Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 76.65.42.75 (talk) at 22:35, 6 August 2017 (→‎Another issue with DVD release dates as air dates). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconAnime and manga Project‑class
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime, manga, and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/WikiProject used

Recruit new editors for the project?

Hi, just wonder if there is any template or program in the project to recruit newcomers or new editors to join the project? Bobo.03 (talk) 18:01, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Bobo.03: You can use {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Invite}}. It looks like this:
You are cordially invited to join the anime and manga WikiProject (WP:ANIME), a WikiProject dedicated to improving all articles associated with anime, manga, and related topics. WP:ANIME hosts some of Wikipedia's highest-viewed articles, and needs your help improving old and creating new articles in this area. Simply follow the directions here to join!
Hope that helps. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 20:35, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It looks good, thanks, 日本穣! I wonder how does the project usually recruit or welcome new editors. I am a PhD student from the University of Minnesota. We are planning on a study to help projects identify and recruit new editors to contribute. I am not sure if this is something WPAM would be interested. Here is our project detail. Bobo.03 (talk) 21:05, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
University? Sometimes, stuff like that can help to improve articles. For example, Naruto Uzumaki became a FA thanks to the studies multiple writers, studios and university professors made about the character. I could only find one for Allen Walker whereas Sasuke Uchiha could become FA too once the copyedit is finished.Tintor2 (talk) 00:42, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, we are researchers from the university, and we are conducting studies trying to figure out how to help WikiProjects recruit new editors and thrive. We'd like to hear more suggestions or feedback from Wikipedians about our study before we launch it. Bobo.03 (talk) 04:10, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think one suggestion could be to make posts of some kind over at some of our sisters WikiProjects, like WikiProject Japan and WikiProject Animation. There could be other users there who would be willing to help, particularly in finding sources (both online and offline), writing articles, and improving existing ones. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:19, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thank you! We have contracted a number of projects to see if they are interested in our study. We identified the most active projects in the last calendar year (based on the number of edits on the project and project talk pages). We would definitely like to invite them. If you know anyone who could potentially be interested in our study, please help us spread our study. Thanks! Bobo.03 (talk) 14:36, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Hi Nihonjoe, Tintor2, Narutolovehinata5, following the previous discussion, I made a set of recommendations (it might contain some blocked editors who I will remove later). You'll notice that they are split between new editors and experienced editors. What do you think?

Username Recent Edits within Anime and manga Recent Edits in Wikipedia First Edit Date Most Recent Edit Date
Hadassah16 (talk · contribs) 5 6 2017-7-16 2017-7-20
SenpaiV3 (talk · contribs) 2 2 2017-7-15 2017-7-15
Dellersx (talk · contribs) 1 3 2017-7-16 2017-7-16
Tyler L. Burton (talk · contribs) 2 2 2017-7-18 2017-7-18
Hinadori (talk · contribs) 218 1844 2008-11-10 2017-7-18
KeinezG (talk · contribs) 350 352 2016-9-15 2017-7-22
Nightwolf87 (talk · contribs) 378 11276 2010-3-20 2017-1-5
Klobis (talk · contribs) 330 1632 2009-2-28 2017-7-18
Juandmarco (talk · contribs) 258 779 2014-1-30 2017-7-19

Bobo.03 (talk) 20:25, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Bobo.03: Recommendations for what? If you think someone might be interested in the project, just invite them. It doesn't need to be discussed here. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 23:06, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about the confusion, Nihonjoe. I am just a research in the community, and hope to create new editor recommendations for WikiProjects. We wish to create good recommendations, and let project members/organizers to recruit those editors if they'd like to. Bobo.03 (talk) 04:46, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Tyler's a vandalism account. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 23:17, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pointing out, AngusWOOF. We will definitely remove those editors in the future! I noticed you left a message on that user's talk page. Did he/she make some edits that drew your attention? Bobo.03 (talk) 04:46, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, there's coincidentally a hopping IP vandal that uses "Tyler" in many of his edits. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 17:11, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion of additional voices in anime voice actor articles

