuff. I'll try and find the chapters they were released in, though. And the first one doesn't need a reference, only the second one does. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 16:44, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was unneeded for that article, incomplete, and the List of Naruto chapters article deals with ISBNs nicely, so let us just worry about ISBNs there and there only. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 17:00, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You aren't supposed to list ISBNs just to find a book, and it serves much more sueful purposes in the chapters page. And after reading that, I found a line that said they aren't required. Although for a list of books article, they would probably be needed, but for a fictional character, the ISBNs are completely unneeded. Let us just leave the chapters article to do the ISBN job, as they can do it much more appropriately than a character article. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 17:15, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"popular among fans" means he is popular among the number of fans of Naruto, not popular on Jurrasic Park, Dragon Ball, or Star Wars standards. And I reverted it because favoured just made it seem terribly written, as long as you can think of a better word that does not suck you can change it. And yes, favoured sucks in that use of it compared to popular. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 17:46, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, they are better than favoured. But non of them fit the situation as much as popular does, even if they are more well-written words. Popular is straight and to the point, while the others are fancy and don't seem very appropriate. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 18:02, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Before we go on, I would like to ask: I read a comment that said the former Shippuden plot article was the 89th most read article on Wikipedia. How did he find that out? Is there an article or list or survey that shows that stuff? Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 18:06, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You misunderstood. When I said "former Shippuden plot article", I meant that it was deleted. It doesn't exist anymore and shouldn't exist. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 18:13, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry in to interrupt but the page Artist is looking for I believe is in the process of a make over and if you're trying to use that for itachi's sake then remember if it didn't help Shippuden why would it help in this case?Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 23:31, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ABBA / B.A.T.M.A.N.

Hi David. Doesn't ABBA need to be moved/renamed to Abba (band)? Perhaps just Abba per MOS:CAPS (take a look at the shortcut box there BTW). Lord Sesshomaru 22:59, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ABBA is an acronym, so it shouldn't be modified.

I'll prune that enormous shortcut box down to size. —David Levy 00:00, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: How about that shortcut proposal you were planning? Lord Sesshomaru 22:59, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I've been very busy in real life. I'll try to get to that soon. —David Levy 00:00, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm unsure about B.A.T.M.A.N.. Is the hatnote there necessary? Lord Sesshomaru 23:38, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's a judgement call. Given the fact that BATMAN redirects to Batman, I'm leaning toward "no." —David Levy 00:00, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Batman

"Superhero" would be adequately terminology to describe Batman, since he is described as such in popular and academic contexts. While he doesn't have superpowers, lots of other superheroes don't, ranging from the Golden Age to now. Despite the lack of superpowers, he does consist of various traits attributed to superheroes, including a career as a crime fighter, a secret identity, a costume and motif, and a rogues gallery. WesleyDodds 01:46, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Im back!

Hey Sesshomaru I have just got back from an unanounced Wikibreak, I know we have had our differences in the past but I hope we can look past (no pun intended there) that and help improve wikipedia, DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 22:43, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was great I went to Yosemite in California and it was awesome. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 22:47, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uh just one, what happened to all the pictures in the lists? DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 23:02, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disrupt? No no no I now realise you were only trying to make sure I didn't destroy Wikipedia. Its fine, really. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 23:17, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Undid the revision I see where your coming from. it really does look better as a citiation. :D DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 23:38, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For working tirelessly to improve Dragon Ball related articles I present you with the Original Barnstar, keep it up! DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 23:44, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know, I know

I know I should start a AFD but if I do the damn IP's will come running and I won't be able to handle that BS from them. We each bring up good pionts but I still satnd by my reasonings that no information will be lost in the merge.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 00:00, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's just that when I answer them over and over again I get tired of repeating myself and then guys like Artist see fit to insult saying I should give them policies as if I didn't for the past two days. And that along with work gets on my nerves.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 02:22, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The only reason why the article was created in the first place was that every one was under pressure to make one and so when someone came along with a mediocre article everyone jumped all at once. And yes i'll continue with the current disscussion i see no reason to start up an AFD now as we're too far into this already.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 04:48, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Saint Seiya, a sci-fi?

