Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga

List of Inazuma Eleven episodes

This show has been dubbed into English the only reason i know is there is a advert for it coming soon to Disney XD UK but i am just wondering when it start airing if i should add the airdate as the UK transmission i can provide a source but someone would need to archive it as the TV site only keeps 2 or 3 weeks listings then there gone--Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 18:48, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

acutally it starts tomorrow here is the links http://www.tvguide.co.uk/detail.asp?id=98607293, http://www.tvguide.co.uk/?thistime=8&thisDay=7/25/2011&systemid=&gridspan=03:00&catColor=, http://beta.radiotimes.com/tv/tv-listings?sd=25-07-2011%2021:00:00#{"sd":"25-07-2011 08:00:00"}, http://www.onthebox.com/search.aspx?q=inazuma, http://www.mydigiguide.com/tv-guide/tv.dll?a=6&h=1&PID=150963, http://www.mydigiguide.com/tv-guide/tv.dll?h=1&a=2&dt=4e2d1b78&Ch=50945#P150963--Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 19:26, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

You can use something like http://www.webcitation.org/ Shiroi Hane (talk) 18:22, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

unfortnally i tried teh sites after fiding that site but it seems they block sites liek them from archiving them :(--Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 22:02, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Virtual idol anime?

I need some help coming up with a list of anime featuring virtual idols. So far, I've come up with Macross Plus (Sharon Apple) and Megazone 23 (Eve). Can anyone think of any others? I'm purposely excluding Vocaloids as they aren't actually anime (though some have appeared in a manga or two). Thanks! ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 05:56, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Anyone? ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 04:47, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

The Idolmaster, White Album, Kannagi: Crazy Shrine Maidens (Zange), Koihime Musou had three idol sisters, Lovely Idol, Nogizaka Haruka no Himitsu (Haruka works as an idol for a time), Seto no Hanayome (Lunar), and To Love-Ru (Ren/Run). All I can think of.--十八 05:35, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Uta no Prince-sama lol _dk (talk) 06:02, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

So these are all virtual idols? I'm looking for holographic or other similar virtual idols which are not physically present within the world of the story (hence my examples of Sharon Apple and Eve). I'm not just looking for idol anime. Thanks! ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 06:29, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

I did not understand your original request. No, none of these are virtual idols in the sense that they're virtual in-story. I can't think of any that fit that criterion.--十八 20:37, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

So from what I understand, you're looking for idols who are created by characters in anime but with no actual physical presence in the story of that series. I had to actually look up info about Sharon Apple to understand your original request. I can't seem to come up with additional examples, unfortunately. How minor/major do you want these virtual idols to be? —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 06:58, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Exactly. I'm fine with minor ones, too, as I'm just looking for any examples at this point. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 07:13, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Is this for something Wikipedia related? Are you looking for specifically constructs, or would something like Fancy Lala count? She exists, but she's magically aged-up and doesn't look like her true younger self. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 14:02, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

It's not specifically Wikipedia-related, though it may end up being able to be used here if I can find enough information. It would need to be virtual idols as described, not magically aged-up or otherwise enhanced. The only two I can think of are Eve and Sharon Apple. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 22:39, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

RfC for Romance and Drama as redundant genres of Harem

As the previous discussion ended with no concensus, I've decided to start a RfC to revive this discussion. I am hoping to gain further comments and reach a concensus whether the romance and drama genres should be considered redundant when harem is already listed in the infobox. The issue arose after TheFarix (talk · contribs) reverted my addition of the genres to To Heart 2, a visual novel. TheFarix stated that the harem genre is an obvious subgenre of romance, and that it is impossible to have a harem series without involving romance between the protagonist and multiple characters of the opposite gender.

My argument is that a visual novel is a form of literary work with multiple endings branched from a common exposition (common route), and the singular romance of each separate route/ending constitutes as a reason for the other genres' inclusion in order to give both "halves" of the game fair representation. Jinnai (talk · contribs) also provided two sources regarding the harem genre's defition in the previous dicussion; one of such source requires romance while the other doesn't. -- クラウド６６８ 21:22, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

I feel if anything the category Romance should trump Harem as harem falls under romance not the other way around. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:26, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Drama and Comedy are opposite genres and should not be listed together in |genre=. If To Heart 2 is a comedy, then it is not a drama. If To Heart 2 is a drama, then it is not a comedy. It cannot be both. If you are going to make the claim that it is both, then you must a cite a reliable source. Harem is a subgenre of Romance, a rather obvious one at that. In accordance with the {{Infobox animanga}}'s documentation, the more specific genres should be listed in the |genre= over general genres, not the other way around. So if Harem is listed, Romance—as the more general genre—should not. —Farix (t | c) 21:40, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

