Jump to content

Talk:Lycoris Recoil

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

Category LGBTQ

[edit]

Without touching on the main characters ahead of time, so as not to get bogged down in obvious disputes, how about just returning the general LGBTQ category for the time being due to the fact that the show has canonical former same-sex male lovers? It's stated directly and plays a part in the plot, so why not? Solaire the knight (talk) 20:17, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Sales numbers for light novel march 2024

[edit]

I added the sales numbers for light novels on March 8th that were reported by Crunchyroll, because it seemed noteworthy. @KenL2001 you reversed this addition on march 11th. Can you explain your reversal, since you didn't add a comment?

I didn't add their original source Mantan Web back then, because it wasn't available at the time. I can add the original source now, however is it even a good source for an english article if it's in Japanese? Did you reverse the edit because you think Crunchyroll is not a valid source? Or do you think the numbers aren't noteworthy? 2A02:8071:5082:3B20:F07A:1CFA:F455:E423 (talk) 12:19, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I reversed your reversal for now.

Takina Inoue needs its own article

[edit]

Like the Chisato Nishikigi article, I propose that the Takina Inoue section will need its own Wikipedia article due to its immense popularity of the series. One of the publications from Otaku USA Magazine is a good example. Share your thoughts. Imperial meter (talk) 03:34, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that if there are enough sources on her individually, then surely she can have her own article. Historyday01 (talk) 14:34, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The critical reception section needs to be rewritten

[edit]

All of the reviews were written right after the premiere or only after 3-4 episodes. Nguyen280405 (talk) 02:41, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because ANN reviews review each episode separately, one after the other. Of course, their final conclusion about the show will be in their review of the final episode. Solaire the knight (talk) 08:36, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am asking someone to add post-series rewiew, that's it! Nguyen280405 (talk) 10:31, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The section does not cite the site's final opinion on the show anywhere, and all links to reviews of the first episode or the first three are properly attributed. So I don't quite understand what exactly you want to rewrite. If you want to describe ANN's final opinion of the show, since Wikipedia is an open and voluntary project, you can always do so yourself under the "Wikipedia:Be bold" rule. Solaire the knight (talk) 11:16, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is just the review of the final episode; besides, my writing skills are poor. And why did you modify the phrase"mildly positive" to "mixed". Nguyen280405 (talk) 11:25, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've already explained to you that ANN reviews most shows through sequential reviews of each episode, then giving their final opinion on the show at the end of the review of the final episode (or mixing them like in this case). Replaced because you did not accompany your change in rating with any explanations or links, despite the fact that you yourself ask for additional links to other information. So, could you please explain why you think the reviews on the two sites were mixed positive rather than mixed? I took another look at both links and members of the editorial staff both praise and criticize aspects of the show. Solaire the knight (talk) 11:46, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My writing skills are poor so I would like someone more expereienced than me to do that. And the average point is above 3, so it is mildly positive. Nguyen280405 (talk) 12:01, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ANN doesn't made average number out of premiere reviews, so I'm afraid that any calculation on our part here would be original research. The number 4.4 that you see in the page header was formed by the resource community, that is, by ordinary users of the site, and not by its editorial team. From what I can see, two-thirds to half of the editors gave the show's premiere 3 out of 5 stars. But then again, this will all be original research as well. Although I won't mind if other users leave their opinions on this (this is not a matter of life and death, so I won’t mind if someone thinks I’m wrong on the rating issue). I didn't quite understand what you meant by "someone more experienced." Are you asking other users to expand the critique section or did you imply that you didn't explain your change due to poor English? Solaire the knight (talk) 12:11, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am asking someone more versed in English than me to do the edits. And the data are all there, how could it be comsidered original research ((3.5+3.5+(2.5+4.5)/2+3+2.5)÷5)=3.2). Nguyen280405 (talk) 12:23, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Even if we forget that calculating an average would be original research, as I told you above, 3.2 can hardly be called particularly above average. This is literally an average with margins of error. But again, if the site doesn't calculate the average themselves, we can't do it for them without risking getting into the original research. You may well ask more experienced users to do something. I don't see any problem with this. But if these are not obvious edits, then such things should first be discussed on the talk page. Solaire the knight (talk) 13:07, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On metacritics, a score of between 61 and 80 is called " generally positive". And by your logic, how is calling their reviews "mixed" not considered original research when the sites do not say so themselves? Nguyen280405 (talk) 13:22, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Metacritic, ANN has nothing to do with this resource. And in this case, mixed only indicates that the opinions of the reviewers are divided. The site itself does not use such ratings, simply publishing the authors’ opinions and giving stars. But okay, since our dialogue seems to be starting to go in circles, with your permission I will duplicate the topic on the discussion page of the anime project and invite you there. Solaire the knight (talk) 13:27, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, just duplicate it so that more people will notice this. Nguyen280405 (talk) 13:38, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I invite you to an open topic here. I am not deleting this topic, especially since you ask to save it. I also notify that since I have already made compromise edits and one rollback, I have asked other users to act as a third party in our dispute to avoid any edit war or protracted dispute. So if other users agree with you, I won't argue or undo your or their edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solaire_the_knight (talk • contribs)
I read hhe review, but I don't think I can summary it well. Nguyen280405 (talk) 12:25, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Work on section

