Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/World comics work group/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 1 Archive 2

Some early manhwa to-do

Hello, I'm waiting on some assistance from more experienced editors before trying to fully "move in" here, so in the meantime, here is an initial to-do list that's been knocking around in my brain. I'm talking about manhwa only until someone who knows more about the other groups can chime in.

  • Tag manhwa articles with world comics work group tag and update articles with existing comics tags to include the world comic working group parameter.
  • Decide on a spelling for Korean comics: manhwa or manwha?  :)
  • Get manhwa (and probably some manhua) currently labeled as manga correctly assigned: infoboxes, wikiproject tag, category assignment. Perhaps we should drop Anime & Manga a note when these changes are made, as a courtesy? -- User:TheFarix seems to have begun this process! :)
  • "Move in" manhwa and manhua infoboxes; discuss possible improvements.
  • Discuss status of things like Korean animated films based on manhwa. These technically aren't in the scope of WP:COMICS, but the number of affected articles will likely be quite small, so let's talk about options. We want consistency between same-series animated and comics articles, like in the animanga project.
  • Brainstorm relevant links for inclusion in working group's pages (Korean naming conventions, etc); discuss manual of style-type stuff, since this work will be a little bit like the rest of the comics wikiproject and a little bit like anime & manga.
  • Check over Asian comics category, as a whole, for redundant or inaccurate sub-categories. I don't know if there are any, it just seems like a logical thing to check, LOL. Emperor seems to be a good go-to guy for this. (for instance, where do "List of...characters" articles go?)
  • Make & use a world-comics-stub template.
  • What is this list supposed to be? My mind has officially boggled.

Things I can think of, right off the top of my head, that will be important once the grunt work goals are reached:

  • Fix up articles previously erroneously categorized as manga to include correct terminology.
  • Wikilinking within articles, b/c in my experience that's a bit of a mess right now.
  • Review articles for inclusion and accuracy of hangul (and sometimes of hanja/kanji). Can a tag be made to stick on articles in need of this type of work, since it may require research or specialized knowledge?
  • Come to some kind of consensus about article names re: romanization and name order, both for existing and new articles. Right now there is Wikipedia's Korean naming conventions and then there's the reality of what's actually on Wikipedia. Sadly, the two do not coincide. :) I've posted an inquiry at Wikiproject Korea about this, as well.
  • Check images currently used in articles for licensing tagging, plus fair use rationale and appropriate image size (i.e. small/low resolution) for non-free images.
  • Start assessing. Most of the articles are going to be stub class. Makes it easy!
  • Check for/link to relevant articles in Korean Wiki (other countries also, sometimes). Teach hamuhamu how to not screw this up.