AnimeDisneylover95 has complained repeatedly regarding the removal of additional voices in anime voice actor articles, and keeps reverting edits from other editors whenever they do remove them. However, it is commonly known among WP:Anime participants that additional voices are NOT to be added on VA pages. To settle the dispute once and for all, I'm starting a discussion as to whether or not additional voices should be added in VA pages. Sk8erPrince (talk) 00:06, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Express your stance below

  • Exclude with few exceptions: They're unneeded in VA articles. Only notable/named roles should be listed, unless notability could be ascertained (which is mostly unlikely). Sk8erPrince (talk) 03:25, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Case by case basis, but generally exclude - They could probably be mentioned in certain instances; for example, if it was their first role, or it was mentioned in a reliable source. For example, Anime News Network had a news report on voice actress Aya Suzaki after she was cast as Tamako in Tamako Market; at the time, Tamako was her first named role as Suzaki's previous roles were all unnamed background roles. For certain celebrities who make vocal cameos in anime and movies, perhaps a brief mention could be included, again, if it's mentioned in a reliable source. Otherwise, these roles probably shouldn't be listed, especially if the voice actor has several non-background roles. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:55, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Case by case basis, but generally exclude - As I said below there should be two main criteria: A: Are the "additional voices" notable? If these additional voices are mentioned in reliable sources then they should be included. B. Did these "additional voices" roles have a big impact on the person doing the voices? I think a handful of editors can agree in general though that nobody is going to care who voiced "Girl #2" so usually it is just excess fluff. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:35, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Case by case basis as long as this detail can be properly sourced, it's fine to include, but inserting actual character names when known is preferable. There's no good reason to cherry-pick among verifiable roles, and "notable roles" is a POV description. Snuggums (talk / edits) 16:30, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Notability to me is inclusion in reliable sources. Some roles might be so minor that the actor/actress goes uncredited. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:37, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Include minor roles, exclude Additional Voices if minor roles are specified For example, in Tom Kenny filmography for SpongeBob SquarePants obviously SpongeBob and Gary the Snail are his major characters he voiced, but he also does a bunch of minor recurring ones that would be summarized as "others" or "various characters". A voice actor who does like 50 World of Warcraft characters would definitely fit under Various characters instead of listing Orc #2, Dwarf #7, Archer, etc down to the last listed credit in the game. Dee Bradley Baker does a bunch of monsters in Ben 10 all sourced by BTVA check-marked closing credits, so definitely "Various characters" for his role there. "Additional voices" would be okay for films. I don't know about Wallas or loop groups as they are sometimes listed apart from the main credits of a film so they are almost always non-notable, or the uncredited voice substitutions and voice matchers which usually come from self-published sources, which run like "I was the voice match for Jodi Benson in The Little Mermaid. I wasn't listed in the credits, but I was there to voice (whatever quotes) they missed". Those would need some independent secondary source to indicate they are important. But some people like to know that Tara Strong was in feature films such as Sing (2016 American film) and The Secret Life of Pets as an additional voice and if the film credits her so, then she can be listed with that credit. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 21:13, 17 July 2017 (UTC) updated 18:21, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Striking verbiage about how to credit minor roles. Additional voices should be removed if the minor ones are specified. See my discussion thoughts. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 18:29, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Include as long as there is reliable source. TranquilHope (talk) 23:49, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Include I generally don't understand why "minor" voice roles shouldn't be included if we want our articles to contain complete information. After all, Wikipedia is not bound by the limits of print. If a filmography is included at all, it should be a complete to the extent that WP:Verifiability allows. There is no reason to limit it to so-called "notable" roles, and doing so will create too much drama around what roles are or are not "notable". If you look at the filmogrpahies of John Wayne, Kevin Bacon, and Samuel L. Jackson, you will see that all the filmographies included small, sometimes unnamed roles. —Farix (t | c) 00:48, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Include I am changing my opinion based on the argument of "notability" criteria. As long as there is a reliable source then the part should be included, it isn't going to change something like an AfD discussion. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:00, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Include I would like to have the minor roles included for the voice actors (especially the anime voice actors) as long as they are credited by a reliable source (e.g. actor's resume on website, ending credits for a specific film, TV episode and video game, convention bio, and article interviews with the voice actors).--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 01:37, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Include if it's a named, credited role. Therefore, if they are credited as "Girl A" or something similar, it can be included. If they are credited as "additional voices" or something similar, it shouldn't be included. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 17:53, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

