Talk:Megatokyo/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

"Erika" - Katakana or Hiragana?

An anonymous user changed Hayasaka Erika's name from えりか to エリカ. The difference is that the former is in Hiragana and the latter in Katakana. I believe that we saw hiragana used in the comic at some point - if so, the change should be reverted. (It would also be strange for a Japanese person to use katakana for their name, even if it's based on an English name.) Can anyone confirm that hiragana is correct? --DenisMoskowitz 14:50, 2005 May 9 (UTC)

To give an example, we see the name written in Hiragana in strip no. 420. Reverted the change. --SKopp 23:31, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

Yes, that was the image I knew I had seen. Thank you. --DenisMoskowitz 18:13, 2005 May 10 (UTC)

It appears in Hiragana also in strip #641. Hangfromthefloor 16:12, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Forums again

I've reworded the paragraph on the forums. Change if you don't like it. However, I intentionally removed the following passage:

Fred Gallagher estimated that perhaps 80% of Megatokyo Forums users are not fans of the comic. [1]

That was a throwaway line Fred uttered on IRC in a discussion about whether a moderator needs to be a reader of the comic. I don't think it warrants mentioning as an "official" estimation. It's doubtful he has any way of determining such a number anyway.

Also, I suggest removing the list of sub-forums and replacing it with a link to forums.megatokyo.com. If someone wants to know what forums there are, they can just go there and look for themselves, no? (Unless the forums happen to be offline ...) --SKopp 23:48, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Please? --Nifboy 03:30, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Tried that before, PMC will have me hanged if I touch the forums section again... :( --DarkLordSeth 18:52, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Plot needed?

Seriously, are we writing an encyclopedia article on Megatokyo or are we writing a plot summary here? This is not the place to put up some details about the plot, regardless of what the Feutured Article people claim. We're aiming for a good article here, not to win some form of WP beauty-pageant. --DarkLordSeth 09:38, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, that was me suggesting that Megatokyo should have more details about the plots. I admits mistakes., because I begin think it was a bad suggestion I made. --Kiba 12:21, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The idea isn't bad, it's just overdone. (Or at least the versions I saw a few hours ago were...) A good plot summary would mention who the main characters are, who the supporting characters are, give a small description of quirks and non-canon oddities (For example, DPDs, Endgames, those horrible Dom comics, etc) and explain the setting. This should be... About a paragraph at max and nto involve actual storylines. This way we give a nice short bit of information that includes the important bits while we leave out the storyline itself. Maybe an idea? --DarkLordSeth 16:17, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yes, that was a wee bit too detailed. Wikipedia is not supposed to be a replacement for reading the actual comic, so there's no point in reiterating every single event here. I replaced it with a more concise version. It's not very good yet and still needs lots of fleshing-out. In particular the roles of Miho, Erika, and Kimiko must be described (but please not in too much detail). But I hope this at least sets a better frame of elaborateness. --SKopp 16:29, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

See Kevin and Kell and Sluggy Freelance for how a detailed plot summary might work out in the long run (although I'm biased, I wrote most of the latter). I think MT needs it more than the others, even if it should have its own page at Megatokyo plot. --Nifboy 18:35, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm not generally opposed to a chapter-by-chapter rundown. Considering that Sluggy Freelance is much more eventful than MT, I don't quite see why MT needs more, though. I'm a little suspicious of this subpage thing, might be overkill. --SKopp 19:09, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Where to do add this?

Here is a article by ICv2 http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/5241.html On the list, you can see Megatokyo rank in 10 place so that make the comic within the top ten selling manga properties in the United States.

The Megatokyo article say Megatoyko is a popluar webcomic. The ICv2 articles prove Megatoyko is popluar. The question is where I should add it or it should not be mention in the Megatokyo article at all? --Kiba 8 July 2005 03:49 (UTC)

Typically stuff like that is reserved for an "awards" section, along with its winning the 2002 "best writing," "best serial," "best dramatic" and "best overall" awards in the Cartoonist's Choice Awards, as well as the 2003 award for "Outstanding environment design." Although you could also fit them in the "praise/criticism" section, where the criticism apparently outnumbers the praise. --Nifboy 8 July 2005 04:19 (UTC)