Well, I'm off to tag. --hamu♥hamu (talk) 04:45, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Lots there to be getting on with!! I'll leave the question of transliteration to the experts but a couple of things:
  • Films and TV based on comics are within our scope (there is a lot of crossover so it makes sense) and we have structures in place for such things - you can probably start here and work out: List of films based on comics (everything should be linked in if only via categories and "see also"). The general way it is usually done with a focus on the original comic and then "In other media" sections dealing with films, TV, books (and perhaps a separate section for merchandise if there are action figures, etc.), see e.g.: Justice League#In other media and X-Men#In other media, which can then be split off as they grow. I'm not sure how to deal with something like: Blade of the Phantom Master, as the different media are treated as being the same or similar, but that might be an exception.
  • On lists of characters see for example: List of DC Comics characters although that is HUGE so see also List of Marvel Comics characters. There is usually plenty of precedents to work from so ask away and I can dig them up.
  • There is a List of comic books, but it gives me a headache just thinking about it and it might be better to subdivide titles by publisher or something similar.
  • As I say I have tried to bring Category:Asian comics in line with the rest of the world, with variable success (especially where it meets manga) but we do have Category:Manhwa pretty much shaped up. Category:Manhua is tricky (as Hong Kong and Taiwanese comics fall under it) - it could probably do with "Manhua titles" to move the titles under freeing up the main category and I am unsure why we don't have "Chinese comics writers" (we don't have a "Korean comics writers" either). I can sort those kinds of things out
That should help. Note there is also a List of years in comics structure, it is largely dominated by US titles but I'd encourage everyone to make use of it and plug your titles and news into that (there is a corresponding category structure so you can also tag a comic that started in 2005 with Category: 2005 comic debuts). (Emperor (talk) 13:50, 15 June 2008 (UTC))
Many thanks!
  • Animated films based on Korean (and other language?) comics are pretty rare, I think. Blade of the Phantom Master may actually be the only instance we're likely to run into, and it was initially put together using the Anime-manga MoS and until recently was using an inadequate animange infobox. (That article requires some discussion all to itself on multiple issues.) There are some live actions out there in Chinese -- Dragon Tiger Gate from Oriental Heroes comes to mind (adding WP:CLE and WP:COMICS templates to it as we speak). The category you linked will be very helpful!
  • List of manhwa is a mess because I have no idea what the heck it is. It's hard to list something by an "English title" when it's never been released in English and may have no one widely-used translation. The list is currently a mish-mash of manhwa licensed in English and manhwa that have been scanlated into English and who knows what else. It's potentially a great list, but at the moment...well. :)
  • The "Korean comics artists" category seems to hold all creators, be they writers or artists. Do you think a split is needed? There are also articles that belong in the category but aren't in any Korean comics type category -- I found one just today by pure chance. Not sure how to handle rounding those up, but we can brainstorm.--hamu♥hamu (TALK) 17:56, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
OK some quick thoughts:
  • Yes it does look like Blade of the Phantom Master is the exception and should be easy enough to sort out.
  • That is a tricky one. If a series is notable it should be worthy of inclusion whether it has been translated into English or not. I'll have to leave that to the experts, you'd either want to trim the list down so it is usable again, or accept that we'll have to accept the most commonly used English name for something that hasn't been officially translated. It'd go with the latter if notability is there.
  • Even if a lot of artists write their own material it is worth adding them to both categories as the writer one will hook into a different structure and also while this might account for the majority of cases there are people who only write and we already have Category:Hong Kong comics writers. So basically yes: artist/writers should be in both categories. I'm not sure how to handle people who aren't in any Korean comics category. I'd assume they'd possibly in a corresponding "artists" or "cartoonists" category. I think rather than hunt down the few that are not there it'd be best to get what we have up to standard - I often find I stumble on creators when dealing with titles they create, so if they are hooked in somewhere they'll probably get stumbled upon in the course of more general editing.
Hope that helps. Let me know if you want me to create those writers and titles categories as we might as well make them now and get them added in during general editing that doing it all separately. (Emperor (talk) 19:06, 15 June 2008 (UTC))
Just a quick check through shows there is at least one writer currently in Category: Korean comics artists - Youn In-Wan. I'll sort out the writers category later and you can add it to artist/writers as you see fit. (Emperor (talk) 23:07, 15 June 2008 (UTC))
Yup, I think I stuck poor Youn there because he was floating around category-less. I think searching through "Korean person stubs" might be necessary to find a lot of the creator articles...if they're out there! :) See below for more category-related babbling. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 10:06, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
OK cool. This is the category Category:Korean comics writers. If people write and draw their comics then feel free to put them in both (it is what we do with similar creators elsewhere - like Mike Mignola and Alan Davis). I'll address the other category questions below. (Emperor (talk) 19:27, 17 June 2008 (UTC))

Other templates

  • Created Template:Manhwa-stub, need category. The balloon is filled with a non-political Korean symbol, the sam-taegeuk. Tinker and adjust as needed! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 05:28, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Category started - let me know when you want a manhua one. (Emperor (talk) 17:03, 18 June 2008 (UTC))
  • Finally created Template:Manhua-stub. Balloon contains politically-neutral character for "center", as in the Central Kingdom...which is what 中国 means, and is present in all names that have ever existed for all Chinese nations. Shouldn't cause any problems. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 00:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