It depends, on if it is the Manga or Anime. Since the Anime has a small Toei based plot were some persons wear technological armors. Which can count as Sci-fi, but since this is a rather small part of it, i am doubtfull. And about the other question, some of them can fly, and they have superhuman strength. :D Refuteku 19:11 August 12 2007

I'll get to the Zelos Frog page later :D Still all the characters have superhuman strength, and everyone can move ath superhuman speed. But the ones that can fly are only Pegasus Seiya, Cygnus Hyoga and Phoenix Ikki. These events take place almost at the end of the story. And personally i wouldn't call it sci-fi, so there you have my answer :DRefuteku 19:11 August 12 2007

I currently own the series on DVD, so i haven't seen a reason to watch them online. Though the first episodes of the recent season was an exception since they had not been released yet. 18:28, 12 August 2007 (UTC)Refuteku 20:28 August 12 2007

My revert

Sorry about that. I didn't revert all of it to prove my point, it was just a mistake. It wasn't necessary to accuse me of doing that in order to prove my point. --Zeno McDohl ^(talk) 17:14, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As far as the source, I checked the Job Posting that was linked and I see nothing there. --Zeno McDohl ^(talk) 17:18, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The link you posted is not the job posting. This is and I see nothing there. All the fields are blank. --Zeno McDohl ^(talk) 17:55, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, you have the wrong link. That is not the job posting link. Did you even read that article? Apparently not, since you think my link is a random link. It's not a random link. I got the link from the article (click Gamejob). The link I provided is the actual Job Listing. And as I'm saying, it's blank. The job advert in the article is blank. It can't be used as a source. --Zeno McDohl ^(talk) 18:05, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ref

Sorry, missed the cat notice. I'd say clear it. As for the ref, it's quite unnecessary to repeat the same ref in one sentence. It's relevant to the entire sentence. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 01:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He doesn't seem to have contested it, so you should be fine. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 21:44, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Offhand, I'd say italics since they're foreign. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 20:09, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Goku

I have left a comment on Talk:Son Goku (Dragon Ball). --Ghostexorcist 00:59, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I actually don't think that Google test (as it stands) says much. Check out my reply on the talk page for my reasoning. I'll check out the other comment now and reply on that page as well. Onikage725 11:40, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

After a bit of absence, I return! Any more trouble from Blueshrek while I was gone? Lychosis ^T/C 20:44, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Anime and manga/Dragon Ball Argument

I'm seriously geting tired of A Link to the Past. How are we going to get rid of this guy? Ryu-chan

It might be prudent for you two to take a break. Link can be hard to work with, but as I told him two wrongs don't make a right. That goes for both sides of the disagreement. Comments like Ryu's above are just as bad as what is said on the other side. Onikage725 20:16, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question

<Uncivil / trollish messages removed again. Please view these links, [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], if you wish to know why.> Lord Sesshomaru 17:39, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

0_o I feel bad for you Sesshomaru, seeing what you've been dealing with. Nice to see you again. As you may have noticed, I took a short un-notified leave of absence (seeing this, you could use one yourself). It gets really crazy here sometimes, and I simply needed a break. Think of it as a "Vacation from Wikipedia". Now I'm back, and it seems like you're having disputes with Link as well, as myself and Onikage have in the past. --VorangorTheDemon 13:32, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

<Message by SineBot removed. Please review this false claim if you wish to understand why.> Lord Sesshomaru 16:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:LTA

Definately WP:LTA. He's really getting on my nerves with his Androids on AH. We'll beat him though. Ryu-chan 18:56 20 August, 2007 (UTC)

It bothers me to be hearing you two talk like this. Link needs to be less annoying with his concerns, but he has not violated any policy, and has many valid concerns. -- Ned Scott 04:51, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Majin Buu help

What Happen?

Some one set us up the bad article!

We Get Post

Hello Users

All your Article are belong to us!!!

What!?