I think that most harem anime/manga would be in the romance genre, but that the harem genre doesn't necessarily imply romance. However, that probably depends on how the harem genre is defined. Since this is Wikipedia, we have to rely on reliable sources for how to define the harem genre. The definition used in the Harem (genre) article seems to rely most heavily on an "Ask John" post by John Oppliger of AnimeNation, where he was specifically asked what makes an anime or manga be in the harem genre. In his answer to that question he says that harem shows don't necessarily have to involve romance. Since that seems to be the reliable source that most directly addresses the question of what the harem genre is, I think we have to say that harem shows aren't necessarily romance (unless multiple other reliable sources can be found that specifically say the harem genre must involve romance). So, baring other reliable sources contradicting the Ask John column, I think harem and romance should both be listed when a show falls into both genres. I think that doing otherwise (again baring additional reliable sources that say otherwise) would constitute original research. Also, to give an example, the Anime New's Network's encyclopedia currently list Higurashi as a harem show, and I think it would fit the definition of the harem genre given in the Ask John definition, but I certainly wouldn't say it is in the romance genre. Another example that I think would be in the harem genre but not the romance genre is Mouse, though I haven't seen it so I can't be sure (both ANN's encyclopedia and the current Wikipedia article list it as a harem anime but not a romance anime).

For the drama genre, I feel strongly that the harem genre does not at all imply that an anime or manga is in the drama genre, as there are many harem shows that have little drama (but it sounds like that wasn't the reason Farix removed the drama genre in this case, so I don't think anyone here is actually in disagreement on that point).

As for whether comedy and drama are mutually exclusive, I feel strongly that they are not. There simply is such a think as the comedy-drama genre, and no reason to doubt that those two genres can both apply to the same work. Farix, I think you may be confusing "tragedy" with drama, where plays in particular were traditionally classified as either comedies or tragedies. However, tragedy is certainly not the same thing as drama, and I don't think I have ever seen a reliable source that says something can't be both drama and comedy. Furthermore, just based on common sense, there are works that obviously seem to be both comedy and drama. For example, Kare Kano (particularly the anime version) has significant amounts of both comedy and drama. I notice that Kare Kano currently has comedy-drama listed in the infobox, which may be the best way to list something that is both a comedy and a drama (as opposed to listing comedy and drama separately). Also, I want to note that there are hundreds of anime and manga in Anime News Network's encyclopedia which have both the comedy and drama genres listed. While Anime News Network's encyclopedia is not a reliable source, that strongly suggests that in general usage among anime and manga fans the comedy and drama genres are not considered mutually exclusive. Calathan (talk) 01:50, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I've noticed now that Jinnai did provide one source that suggests a harem show must involve romance. I'd still be inclined to say that both genres should be listed unless more sources are found that say harem must imply romance. However, the additional source does add some weight to the other opinion. Calathan (talk) 02:12, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Are there ant anime that involves a group of females and one of them has a brother that is involved alot in the story? I do not know if this would be a case of non-romantic harem or not. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:26, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Whether Harem is a subgenre of Romance or not is debatable. It may appear very obvious to you that Harem is a subgenre, but it does not appear the same to everyone. It's a challengeable statement, and thus it requires sourcing. Moreover, the "specific genre over general genre" clause is not designed for a versatile literary format such as visual novels, which To Heart 2 originally is. Instead of forcing the clause on the medium, we should instead find a consensus for representing the genres of visual novels. -- クラウド６６８ 02:31, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

(And to Knowledgekid) The closest example I can give is Hoshizora e Kakaru Hashi, but even then that may not exactly fit what you said. -- クラウド６６８ 02:36, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

• Comment - The classification of a work into a genre should not be determined by editors. Instead, editors should find reliable sources which state what the genre is. The WP:Verifiabilty requirement applies to all material in the article, even to information in an InfoBox, such as dates and genre. If reliable sources classify a work as harem, or drama, or comedy, then those genres can be listed in the info box, even if multiple genres appear to conflict. Editors cannot themselves determine which genre a work belongs to, since that would constitute WP:Original research, which is prohibited. --Noleander (talk) 05:49, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

The problem with that is there generally isn't a lot of reliable sources regarding a specific work's genre, and that makes it sometimes impossible to list genres for an article. This is not favorable because infoboxes exist to give readers general information about the subject, and having the genres in the infobox will likely help readers understand the nature of the work. I think in the cases where sources on a work's genre(s) are unavailable, WP:IAR can possibly be invoked, allowing genre(s) to be listed without sources unless they become challanged (which is where To Heart 2 is at right now). -- クラウド６６８ 20:14, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

WP:Ignore all rules is not a useful policy to cite when in an RfC :-) The whole point of the RfC is that there is some confusion or dispute between editors, so it is best to stick with sound guidance from concrete policies, such as WP:Verifiability. --Noleander (talk) 22:33, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