I don't think this is needed as each case is unique. What are "additional voices" anyways, and what would fall under the scope? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 01:57, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's not really a unique case. Most anime VA articles have this tag attached to their templates (as in the EXCLUSION of additional voices). Also, examples of additional voices are "Girl A", "Girl B", "Boy A", etc. Basically, unnamed roles with very little to no significance to the main plot in an anime. Sk8erPrince (talk) 02:06, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I do see that but feel that the editor in question should have the chance to explain themselves on the talk-page before edit warring takes place. You cant deter an editor by the use of edit summaries alone as the back and forth reverts can become too heated. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:11, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Which is why we're having a discussion here. We're letting the community decide whether or not the inclusion of additional voices is necessary, true to the code of conduct on Wikipedia in that it operates on consensus. Sk8erPrince (talk) 02:13, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest asking the other Wikiprojects such as the WP:FILMOGRAPHY, WP:TELEVISION, and WP:VG, the last one is important as some video games such as the Skylanders series and Lightning Returns have hundreds of Additional Voices. As for my stance, I recommend looking at Talk:Yuri Lowenthal#Far_too_many_non-noteworthy_examples_and_excessive_detail and Talk:Ryōtarō Okiayu#Filmography is excessive for some earlier debates on this. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 02:16, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I would go with the notability criteria here. This can be determined by if x role is notable, or if x role had an impact on the person's life (this would add biography info). I agree with Angus though that more input is needed before this can be made as a general thing. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:19, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Look, yes the Additional voices from the vast majority of you is considered to be redundant, but let's be real most animated shows, movies, video games, will contain an portion dedicated to additional voices, and does it feel it is the right thing to do by removing every role that is considered an additional voice? On top of that it would feel odd just removing additional voices on every voice actor page because usually some voice actor's websites, resumes and convention bios will more often will feature "this actor has provided background voices in this film, show, game etc....", lastly we do not have to mention it as additional voices it could be various or others so that it will only list the major roles the character is associated with, honestly I feel that removing additional voices on every voice actor page will not only make the page feel "plain" but it just seems unusual to just leave in ONLY the notable roles and nothing else.--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 02:30, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And why would the exclusion of them make the article plain? I can't comprehend your logic. We don't need to include Johnny Yong Bosch's additional voice credits to know that he is the voice of Vash, Ichigo, Hajime, and Renton. Sk8erPrince (talk) 03:29, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I know it feels unusual but we cant promote a minor role she or he might have played just because she/he played it. We can however provide an external link (provided it meets WP:EL) that shows each role x has played. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:47, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well I hate to be the one to tell you this & how I don't like to choose sides, but I have to agree with @AnimeDisneylover95: on this whole Additional Voices & many Reliable sources/credibility situation, cause he's right & the way our Voice actor's articles are being provided with the sources that we're retrieving from, it's not even enough to meet the Admin's expectations, & then the next thing you know, the VA article's could get a Speedy Deletion AKA WP:CSD because of it, ya know? :( Norozco1 (talk) 03:13, 17 July 2017 (UTC)'[reply]
Already notable voice actors with clearly notable roles (like how Stephanie Sheh is synonymous to Orihime and Hinata and Cristina Vee with Homura, etc.) won't suddenly get their own articles deleted just because we exclude their additional voices credits, as they're already known for something else. Sk8erPrince (talk) 03:23, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
A VAs article could still get speedied with all the "additional voices" because notability is based on the existence of "significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions" (WP:ACTORBIO). So, actually, having forty "additional voices" roles and no significant voice roles would not prevent an article from getting speedied. Because a plethora of "additional voices" doesn't actually establish notability. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 03:18, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Precisely. That's why Wikipedia isn't IMDB. Sk8erPrince (talk) 03:26, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"Precisely. That's why Wikipedia isn't IMDB." And this is one of the biggest pet peeves I have from the vast majority of you naysayers who constantly continue bringing back on this darn issue over and over again until they "beat the dead horse", I did not got MOST of the info from IMDB, and Wikipedia will NEVER be like IMDB they are credited with sources from the end credits of the film, tv show and video game!!!--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 04:03, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody's saying that you got your info from IMDB? You're missing the point here - what I'm trying to say is that we're not IMDB in the sense that we do not list every single thing that a voice actor voices in, especially if they're not notable, which is, as I have noted before, 90% of additional voice roles. You need to keep your temper in check and conform to the general consensus within this project. Also, it should be noted that we're not trying to "bring back an old issue"; we're here to settle on a consensus so that we won't have a similar issue like this ever again. Sk8erPrince (talk) 04:58, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I am calm, I just don't like that the majority of you do not want additional voices all because it feels like "IMDB" and the majority of you are still missing the point that - The majority of the articles need to have a a reliable source and most pages DO NOT have to be reserved for just the major and notable roles here!!!--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 12:18, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