Sorry couldn't resist an AYBABTU reference. Anyway, Majin Buu needs some massive clean up, are you up for it? DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 23:36, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Sorry about the whole Majin Buu page I just did not like the picture (probably not the best reason huh?) anyway again I am sorry.--The K.O. King 8/23/07

The Reason I came to you just now was because I did not read my messages and thanks for the suggestion.The K.O. King 20:30, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: SineBot

I responded to your post to my talk page a few days ago, and I just saw the one you recently posted to User talk:SineBot. I'll try posting here in hopes that you will get my reply. Your signature does not contain a link to your user page or your talk page; instead, it has a link to your contribs page. Per signatures guideline on internal links, you must have either a link to your user page, a link to your talk page, or both in your signature. The bot is programmed to follow guidelines as best as it can.

If you would like to ignore all rules in hopes of making the encyclopedia better for everyone, you shall have my warmest encouragement. If you you choose that path, however, I would suggest that you might consider opting out of automatic signing, otherwise the bot will continue labeling your posts as unsigned so long as your signature points to your contributions list. I apologize for any inconvenience this might cause you. --slakr ^(talk) 02:42, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

#17

Not that A Link to the Past is blocked, how are we gonna make Artificial Human 17's page back to what it use to be? Ryu-chan 17:35, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find the part on WP:MJ that says the thing about accuracy. Ryu-chan 17:54, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Superhuman strength

Far. I feel a list is unencyclopedic anyway, just prone to bloat... but whatever. I will renominate later when the suggested rewrite never happens.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 15:33, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried but there's no real way of writing as concise prose without horrific broad/general uncited statements about the progression of of cinema and television, the use of metaphor etc. I'm just going to merge the whole thing into one sentence in the lead and hope you'll assist to revert any attempts to restore the listcruft.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 16:08, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing the list doesn't shorten the quality. The "Sandbox" was just what I shortened it to but hated.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 16:16, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can appropriate it anyway you like, just I didn't like what I wrote very much.~Zythe^{Talk to me!} 17:27, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Son Goku

I actually intended to move Son Goku (disambiguation) to "Son Goku" (not Sun Goku) per consensus here. Can you lend a hand David? I'll manage the redirects once this is done. Thanks. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 01:01, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll need your assistance David, if you're available. I can't move the page to Son Goku as planned, it would be great if you would do this, as I'm unable to. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:27, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I apologize for the delay. I somehow overlooked your original message.

I've performed the page move. —David Levy 19:02, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re:Itachi

the one where snapper posted last. or if you want to start a new topic if you're consused.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 19:13, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Trolling

<Messages by ip sockpuppets of Recoome removed again. Please view these links, [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], if you wish to understand reasoning.> Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 21:22, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I can see from your page that your used to dealing with vandals and i was wondering if you could help me. On the page Superboy prime their is a editor vandalising and removing sourced information. Can you help me or point me in the right direction? Thanks.BIG Daddy M 05:11, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Big Daddy M is continuing to throw around accusations of vandalism where no vandalism exists. It is a content dispute, with two editors opposing his additions, and he has yet to satisfactorily explain why his additions to the article are warranted despite several requests. Instead he falls back on calling it vandalism and demanding we stop. Pairadox 05:49, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Hi Sesshomaru, I was wondering, seeing as you have linked your signature to your user page now if it is ok for me put the barnstar I gave you on your page? DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 21:47, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ok I was just wondering. Its your page after all :D. DBZROCKSIts over 9000!!! 21:57, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection

Hi David, I was wondering if you could sprotect my user page and talk page. There is a sockpuppet who uses a hopping ip and continues to edit around my user pages despite his indef. block. See User:Recoome. Do you semi-protect user pages by personal request or is that against policy? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:32, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The protection policy allows for the indefinite semi-protection of user pages (but not user talk pages) on request. I've semi-protected your user page. —David Levy 19:40, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. If the sockpuppet continues to troll my user talk page using a different ip every time, what would you suggest for my talk page? I say this because I'm tired of dealing with him. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:51, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please add/confirm an e-mail address? I'd like to reply privately. —David Levy 08:20, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fictional characters w/ superpower CfD

You can find the over all CfD here... for the later telekinesis see here. - J Greb 00:36, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Itachi