I'd like to get some brainstorming, discussion, etc about what infoboxes we should use for topics in this working group, before we "move in" the currently available ones. Seems like a logical time to re-evaulute! :)

  • Series infoboxes - There are existing infoboxes for manhwa and manhua that have been around for a while and are in use on most of the relevant articles I've run into. They address the special non-English language/character needs of the subjects, and have the words "manhua" and "manhwa" hardcoded into them, like the manga infoboxes do. (Then there's the special one I hurriedly made for Blade of the Phantom Master...special case.) I've looked at the current graphic novel infobox -- what do you guys think of its ability to handle non-English works? I can see it being workable perhaps with some tweaks, but seems easier to keep the existing templates and look into perhaps adding fields that may be lacking and/or looking at changes in color/appearance for consistency with other comics series infoboxes. Opinions?
  • Arist/author infoboxes - From what I've run across, existing articles (of which there are few) are using Template:Infobox Korean name or such. I think it's important to continue using infoboxes of this type, and it's the goal of the Korean and Chinese-language Wikiprojects, as well. I think an infobox that retains the appearance of Template:Infobox comics creator but accommodates the needs of non-Roman-character persons is ideal. Fields could be added to the existing comic creator template but is it more trouble & confusion than it's worth or is this the easiest way to go? Whatever the answer, for anyone who might not be aware - it would be considered offensive to put romanizations or hangul/hanji in a field like "alias" or "other name" - I've seen some editors really upset by it. I've checked the way mangaka are handled by Anime & Manga; they have no unified method, and most have no infoboxes at all. So they're not a good example in this instance.

Those are the two biggies. Please share your ideas! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 22:17, 15 June 2008 (UTC) a

On the creator infoboxes there seems a mix, with quite a few having none, and some simply using person (e.g. Youn In-Wan). I'm not sure what the Korean projects policies are but looking at an example category like Category:Korean actors shows a real mix, including at least one with actor and Korean name (e.g. Yoo Ha Na).
This all seems like a bit of a mess. Now I'm not an infobox expert but that seems an awfully clunky solution and there must be a neater way of doing this. I suppose the brute force way is to just make the comic creator infobox flexible enough to handle this, but there could be more elegant solutions like making the a modular Korean name template which could be transcluded into other infoboxes like the actor, comic creator ones, etc. I know we can do the first but I wonder if we could do the second. Are there similar requirements for people's names from other countries? It'd help if we had an idea of the amount of flexibility that would be required before getting a solution.
The graphic novel infobox is pretty flexible and there are others we can use. What I see it looks like it should be usable - it covers things like Franco-Belgian album series too and if it needs a tweak to accommodate manhua and mnhwa then I don't see that being an issue. It already includes room for original and translated volume details, which would be the big need. (Emperor (talk) 23:04, 15 June 2008 (UTC))
Yes, infobox consistency does seem a bit nonexistent across Wikipedia as a whole, doesn't it? Coming at it from the point of view of a Wikipedia reader, I find having the original script and romanized name (if drastically different from the common/article name) right in the infobox to be extremely useful and just seems "right," but I also feel it can be incorporated in a less-overpowering than in the Korean-person box or such. After trawling around, I've seen a lot of things done like this: Ageha Ohkawa (using a comics infobox), Saddam Hussein, Golda Meir, -- which for me works. This can be done with any script with use of a < br > tag. Coming at it from the view of a Wikipedia editor...well... after looking through more Wikiprojects, manuals of style, naming conventions, and articles, all I can really see is that there's a lot of inconsistency (even between sources but within a language), so I say let's go for what works. LOL! What are your perceptions?
Let me take a closer look at that graphic novel infobox and look at its deployment on some non-English series pages. You may very well be right, and I'm all for consistency. I personally don't have any issue with not having language/culture-specific words like "manhwa" hardcoded into the box. An infobox that shows a Korean series name with Korea as the country of origin conveys plenty of clarity without the word "manhwa" in it. Use of a non-English word for what can be easily described by an English word is, IMO, not needed and maybe not even appropriate in something like an infobox, and we've seen some of the problems having it hardcoded can cause (Blade of the Phantom Master...sigh). (((There may be (limited) cases where an infobox that can accommodate more than one type of media will be best: Blade of the Phantom Master...again. The animated film is what kept me from using the graphic novel infobox, and the word "manga" is what kept me from using anime-manga modular infoboxes, and there's no way two separate articles was appropriate in that case. Don't know how often that will pop up.))) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 04:01, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Some experiments using Ares, Bring It On! (manhwa), and Youn In-Wan -- User:Hamuhamu/Sandbox3. I find it quite workable and attractive except for a few points, mostly minor easy fixes:

  • Birthdate is a required field; this may be empty a lot and it will be quite rare to have a birth year. It's a cultural thing. I can live with that if everyone else can. Otherwise, comics creator looks good, IMO. Even looks good with both hangul and kanji beneath the romanized name.
  • Is there a way to get number of volumes in the graphic novel box? Very useful soundbyte, and it "seems" like an easy thing to tack on. (Not that I speak from experience :))
  • The only "real" problem I see is the way the foreign title parameter adds parentheses and italicizes the field contents. A parenthesis will look like part of the hangul and italics can render hanja or kanji unreadable.  :( I really like the way the manhwa infobox has the non-italicized hangul, with the italicized, smaller-sized romanized/translated title below it -- this would look perfect below the standard title in the graphic novel infobox. Is this implementable? Seems like it could foul up other pages. Ideas?

The bright blue of the boxes makes feel cheerful. :) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 08:21, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Looks good. Couple of quick thoughts:
  • I am unsure what the issue is with birthdate but an awful lot of the fields are empty anyway as it can be tricky getting someone's birthday so having that blank is not a big deal
  • You mean like "Volume 3"? That should be fine - it'd make sense in relation to Franco-Belgian comics.
  • We can look into addressing that.
What I'll do is drop in a note and our template experts can take a look at your ideas for tweaking the templates to make them more global. It shouldn't be a big deal but it may be there are other requirements from other areas and we have to strike the right balance. If you have any other ideas then throw them in. (Emperor (talk) 13:42, 16 June 2008 (UTC))
Awesome. In terms of volume, I meant number of volumes, as I only see the field being used for entire series, not individual volumes. It'd be like "Volumes: 12", "Volumes: 12 (ongoing)", or "Volumes: 12 (on hiatus)", and would represent releases in the original language. Let me know what the template gurus say and if the series naming issue, in particular, will create a problem for other articles we can brainstorm other ways. Maybe a little modular insert for titles in non-roman characters, if that's easier from a technical POV. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 19:56, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
I've flagged this on the Comics Project talk page so we should be able to
So volumes would be like "issues" for a comic book limited series? My only concern about that would be that if you had 12 and then a thirteenth was added that'd mean someone would have to go back and change all the other 12. There are other solutions. The TV episode template allows a next and previous (as does graphic novels - see e.g. Point Blanc: The Graphic Novel) but it also allows the insertion of a template that covers and entire series. Compare and contrast: Blood Drops with Goodbye and Good Luck (the former running off {{CSI season 1 episode list}}). Something like that might be my preferred solution and would make a lot of sense for long album series like Blake and Mortimer (which is 19 volumes long). (Emperor (talk) 22:29, 16 June 2008 (UTC))
Ah ah I see where the confusion comes in! These series articles will be like Blake and Mortimer, with the articles covering the entire series. Individual volumes are non-notable, and division between volumes are just incidental; the notability comes from the series as entire bodies of non-episodic work. I don't think there are any manhwa articles currently developed enough to show as examples but for a manga one - the main article for the series Naruto. Individual chapter/volume info has been broken out into List of Naruto chapters (Part I) (and part II), but this isn't a very common occurrence. Number of volumes published is pretty much always mentioned in the article body, so the infobox would just be one more place to change the data, but only in the one series article, and only for active series. Does that all make sense? I've been around this stuff so long that I make assumptions about others' knowledge -- sorry about that! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 03:10, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Ah well that should be easy enough to do.
That said I do think it is a good idea for series like Blake and Mortimer (as well as things like The Sandman (Vertigo), but that isn't relevant here. (Emperor (talk) 19:00, 17 June 2008 (UTC))
Excellent. I'm glad it will have broader application, as well! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 20:32, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