So the inclusion of non-notable elements is acceptable, when what we should really be doing is listing notable material instead? Sorry, but that logic doesn't sit well with me. Sk8erPrince (talk) 13:13, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I just want to add that generally IMDB isn't even a reliable source. There are very few exceptions which include: "1. The writing credits marked with "WGA" that are supplied directly by the Writers Guild of America (where applicable)." and "2. The MPAA ratings reasons, where they appear, that are supplied directly by the Motion Picture Association of America." Most of the stuff on IMDB is user edited which means that right now I can also edit that page to exclude all of the non notable roles. (WP:CITEIMDB, WP:EL/P#User-submitted contents) - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:38, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, it is not. We aim to be different by inserting verifiable citations. Sk8erPrince (talk) 14:19, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"Sorry your logic doesn't make sense" You know what Sk8erPrince, you are being so unreasonable it is YOU who isn't making sense besides I have been citing all sources that are reliable, and if you are going to go on with this issue, then that's the last straw!!'--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 17:08, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
For someone that claims to be very calm, you sure don't look like it. Look dude, if you can't accept the fact that Wikipedia operates on consensus (as you can see, one is emerging right above us), you might want to reconsider if contributing to our encyclopedia is the right job for you. Seriously, raging like this isn't helping your case. And at the rate you're going, you're going to get sanctioned for being an interference with the progression of this project. I know so because I speak from first hand experience.
PS: I will gladly report you on ANI if you keep obstructing progress. Sk8erPrince (talk) 21:38, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have reopened the discussion as editors are from all over the world on Wikipedia, you have to give time for editors to weigh in before implementing something. Maybe it is just me but I have noticed that you have been very hostile towards User:AnimeDisneylover95 which isn't going to help our project in the long run. Please remember to focus on content, not on the contributor. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 22:54, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I see your point, and I'll close it the discussion in a week since opening it. I would like to clarify that the aforementioned user can't keep his temper in check, which is why I reported him on ANI. Sk8erPrince (talk) 23:01, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Your temper is also of issue here. You both need to calm down. Now. --Tarage (talk) 23:19, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Since this discussion involves apparently involves a large number of articles, and is apparently pulling from four total WikiProjects (I notice Nihonjoe notified WP:FILMOGRAPHY, WP:TELEVISION, and WP:VG per AngusWoof's suggestion earlier), I think the discussion closing after 24 hours is too soon. I'd give it a few days at least. I also echo Knowledgekid's statement. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 23:31, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Sk8erPrince (talk) 23:35, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly my hostile temper is because of how the vast majority of you seem to not reason over the "additional voices" issues regardless If I cited with a reliable source, but honestly this issue has been going far enough that this needs to be resolved now!!!--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 01:41, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The issue isn't over sourcing. The discussion is proceeding assuming there is a reliable source. The issue is whether its meriting inclusion, probably including issues of weight (WP:WEIGHT). Never at any point on this page did anyone say that adding "additional voices" would be an unsourced, original research claim. And discussions take time. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 01:44, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I have to agree with @AnimeDisneylover95: on this decision, cause from the way this issue has escalated so fast & I just want this to get resolved as soon as possible, ya know. :/ Norozco1 (talk) 01:47, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For the purposes of this discussion topic, we need to assume the filmography roles in question are already reliably sourced, as it's harder to argue whether a role should be listed if it's uncredited or only supported by the actor's self-published tweet/blog/resume like "check it out, I voice Girl #2". AngusWOOF (barksniff) 20:47, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Sk8erPrince and AnimeDisneylover95: regarding both of your edits at Christine Marie Cabanos, I advise BOTH of you to stop editing voice actor articles with regard to additional voices roles. Leave articles as they are right now. Do not add or restore additional voices. Do not remove them. Leave it. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 00:36, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. Sk8erPrince (talk) 01:23, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Norozco1: I'm going to assume good faith here, but can you explain this edit? Why did you replace the signature of a comment left by @AnimeDisneylover95: (diff) with your own? ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 01:52, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well of course, for ya see, that was my original statement when I try entering it on this discussion, but then @AnimeDisneylover95: took that statement & rewrote it as his own, I know that he didn't mean to do it, so I let it slide & he gave me back my statement, & He apologized after that, & that's what really happened. :) Norozco1 (talk) 02:01, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not really, I did put in my statement until Norozco1 suddenly changed it has his comment. I never recall if i ever apologized to him, neither was I aware of him putting the same statement I was putting in. :/--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 02:06, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
None of that response made any sense, Norozco1, and that doesn't exactly inspire confidence. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 02:11, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind. :( Norozco1 (talk) 12:35, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