Consensus does not always need to be determined in order for an action to be taken, and in the absence of consensus, editors are free to be bold in such cases. Consensus at WP:FICT overrides any local consensus at Talk:Itachi Uchiha anyways. In any case, you still have not, and cannot really, refute WP:FICT. List of Akatsuki members was deleted over this reason, and such a deletion was then endorsed at deletion review. Now, Akatsuki (Naruto), Itachi's parent article, is in danger of deletion for the same reason. There have been no reasons from the opposite side to keep Itachi except a lot of WP:ILIKEIT, which does not, in any way, shape, or form, refute WP:FICT. I am going to revert your edits - please discuss this with me on my talk page, or at Talk:Itachi Uchiha before reverting me. Also note that if you cannot bring forth an argument to refute WP:FICT, then please do not continue. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:15, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As for your WP:CONS argument, Wikipedia's consensus policy deals with disputes between versions of a page. Namely, it applies to the addition, removal, or alteration of material on a small scale due to differences in interpretation of the subject or of what is or is not noteworthy. Per WP:CONEXCEPT], it may not override the application of a policy or guideline, such as WP:FICT, as those have already garnered a greater level of consensus. You Can 't Review Me!!! 06:22, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What you are trying to keep is a mess of in-universe details, and the etymology on his name. The in-universe details will not be missed (and were unnecessarily verbose), and the latter can simply be added to Akatsuki (Naruto)#Itachi Uchiha, considering that the source is reliable. The rest of the sources are all primary sources, thus making it unsuitable to stand alone as an article. Akatsuki (Naruto) is not excessively long to the point where WP:FICT#Notable topics would become an issue, and List of Akatsuki members failed to reach that criterion. Furthermore, WP:FICT#Notable topics clearly states that the articles must be able of standing on their own notability merits, and this is clearly not the case. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:29, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Which question? Heck, you only put one question; ergo, I'll respond to that. No, I do not need to wait until consensus is reached because consensus elsewhere on a guideline overrides any local consensus reached. I believe You Can't See Me! clearly outlined that above. I am free to be bold to pursue this end if necessary. Further discussion on Talk:Itachi Uchiha would would accomplish little, because no one has answered the question, "How has this article satisfied WP:FICT?" In any case, shortly after the article was merged, I had nothing but WP:IDONTLIKEIT, hence nothing substantial, as to my decision. What do you hope to accomplish with further discussion? Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:39, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps he does not. That's another issue to be considered at another time though. Anyway, due to the recent fair-use crusade that's been occuring, consensus has been for including solely the spread page. You are free to bring the topic up again at Talk:Akatsuki (Naruto), although you might be more concerned with this first. Feel free to include the ref though. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 06:49, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Page blanking

My apologies. I intended to revert it to a redirect, but for some reason I accidentally left out the redirect line. You Can 't Review Me!!! 06:16, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem at all. It was my fault for making an editing mistake; there was no way you would have known that I didn't do that for the sake of disruption.

In any case, I'll adress your points about the article itself tomorrow; I was actually doing one last watchlist check of the night when I saw Itachi's article jump to the top of my watched articles. G'night! Again, I'm terribly sorry again about the confusion. Regards, You Can 't Review Me!!! 06:36, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Templates

Not necessarily. They are used to help us kep track, but if an IP was used just once or twice in the past by a puppeteer, I'm not sure that a mass tagging is appropriate. -- Avi 18:22, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dragon Ball Z

Dragon Ball Z (film) has been updated with the history of this project since your last recommendation using sources like Variety and The Hollywood Reporter. Would you consider this content worth merging to Dragon Ball Z in a Live-action film adaptation section? —Erik (talk • contrib) - 23:30, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Variety and THe Hollywood Reporter are very big and accurate sources. The news about dragonballz being filmed in montreal is not internet gossip. -cman7792 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cman7792 (talk • contribs) 03:17, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I asked you to consider a merge because the primary opposing editor does not think any information about the history of the project should be kept anywhere. I think that verifiable coverage from Variety and The Hollywood Reporter about the project would warrant mention on the article of the source material. I'm not concerned about the fate of the article itself, whether it gets merged or deleted (but preferably not kept), just that the content of previous attempts exist somewhere. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 15:20, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was bringing the article to your attention again due to its cleaner rewrite, using sources like trade papers instead of Internet gossip. The key issue here is that the primary opposing editor does not want the coverage of this reported film at Dragon Ball Z, believing that the deletion of this stand-alone article means that nothing should be said about it anywhere else. Thanks for your time, anyway. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 18:52, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Hey Dantman