Rewrite

I just rewrote parts of the article for NPOV issues, and a few ambiguous statements. In the process I tried to clarify the Criticism and praise section but became bogged down in it so work in there is sparse. the diff of all my recent edits to that extent is here for easy reference. Jtkiefer ^{T | @ | C} ----- 07:59, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

Omake (in particular 'Circuitry')

Should there be a mini-section for MegaTokyo's omakes? You know, about GTA: Otaku City and most recently the rather different (and a bit befuddling) Circuitry. Just a thought. --Perks 16:07, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

Maybe a small tidbit about the non-canon side-stories would be nice but writing them all out wouldn't be a clever thing imho. First of all there's so damn many of them. Second of all there will be many more to come. Third of all, they aren't substantial enough. So just a small little bit of info about the side stories in general would be good. --DarkLordSeth 12:08, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Which part need Improvement?

I wonder if we fixed all the objections in the FAC yet. It seem to me that Megatokyo went through some trimming and need expansion on some section. This time, I am intending to add more useful contents about Megatokyo instead of the horriable mess it once was or still was. I am thinking of adding section about Megatokyo book sales in their best ranking so far.

I could like the opinions of editors who have edited this articles to give some review on this article. So we can improve it to Feature Article standard, and eventually to Feature Article status. --Kiba 01:26, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Based on how much the article has changed in the past two months, I'd say the article is much better than it was. My only complaint is the paragraph which essentially accuses Piro of pedophilia, no matter how softly the accusation is put; it feels like a leftover of some senseless MT-bashing rather than a legitimate objection. As it is currently described (a "tenuous interpretation") I'm not sure if it merits inclusion at all anymore. Nifboy 02:36, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

There's a bit too much junk floating around in the external links section. Looks kinda messy to me. I'd get rid of the translations ( All except the german one are hopelessly outdated. ) and some completely unrelated external links like the Creative Writing DataBase, the MT Fan Network (no longer operational), Rodney Caston's weblog ( Unrelated to MT. ), the MT Renga-kas ( Whatever the hell they do, it sure aint related to MT. ) and the MegaGear site. ( See item 2. ) :: DarkLordSeth 01:01, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

MegaGear site is a Megatokyo store and operated by Fred himself. If the Megatokyo forum get mentioned, MegaGear should be in there too. Peer review didn't help a lot apparently.--Kiba 01:08, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

On a scale of one to ten, I'd say MegaGear is a notch more notable than, say, the PvP merchandise page, but still not notable enough by itself. Nifboy 01:13, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Does linking to it add value to the article, though? It doesn't add any content, it's already easily accesible through the main MT link, it's a seperate commercial site and it's unrelated to this article apart from a single unlinked mention. Get rid of it to clean up the external links section, I say. :: DarkLordSeth 01:53, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

I prune some links like the stuff that is already in the reference section and a site that is no longer a fansite. I don't brother pruning the tranlation section because I feel it add values. I also added some contents that need referncing. Hunting for Megatokyo rants to reference to is going to be a pain in the ass, but someone have to do it. What I planned to do is add the annoucment stuff for MegaGear, and looking for bookscan ranking for comics to see what I can find about the book sales of Megatokyo. If you guys think we are ready for another nomination for Feature Articles, than go ahead nominate Megatokyo for it. --Kiba 00:52, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

ia:Megatokyo

ia:Megatokyo is currently Article of the Week over at ia:. If anyone wants to update it, or add more information, that would be great. Almafeta 10:01, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Is that anything like a featured article? If it is, there is no notice on the page. ~ Dread Lord CyberSkull ?? 22:36, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

I found what I think is the featured article link: ia:Wikipedia:Articulos del septimana. If it is a featured article on that site, I'll add a star next to it's interwiki link. Dread Lord CyberSkull ?? 22:40, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

I saw Megatokyo article over there. I cannot imagine it actually being a feature article in it current state. o.O--Kiba 23:02, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Removed pedophilia sentence

I removed the following sentence: "However, it should be noted that pedophilia is still illegal in Japan as well as in the United States, where Gallagher lives."

This sentence was problematic on many levels.