J Greb, this is mainly directed toward you, as Template Guru. If Emperor & others do want to try to move to the "one box template for all series, regardless of language of origin," I have thought of a few things to possibly make a single template work. As you can see from discussion above and at User:Hamuhamu/Sandbox3, the most serious problem with using the current graphic novel box for series from non-roman languages is the parentheses and italics in the "foreigntitle" field. Internationalizing the box will go beyond East Asian languages, and will help comics in Russian, Hebrew, Greek, Arabic, etc., too.

My idea -- leave "foreigntitle" just as it is, for use with roman character languages, and for use with the romanized (or translated) titles of non-roman language titles. Then above "foreigntitle", have an optional field called, say, "nonromantitle", for use with non-roman character sets -- no parentheses, no italics. This should(?) produce something that won't disrupt any series that don't have non-roman titles, like the Franco-Belgian series, and will show up to three lines for series from non-roman languages: 1) "English" title, 2) Title in original script, 3) Romanized title. It may sound clunky with three lines, but I think all three are very necessary and will actually look fine in action. Personally I think the boxes would benefit from having lines 2 & 3 be a slightly smaller font size than line 1, regardless of language or character set -- what do others think?

There are times when the official English title is not a translation of the original title (Bring It On! in the examples). I don't see any need to make the infobox accommodate a romanized title and a translated title, unless you just really want to. It's probably rare both would "needed" in the box, and mention within the article body would suffice. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 05:24, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Just some "off the top of my head" things:
  • Given the nature of this Wikipedia (English) the ideal situation would be for the title to be in English.
  • If, and I think this is a safe bet, all of the foreign (non-English) books have just one language involved, there is an easy solution. {{Infobox comic book title}} has coding in it so that "Colorist" presents as either the American or British (Colourist). This was done so that the box could be universal. (2 asides 1) this is going to need to be ported to the graphic novel box and 2) are there any other fields this particular flag should affect?) The mechanism can also be setup so that "foreigntitle" presents with or without parens. Such a mechanism can also insert and "Original language" listing.
  • Romanized names can be either a 3rd field or a "<br>" addition to "foreigntitle"
  • I noted to Emperor when he posted to the Comics project's main page that I like the idea of the "auto-notes" about the prominent usage of non Roman characters. I do wonder though if they are just 'box width or if there is a page width version. Since the 'box normally goes at the top, it is possible to code it to place the metatags there. See {{Infobox future comics}} for an example.
  • Last... the flags. I know there has been a fair degree of flack with most uses of the flag icons. Has anime/manga had a run in with that? And if so, has it hashed out its own MoS for their use?
- J Greb (talk) 02:36, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
The animanga project has had some discussions (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) on the whole flags issue, but we haven't really come to a consensus on it, and it's not a big area of discussion. On top of that, none of the proposed alternatives work quite as well as the flagicons (IMHO), so we've really not done anything about it. —Dinoguy1000 17:02, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
  • No problem about the article and box titles -- there's no plans to change current practices.  :)
  • Regarding the specific issue of "colo/urist," I hadn't even thought of that. *gets slapped by Emperor* I don't think I've ever seen that info available for East Asian comics but in other parts of the world, quite possibly! Given former British presence throughout the world, might be worth it(?). But if you can make "foreigntitle" have a way to turn parentheses and italics off & on, that would be nifty. If this works then yeah, romanized title can be a -br- after the non-roman title. Most series will use only one non-roman script in foreigntitle b/c each series is an original product of one country. Rare exceptions can be handled.
  • I like the idea of auto "this language is here" boxes too, but how would the box know what language to insert them for?
  • Flags are, IMO, by far the cleanest way to present international publishing and licensing data within an infobox. Used this way, they aren't at all nationalism or overemphasis of minor points. And if a reader doesn't recognize the German flag, a quick mouse over or click on the flag leads him/her the extremely descriptive name "Flag of Germany." I don't feel this usage violates WP:FLAG, but other flag usages probably would. Take a look at the Naruto infobox (just the manga part). Publication in a ton of countries and languages is presented very cleanly through use of flags and I can't even fathom being able to get this across without them, LOL. (Naruto is rather exceptional in terms of its internationalization.) On a side note I have no idea why there is a Japanese flag next to Shueisha, b/c by definition the original publisher must be Japanese for it to "manga" as used by animemanga project. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 21:47, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
I can see why the flag would be there with the original publisher: 1) consistency and 2) assume the reader may knot know it's manga, where the company publishes, and/or what language manga is associated with. - J Greb (talk) 22:36, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
And after starting to work on setting up a test sandbox I just has a Homer moment — It's looking like the graphic novel box isn't a good fit for most manga, manhwa, or manhua. The GN 'box is designed for single, stand alone issues. {{Infobox comic book title}} is a better fit. - J Greb (talk) 03:03, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
A Homer moment can only improve things b/c he is dumb but awesome. :) Emperor and I talked about it quite a bit and I played with the gn box in my sandbox, and it certainly seemed like it would work fine for whole series in addition to single issues (which we'll prob never have). He mentioned some of the European comics are using it that way...Frank and Mortimer Blake and Mortimer, I believe? --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 03:08, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Yes I may be mistaken but the graphic novel box copes well with graphic novel/album series, e.g. The Voronov Plot. However, given the nature of the beast (see discussion below) it might be the story arc template is the one? Although I think the graphic novel one may be the most flexible in this case - and hamuhamu has sandboxed some examples and they seem to work. (Emperor (talk) 12:25, 20 June 2008 (UTC))