[edit]
I'm copying this comment from what I said on the aforementioned link which is a discussion at the anime and manga WikiProject. Here's reviews I found:
Also, the series was listed in poll results by ANN viewers, and nominated for awards held by Crunchyroll (I think the series won). Also, the series influenced the name of a "modern entropy coder" (whatever that is), as noted on page 40 of this article, mentioned on page 2 of the Bulletin of the Tohoku University of Art and Design (published in March of this year), mentioned on page 76 of a doctoral thesis by a Italian student and mentioned on page 25 of a German-language thesis (the translation I got of those pages is: "...to establish a more direct connection to amae, upbringing and individualism, the protagonist of the anime Lycoris Recoil...Chisato Nishikigi is a good example. The world in Lycoris Recoil resembles a utopia in which crime and terror in Japan seem to have disappeared. Although criminal structures still exist, a secret organization uses so-called Lycoris to create the impression that crime and terror have been completely defeated.") [the analysis goes on to page 26]
I did search on Anime Feminist, but only found nothing beyond the existing ones already in the reception section (there is a "2022 Summer Premiere Digest" post, but that just pulls from the episode 1 review...). Here's the page for all the ANN episode reviews for the series. Historyday01 (talk) 14:25, 15 October 2024 (UTC) UPDATE: I incorporated links / content from Okazu, IGN, Common Sense Media, Game Rant, Collider, and CBR into the main page. I plan on incorporating more later.Historyday01 (talk) 16:07, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Update: SakugaBlog, which is a reliable source of information per WP:A&M/RS, has a review of the series published on Sept. 28, 2022, which should also be added to the reception section. It was originally in the "ref ideas" section of this talk page.Historyday01 (talk) 20:10, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I rarely use them for reviews, since really understanding the visual part, they are often quite speculative and biased regarding the plot (for example, the famous case where they lowered the second season's rating of Hibike due to Naoko Yamada's decision to reduce the yuri bait and be more faithful to the original novel), but if you describe it in a neutral way, then why not? Especially in terms of technical issues. Solaire the knight (talk) 20:19, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's true. I plan to incorporate the other ANN reviews and some of the other reviews elsewhere I listed in my comment on the 15th. Historyday01 (talk) 16:13, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for taking on this. I was afraid that you would perceive my remark yesterday as gentle pressure, so I feel a little guilty if that was really the case. In any case, I have slightly corrected the vocabulary and wording in the section with your permission. No criticism of you or Erica, I just felt that the text could be made easier to read without compromising the meaning. I haven't visited her blog in a few years, but I hope I still remember her way of thinking well and didn't screw it up during the edits. Solaire the knight (talk) 17:51, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think you did a good job correcting / improving the section. I was only in a bit of a downtime from work and decided to put it in. But, I'm going through it very slowly, and if others incorporate these sources, and not myself, I wouldn't object to that. Historyday01 (talk) 19:05, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I love correcting wording, but I'm always afraid of breaking something since English is not my native language. I’m not sure that I fully understood you correctly, but judging by the links above, only initial opinions and various awards and nominations remain, so I think this can be left for later for those who want to develop the article further. In theory, I'd like to find someone with a good knowledge of Japanese, since I heard from a friend that Lycoris was really a huge hit among the original shows and even started a new trend for yuri-bait and not so various original shows with female leads. However, you and I could be convinced of the latter ourselves. In particular, the Jellyfish known to us was called the musical SoL analogue of LR in terms of concept and certain popularity. But alas, without knowledge of the Japanese language and finding certain sources, with this we will still hit the ceiling of original research. Even though my friend reads many Japanese anime resources. Solaire the knight (talk) 19:20, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's a fair point. The only ones I might add in from the above is the poll results by ANN viewers, the nomination of the show for Crunchyroll awards or any of the other four articles listed in that same paragraph (mostly in terms of possible influence of the series). Those would be added to the "Audience response" section, rather than the "Critical reception" section which is pretty robust right now! I will say that since Lycoris Recoil: Ordinary Days is going to be released in English in late January of next year, there may be more reviews of that following the light novel's release, or maybe not.Historyday01 (talk) 20:36, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see anything wrong with creating a conditional "acceptance" section with mention of awards and fan reactions. With authoritative sources, of course. Maybe even mentioning LR-inspired anime at least indirectly. As for LN, I think we can just add more reviews after Erica's if there are any in the future. I think at least ANN will do some, considering that they like to review new licenses and publications as a promotion for them. Also, don't forget about the upcoming six-film sequel, which will probably require us to reformat the section a bit. But, as they say, we still have to live to see this. But this is already a matter of “tomorrow” and the availability of free time and desire; thanks to God, we have sorted out the main task thanks to your irreplaceable help. Solaire the knight (talk) 21:09, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lycoris_Recoil&oldid=1251745098"