1. It is factually incorrect. Pedophilia is not illegal anywhere; molesting children is.
2. The age of consent in Japan is 13 (though many prefetures put it at 16 or 18), making the sentence misleading at best.
3. Most importantly, the sentence is simply unnecessary, and I don't see what it accomplishes there. Is it saying that Megatokyo is illegal? Clearly false. Is it implying that it is immoral? That assertion is already made in the first sentence of the paragraph. Is it making a point about pedophilia? Then it belongs in the pedophilia article, not in the Megatokyo one. --Ashenai (talk) 15:24, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Questionable addition and Comment

I feel this recent addition

Many people also note the frequent existance of Gallagher's 'Dead Piro Days' and other ways to avoid having to produce the comic on an actual schedule. Some feel that Caston's departure signalled and end to a contsant running story.

is questionable addition. Any opinion on it will be great. This addition I felt is an attempt to make the article POV (I could be wrong).

I felt this accusation is false among others objections but it is really not citable. My main grudge; people felt that Megatokyo do not update frequently. Fred did update without fail at least 96% of the time. Here the ironic parts, most of the off topic scripts are in Megatokyo's FIRST YEAR. Source of information is here [2]. Again it isn't citable. Numbers don't lie when people don't lie or try to distort the statistics, in this case I believe the author is not a lier. Again, it isn't citable because it is published in a livejournal but not by a notable and trustworthy institution. So Megatokyo do not update frequently is a crisistism without evidence.--Kiba 15:58, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Upload another comic.

Hey I was wondering if I should up load a chapter 1 comic so we could show the compareson to the present comic we have featured. -- Psi edit

• Would be too messy, I'm already against the current comic sample being up on WP, anyways. If you could find/make a few (say.. three) panels that best illustrate the differences between chapter 1 and chapter 7, then it would be nice. Take a few good examples and put them side by side in an image or something like that... :: DarkLordSeth 21:39, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

You know what? Ill just make a section and describe the changes of comic and then later I might upload an image. -- Psi edit

Is pt:Megatokyo a featured article?

I noticed at es:Megatokyo and fr:Megatokyo both list pt:Megatokyo as a featured article. Can anyone verify this? Dread Lord CyberSkull ?? 04:14, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Characters Subsection

One thing that I would like to see is a more accessible characters page. The Charcaters link is hidden inside of the plot section and It can take me a few moments to find it. I feel that in order to make the page more practical we should restablish a character subsection and prehaps that is a summery of some of the information on the characters page. This would be more similar to the characters section on many Animes. Prehaps also spliting the Characters page up into different sections such as major minor and omake thearter would work better. This was one of the sticking points people had when I put the article in for its first featured article submision and when the article was put back in for its second. I need opinions as to how to do this before actually implementing it Vcelloho 21:28, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

We might need a more visable character subsection. I dont know about doing anything else other than that though. -- Psi edit 23:37, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

I went ahead and made a potential change. I also created a template. I feel that this would be improved by spliting up the Characters section through Main, Minor and Groups, Alternant and Omake Theater. Vcelloho 03:33, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Character Template

I redirected the template links to independent Megatokyo character files the old page still exists but I feel that the new links are better Vcelloho 00:46, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was don't move. —Nightstallion (?) 10:49, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

move to Megatokyo (webcomic)

• Move because most non MTwebcomic pages are about BGC, this should be a DAB page and not the webcomic. 132.205.45.110 20:35, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
• Move I'm for it. I didn' even knew you could do it. 200.255.137.221 22:51, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
• Strong oppose. Inane move. There isn't even an article for any other "Megatokyo" topic. We'd be inconveniencing the vast majority of people who search for "Megatokyo", expecting to find the webcomic, without actually benefiting any of the small minority of users who are looking for something else (since they still won't be provided with an article on the topic). The linked-to disambiguation page at the top of Megatokyo is already more than enough. Plus MegaTokyo and Mega-Tokyo (the two names that could mean something other than this comic) already redirect to the disambig page in question; asking this page to redirect there too is completely unreasonable and counterproductive. -Silence 22:54, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
• Strong oppose. I can see the sanity of it. But Megatokyo is what I expect to find when searching its name. Sort of counter productive.
• Strong oppose. I admire that you want to further improve the Megatokyo article on Wikipedia. However, This move does not make sense because there is little reason to be looking for anything else if you were searching for megatokyo. Megatokyo is also categorized under the web comic category and does not require such a header. We would probobly have to put in a redirect page so that people could actually find the page. Vcelloho 23:25, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.