From my understanding of WP:LSC and WP:CSC, the filmography does not need to include everything the person has done, and can be filtered to linked notable material at the list maker's discretion. I think the line can be drawn in that if the person appears in closing credits that have titled minor/guest role as Girl A then those are okay to list, and as per my stance above, can either be specified or generalized depending on the media. Someone who clearly has a utility player role with tens of minor characters over multiple episodes doesn't need a listing of every last character.

I'd be cautious about roles that aren't credited properly and when the actor might have self-published a more specific role than what is credited. For example, I've seen multiple editors try to put in that Tara Strong voiced Mike's girlfriend in Sing, but she is officially credited in the closing credits as "Additional voices", so the filmography should say Additional voices. Starring voices can be handled differently as some shows list credits without roles such as "Featuring the voices of" or those piles of video games that list no voice actors or no English voice actors, and it is left to other secondary sources to dig up and match role to voice actor.

Stuff that definitely falls below the line would be stuff like ADR loop groups, uncredited background extras, cameos, uncredited voice matching work, the last of which can be likened to being a stunt double. They kind of fit among Stunts. Those are fine to describe in the biography for those who've done a lot for the big films and it's notable to their career, but it doesn't need to be listed in the filmography.

That leaves the credited "Additional Voices" grouping itself. Are they notable enough to stay? Or they as important as a loop group in providing background characters? Does it get burdensome like the hundreds of additional voices in Lightning Returns? Or not really because credits are credits, and if they weren't important they wouldn't be listed? I think if the film is specifying minor roles down to Girl A and then adding a Additional Voices section then they're really minor roles and should not be included. But if it's a short cast list like The Simpsons and their "Also Starring" for their regular supporting voices then yes it could be included.

Also per recent actions from Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Korea/Popular_culture#Eradication_of_variety_show_sections had recently decided to exclude guest and promotional appearances in talk show and variety shows from filmographies. The promotional stuff goes with the territory for the show. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 18:17, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent analysis. Hope other contributors take note of this. Sk8erPrince (talk) 00:09, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with AngusWOOF's analysis, including about when to include Additional Voices (I.e. did they list minor roles, how Simpson's does it). This seems in line with Nihonjoe's include vote above as well, which I would also agree with. -- ferret (talk) 22:23, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is their a specific day when this conversation will come to a resolution? As much It is fun to talk about this issue I don't want to continue having this last for weeks, maybe even months or years!!--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 19:54, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good evening. Trust you're doing well. I made a post since 2 weeks ago and I want to ask if this conversation has come to a re-solution regarding if the additional voices are allowed to be put on the voice actors page?--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 03:33, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Milestones revisited