Available to comment? On what? I don't actually edit Wikipedia much, or really at all. I mostly just fix a mistake or two if I notice it. So, what do you want me to comment on here? Dantman 03:29, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If this were Wikia, we could probably use SpamRegex to stop him. But on Wikipedia stopping him may not be as easy. I suppose semi-protection would work, but I don't know how easily an admin would give that. Never liked WP community myself... Dantman —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dantman (talk • contribs) 05:52, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

M. Bison

No, 'Bison' is just a shortened name not his official name. As an example, these changes are to do with people calling Ivy from Soul Calibur Isabella Valentine, when Namco themselves only ever refer to her as her nickname 'Ivy'. Mr.bonus 10:39, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I got it

Just signed up with Windows Live Messenger and set the same name in my preferences. You could you try e-mailing me now, I suppose? Let's deal with this "Prince Zarbon" sock vandal ASAP, as he's getting on my nerves.Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 16:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did the e-mail thing work? I just signed up like two days ago, also, is Category:Romanians anime and manga characters supposed to be titled Category:Romanian anime and manga characters? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:25, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted Category:Romanians anime and manga characters and created Category:Romanian anime and manga characters.

Did you confirm your e-mail address? I'm still unable to e-mail you. —David Levy 11:54, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if you sent me an e-mail, did you? I have confirmed my e-mail address on Windows Live, however, is there a Wikipedia page where I must do the same? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:21, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You should have received a confirmation e-mail from Wikipedia. —David Levy 07:13, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Try now. I've just recently confirmed my e-mail address again. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 01:13, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It still isn't working. Did you receive a confirmation e-mail from Wikipedia? —David Levy 01:59, 12 September 2007 (UTC):[reply]

Distribution of animation character

Isn't it useful for the understanding of the trait of each country to classify the animation character according to the nationality? Do you support division to me without division though it proposes classifying?For instance, to the way of Peggy (JoJo's Bizarre Adventure). For instance, I have the preparation for deleting "Category:Anime and manga characters who can move at superhuman speeds" by Removing unnessary triviality per WP:CAT-RD. After observing your reaction, I arrange the category. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Azukimonaka talk contribs) 13:09, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that it was more convenient to use Redirect than to make a small article. (Redirect is often used. Redirect was often used also for the character of Sakura Wars. )

I think that it is profitable to classify the Anime character according to the nationality. However, I do not want to fight against you.

Therefore, after my work is interrupted, and you leave, I will start restoration and the deletion. 　--211.3.112.132 04:16, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Astro Boy (character): detail of edits

Changed "first introduced" to plain "introduced." You can only be introduced once.
Removed "also" and "as well." Not needed.
Moved "Astro" name to alias section in infobox.
Removed "Appearance" section. There's a picture, no need to describe what he looks like.
The seven powers were listed twice. Deleted one instance.
Changed "Prominant roles" to "Appearances." Astro is a fictional character, not a real actor. He doesn't act nor portray anyone in the other series.
"See also" not needed. The relevant articles are already linked in the main body.
Already linked to the English article in the Tezuka World database. The japanese article wasn't necessary.
"Astro's roles" appear in the Tezuka World main entry.
Astro Boy is not a "scientist", even if he "plays" one in another series.