I think unsourced genres should still be allowed by WP:V given that it requires only "challenged or likely to be challenged" material to be attributed; this being a rare case where we argue over the genre. Of course, anything can be considered "likely to be challenged" (such as the genres this RfC is for), but I think a discussion on unsourced genres in an infobox is out of the scope of this discussion, and should instead be a separate RfC if needed. -- クラウド６６８ 02:23, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Cloud: You may have misread the WP:Verifiability policy. It says that all material must originate in reliable sources. The "likely to be challenged" sentence you cite is the requirement for in-line citations (footnotes). The entire relevant passage reads: "all material added to articles must be attributable to a reliable, published source appropriate for the content in question, but in practice you do not need to attribute everything. This policy requires that all quotations and anything challenged or likely to be challenged be attributed in the form of an inline citation". This is a cornerstone of WP. Editors are not permitted to make their own guesses about genre, especially if it is prominently displayed in an Infobox. Think of it this way: if no reliable sources mention the genre of a particular piece of work, then that must mean the genre is not very important, so the article should omit it. If the genre were important, RSs would discuss it. --Noleander (talk) 03:12, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, I guess I'll probably just cite a source for To Heart 2's romance genre somewhere in the body in that case. My main concern is that given not all works receive significant coverage for their genres, especially for older works created before the Internet. I do agree sources should be cited when available, but it likely isn't possible to cite sources for every article's genre(s). I'll have to disagree that not having reliable sources on the genre(s) mean that the information is not important, however, as it is there to help readers to understand the article's subject. If anything, genres in infoboxes should be discussed separately, as there isn't a lot of information about them in guidelines or policies. -- クラウド６６８ 04:03, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

As for the source I mentioned, it did not really say it requires romance. It says "erotic" encounters with mutliple girls eith the main protagonist usually chosing one girl in the end. I see how that can be construed as romance, but there are certainly many darker titles where no romance need be involved. Also, the usage of erotic I got was one that could run the whole gambit from explicit sexx to a panty shot to an arousing encounter..陣内_Jinnai 19:17, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm curious what other editors think about the requirement for sourcing for the InfoBox genre, so I requested input here and here. --Noleander (talk) 14:32, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Excellent discussion at that noticeboard about putting genre in InfoBoxes. --Noleander (talk) 15:27, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Skimming through the discussion, my opinion is that the romance and drama genres should not considered redundant when harem is already listed in the infobox if reliable sources mention them along with harem. Implying that harem covers romance or drama means that there is a consensus in the majority of reliable sources that review anime to establish that, which, as far as I know is not the case. And because of that, doing that here without relying on sources would be original research. The article Harem (genre) says nothing in that regard to imply that harem means drama/romance. One could make the case that School Days could be a harem, drama, romance and tragedy. More importantly, this is not a decision that an editor has to make. If reliable sources classify a series as a harem-drama-comedy, then that is what should be expressed in the infobox because that is verifiable. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth, so it is irrelevant to discuss whether harem implies also drama or romance since sources are the ones that establish what genre should be used in an infobox. If reliable sources do not mention a genre for a series, then a genre should not be used in the infobox if it is contentious, at least until it is backed up by reliable sources. Harem as a subgenre of romance or drama is not obvious in anyway and doesn't seem to be supported by reliable sources and, as such, goes against WP:V. Jfgslo (talk) 01:03, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

I need someone to reclassify those titles. If Love Triangle is not Harem then what about 'Goshūshō-sama Ninomiya-kun', it's Love Triangle but still classified as Harem. And in 'Baka to Test to Shoukanjuu', besides two main heroines, the main char's sister and one of the heroine's sister also have interest in him. His sister also showed signs of jealousy. And in the OVA of the Visual Novel, 'Sora no Iro, Mizu no Iro', both heroines decided to live together with the protagonist in the end. And in those Visual Novels that are adapted into anime or OVA, sometimes Visual Novels have harem ending while their animes or OVAs do not, and reverse. How do we classify those titles? And please recheck the Harem anime and manga category page, I think there are some mistakes for some title to be put there Jakeslogan (talk) 13:44, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Aion Manga

Does anyone know if Aion volume #3 was released by tokyopop or not? I got Aion #3 at Otakon and inside it has the tokyopop website (USA) and a printing of May 2011 but in the article the sources point out the release as being up in the air. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:51, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Gaia Online

Seeing that gaia does create it's own manga[1] and they have been to anime conventions[2] should this website fall under our scope? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:00, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, their "manga" would fall under the OEL or manga-influenced label, so I'm not entirely sure how much that should be taken into account. Manga-influenced series (Peach Fuzz, My Cat Loki, etc.), for instance, do not fall under our scope. (Usually they go to the American comics task force.) Additionally, conventions host several panels, many/some of which don't directly connect to anime or manga. However, I could see Gaia being a "major aspect" of the fandom, which would warrant inclusion. For now, I'll say probably not, unless there is convincing evidence that it is strongly related and not simply influenced. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 17:57, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Case Closed vs. Detective Conan vs. Detective conan

Umm, I know this has probably come up a number of times and I'm sure the debate will continue forever among the angry fanboys, but I just noticed there are three separate articles for the same franchise: Case Closed, Detective Conan, and Detective conan. ~ Hibana (talk) 04:18, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

It's been fixed; the latter two now redirect to Case Closed--GroovySandwich 04:27, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Yup, looks like you fixed one of them and I fixed the other. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 04:28, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Could those redirects be permanently protected? I don't see any harm if they can. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 04:38, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

I also fixed List of Detective Conan films which was a pure copy of the case closed list. No need whatsoever for two of those. Someone may want to keep an eye to make sure people don't try to recreate that. Someone may also want to keep an eye out to make sure that this is not tried on the episode or video game articles.--76.69.168.124 (talk) 06:05, 4 August 2011 (UTC)