I noticed that WP:VG has bounded some of their milestones for GA's, B and C class articles to just a certain percentage (5, 10, 25, 75). Do you think that's worth trying for here? Pinging Sjones23 AngusWOOF (barksniff) 17:09, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This depends on their purpose. A smaller, reachable goal works way better as motivation, but if it's just meant to show where the project is at, then the current version works.--IDVtalk 19:16, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I would suggest working together to improve important articles like Rurouni Kenshin or Goku that already have all its required contents to become GAs but still need work before nominating them.Tintor2 (talk) 19:22, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think Tintor2's suggestion is a good one an it fits the first IDV's purpose. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 03:29, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Translation: Judge (manga)

I was improving Judge (manga) a little to destubify it and found out that the Japanese Wikipedia version has some sourced content (which is a rare case among manga/anime articles). I was able to figure out about the serialization dates, but could not understand properly the first paragraph of "概要". Because of its links to poetic justice and karma in Buddhism I can have a notion that is talking about the series' theme, but I would prefer if someone with better Japanese knowledge translated it if possible. Btw, it is just two lines:

霊能力で悪を裁く「闇の司法官」を主人公とした作品。当初は勧善懲悪とバイオレンスが目指されていたが、オカルト、特に心霊現象に強い興味を持つ細野の性格を反映して、次第に心霊の色の濃い物語になり、さらに因果応報をテーマとして強く取り上げるようになった

Thanks, Gabriel Yuji (talk) 03:28, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:TranquilHope knows Japanese. Sorry for calling you TranquilHope.Tintor2 (talk) 13:05, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"This is a story about a main character who is a "Judge of the Darkness" that judges evil with psychic powers. Although Hosono initially aimed for it to be about poetic justice and violence, influenced by his strong interest in the occult, particularly psychic phenomena, it gradually grew more spiritual, and strongly began to feature karma as a theme."-- 18:45, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Another issue with DVD release dates as air dates

There is an ongoing issue on the Naruto Shippuden episode lists about the use of DVD release dates as "air dates". Previous discussions on such usage DVD release dates as "air dates" resulted in the remove of those dates from the table and sometime adding a home video release section to include the DVD/Blu-ray releases. However, an IP 122.59.209.100 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) continues reinserts the DVD dates back onto the episode lists as air dates. This IP may be related to LordShozin, who did the exact same thing a few months earlier. (Discussion 1, Discussion 2) at the time, LordShozin was very insistent that the DVD release dates must be on the list as they used them as their "shopping list". —Farix (t | c) 11:59, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WT:WPTV has bee notified of this discussion. —Farix (t | c) 12:38, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Notice posted at WP:VPMISC about this discussion. —Farix (t | c) 12:43, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You seem pretty solidly in the right here; broadcast dates and DVD releases are two different things, and it would be confusing/misleading to substitute the media releases in the absence of airdates in the middle of the list. We have many examples of series with some unaired episodes, and they are handled the same way as is currently done in List of Naruto: Shippuden episodes, with N/A or a dash or whatever. That Featured List contains meticulously sourced DVD release info, so no one can complain that you're leaving it out.
You might want to include a footnote at the point of the change explaining that the series stopped airing in English just to make sure everyone gets it, and maybe a blurb at the start of Season 15. And the lead doesn't seem clear on this issue either. But of course none of that will likely appease LordShozin.— TAnthonyTalk 19:12, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously my comments also apply to the individual season articles, which are equally well done. I'm not sure I understand what LordShozin's real issue is.— TAnthonyTalk 19:22, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
DVD/Bluray/Video release dates are not air dates, so they shouldn't be listed in the air dates column. If this editor gets too pushy, we can always protect the article(s). ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 22:32, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Random question here: What happens when the current broadcast of Shippuden starts airing those unaired episodes? Having multiple years between them seems weird to me, but that's because I haven't seen that situation before.24.47.204.97 (talk) 12:48, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If by broadcast you mean that that the previous unaired episodes air on television then that date will be placed as the oringal English air date since DVD/Blu Ray releases don't count in this regard.--76.65.42.75 (talk) 22:35, 6 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]