Jump to content

Talk:Dengeki Daioh

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

citation needed

[edit]

citation needed for the name of the magazine? can't we just use the magazine's site as citation?

Fair use rationale for Image:Daiou 200108.jpg

[edit]

Image:Daiou 200108.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:41, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

I want to add this site in Ex links. http://83 1rec.blog99.fc2.com/blog-entry-39.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.221.248.237 (talk) 17:13, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That link is blacklisted, so it's impossible.--十八 22:35, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seinen or shōnen

[edit]

There seems to be some hesitancy whether Daioh is a seinen or a shōnen magazine. The article on ja: notes that it was classified as seinen at the time of its inception, but changed to shōnen when it was made a monthly. The reference for classifying it as seinen seems outdated: the Magazine Data section of the JMPA site now records it as shōnen as well [1]. I'm reluctant to change it without discussion, though, because it probably means altering the Demographic tag of a lot of manga titles as well, in a way that is somewhat counter-intuitive (if only because a number of those titles are eroge adaptations...). Bikasuishin (talk) 13:34, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If it's listed at JMPA as a shounen magazine, then I'd say that pretty much settles the matter. Thanks for clearing up the demographic.--十八 21:09, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
OK. So I went on and changed the demographic tag on all original manga series currently or recently serialized in Daioh to shounen. I didn't touch manga adaptations of anime, novels or games, as the original material determines the target demographic. Still, I feel a bit silly for calling titles like Ichigo Mashimaro shounen manga. Bikasuishin (talk) 22:25, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I went ahead and did a bunch of alterations myself, though the series with original novels under Dengeki Bunko should be changed to shounen as well since that's a shounen light novel label. I also changed a couple of the anime adapts, and if anyone objects I won't change it, and then didn't touch the game adapts. Trust me, I find it even stranger to call Kashimashi shounen.--十八 22:40, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not as strange as calling Yotsuba&! shōnen, though. But if that's the magazine's demographic ... —Quasirandom (talk) 02:23, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Its not strange at all, look at the titles serialized in Dragon Age and Dragon Age Pure magazines, and both of them are shounen magazines, but remember one thing about these magazines, they aime at the male otaku, and most of their readership (be it Dengeki Comic Gao! or Dengeki Daioh or Dragon Age or ...) are over 20 years old. (but of course target readership and actual readership are not related in the case of these magazines) --ChuChu (talk) 08:20, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also, be aware, the JMPA has mistakes, Ultra Jump for example is a seinen manga magazines, and its mentioned by the publisher as so, and its not the only mistake, there are other mistakes. What I'm trying to say, do not depend on the JMPA on everything they list, the publishers are more reliable. The JMPA as a source can help, but its not the "ultimate source". --ChuChu (talk) 08:31, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I really think this is a seinen magazine, I have a copy right here and with the exception of Yotsuba, there is pretty much no furigana at all in any of the comics. If it really was aimed at the shounen deomgraphic there would be furigana for sure, because people in junior high school wouldn't know enough kanji to read all of it without furigana. And the stories certainly don't seem like typical shounen ones. Paludis (talk) 03:16, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stupid, stupid question: at what time did Dengeki Daioh shift from seinen to shounen? Because if it was still seinen when, for ex, Azumanga Diaoh was published, we should go back to labeling that seinen. —Quasirandom (talk) 20:48, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to the ja: article, Daioh became shōnen magazine when it became a monthly in 1996. There is no source for the claim, though. I assume there is a published index of magazines we should be able to check, but I'm not sure how to find it. Bikasuishin (talk) 22:06, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I hate to bring up this year old talk, but has there been new info as to whether it's shonen or seinen? Was JMPA wrong? Like ChuChu said, the publisher is more reliable. I've read and looked around quite a bit, and seems like there is some uncertainty lingering around. Some people say it's seinen, others say it's shonen. But I see more claiming it's seinen than shonen. Alba Corpus (talk) 06:39, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Though most of its readers are over 20 year old males, and its aime is obviously the male otaku, but since its mentioned by the JMPA as a shounen manga magazine we should keep it mentioned as a shounen manga magazine here too. --ChuChu (talk) 19:31, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great King of Electric Shock?

[edit]

Is there any documentation to back up what I have heard that "Dengeki Daioh" translates to mean "Great King of Electric Shock"? Respectfully, SamBlob (talk) 00:35, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dengeki (電撃) means "electric shock" and Daioh (大王) means "great king". But since there's no particle "no" (の) in the middle, it grammatically makes no sense and just translates literally to "electric shock great king". Not that this really matters anyway.--十八 01:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yonkoma

[edit]

Yonkoma appears to be an omake section of Dengeki Daioh. Is it worth mentioning here? --Eruhildo (talk) 05:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why not.--十八 05:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I added some stuff about it under the Dengeki Daioh#Special edition versions section. --Eruhildo (talk) 04:31, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tora Kiss: A School Odyssey and ef: A Fairy Tale of the Two

[edit]

Tora Kiss: A School Odyssey has been serialized for nine chapters now, without any breaks. This makes it clear that it should be noted that it's a series that should be noted as published. As for ef, that series' last tankobon (volume 9) release was in 2009, and the official Dengeki Daioh site has made no remark as to whether or not anything beyond volume 8 would be released. Therefore, I believe ef should be noted as on hiatus on this page and all other ef pages. Link (talk) 16:46, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you would like to update the article, please be bold.--十八 21:45, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Dengeki Daioh. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:28, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dengeki_Daioh&oldid=1201452212"