About the maintenance tags, I didn't think the article was in-universe or needed further sources. You're welcome to disagree and add them once again.--Nohansen 04:54, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hirano interview on deathcom

Here's the link. [15] I can't link to the page it's on ([16]) because for some reason the site redirects to the front page. I also didn't want to post a direct link to the video because I figured that was against the rules or something. You can find the video from the front page by clicking on Otakon 2006 (under "2006 Conventions"), and then clicking on "Cosplay and FanCam". While I agree that The Dawn should suffice as a reference, a lot of people find it hard to believe that Alucard can change gender for some reason. I added this video as a reference because someone kept changing the line to say that Alucard transforms into a "young boy". Schrödinger 14:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Androids

Check out the Android pages. Ryu-chan (Talk) 19:11, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The people in Dragon Ball WikiProject seemed to like it, that's why I did that. And they do call 'em that after the Cell arc in the manga, if I'm not mistaken, so I thought it was okay. I thought they were okay. They were never called Cyborgs in the manga or anime, so I figured this would be an alternate to stop all the fighting and like I said, they liked it. So what do you suggest? Ryu-chan (Talk) 19:44, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, according to DBZ wiki, most people want this. Ryu-chan (Talk) 18:48, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Genre categories

The number of genres listed on each page is supposed to be kept succinct. By listing every minor genre-related element that ever was touched on in the infobox and categories, you give them undue weight (WP:NPOV violation) and potentially confuse readers. You also make the categories useless. This is ESPECIALLY true of Category:Drama anime and manga; none of the works in it share any sort of commonality any more so it might as well just be deleted for all the good it does us.

If you wish to show the breadth of genres that were touched on in a work's plot, I suggest doing so through prose. --tjstrf talk 04:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bleach isn't an adventure series. Read the article on adventure. It requires that the characters be in it at least partially for the fun of it, and Ichigo not being in it for fun is actually a major point early in the series. (Series like One Piece, Air Gear, etc. are all adventure, but not Bleach.)

Bleach also isn't a comedy. What few jokes there are pretty much just lasted for the first arc and were then dropped, with only occasional moments of humor later on. Now, discussing the humor in Bleach might be a worthwhile thing for the article itself to do, but it's not appropriate for the infobox because it's completely misleading about the overall character of the series.

As for my "mean" comment, I interpreted your statement that you had done the genres for Dragon Ball and YYH as meaning that you had been the one to dump a dozen-odd different labels on those pages. If you weren't the one who did that, then I apologize for overreacting. If you were the one who did it, I think the reaction was quite justified. (Martial arts manga means Fist of the North Star and Rurouni Kenshin, not magical energy blast land.)

And no, the drama category doesn't need deleted, because there are legitimately placed series in those categories (mostly the romantic non-comedies and stuff like Great Teacher Onizuka). They're just few and far between. --tjstrf talk 05:01, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The guideline has been in WP:MOS-MANGA (and its equivalent from before that page was split out) for quite a while, but I suppose most people don't actually read that page unless they're trying to get a WP:GA award or something.

The Dragon Ball discussion is mostly accurate, actually. Dragon Ball ranged in its genres so much that it does justifiably go in sci-fi, fantasy, action, adventure, comedy, and maybe even supernatural (but I'd consider that redundant to fantasy in this case, since it's not strictly supernatural fantasy). The problem there comes in from the other genres, which were imo trivial or off-base.

For Tokko, you can do what you like now that you know the principle behind keeping the number down. I haven't actually seen it and am just judging from the article text, but I'd think police procedurals would normally be more like CSI or Jiraishin, and not have any demons in them.

And, finally, no, I intentionally left the link there as historical fiction rather than just historical, because "historical" is ambiguous. --tjstrf talk 05:23, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd argue that it doesn't belong in the martial arts category since it's an oddball compared to the others. (Especially after the early part.) Dragon Ball is to the martial arts genre what Bleach is to the samurai genre: nominal similarities in the power system, but that's it.

Compare it with something like Fist of the North Star, or Battle Angel Alita, or even Tenjo Tenge, and you'll notice that there's a completely different approach being taken. Tenjo Tenge has some guys who can self-resurrect and channel electricity from the earth and eat powers, yes, but there are equally powerful guys who are just really really really good at kung fu. --tjstrf talk 07:00, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help. It would probably go even faster if you started working on the same task at Z though. (Also realize that you need to make sure that all the categories you're replacing are redundant with the ones on the articles, and also aren't useful for navigation. I made that mistake on a couple of them and had to go fix it.) --tjstrf talk 08:17, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --tjstrf talk 09:33, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]