*Sigh* I made a mistake and need help

Okay, I apparently skipped an imporatnt step in making the stub templates, because I'm being told I was supposed to propose them and get them approved before creating them, and now they say they're too "marginal" and all Asian comics (that means Israel, Russia, India...too) have to be lumped together. Kinda useless to me. =( Discussion is at WP:WSS/D. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 03:17, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Well I never knew that either - can't think I've ever made a stub before but I suspect if I had I would have made the same mistake. I'll have a bit of a read and see what we can do. (Emperor (talk) 03:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC))
Thanks! I just copied the ones already existing for the project. I'm a pretty big newbie, so I'm always paranoid of skipping procedures. Oops! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 03:35, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
I've been here awhile (a couple of years), and even I didn't know about the stub-creation procedures... In any case, don't worry too much about procedures and protocols on here, the majority of editors who oversee such things are quite experienced, assume good faith, etc., so all you need to worry about if you don't know the procedure is just getting it done. ;) After all, Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy. —Dinoguy1000 19:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your words! I was actually pretty surprised having now been scolded twice for not "asking first," because it does seem so un-WP-like. I can't actually see why it requires oversight, except to prevent duplication. The threshold thing is just bizarre, LOL. I'm irritated that we aren't being told who makes the decisions, when the decisions are made, what happens to stuff that's already tagged, or what the heck upmerge even means. WP seems focused on "if it's useful, do it," so this is really uh different. BTW, remember the infobox template I made? It's a good thing I was bold b/c my inquiry about it is still sitting, totally unanswered, at the the Infobox wikiproject, LOL.  :P --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 01:57, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Well I suppose it makes sense as people could go mad and make useless and make such fine-grained ones they are useless. I would have thought that that discussing it with the relevant project and seeing if it would be a good idea would be all that was necessary. I suppose they have been badly burned in the past and decided to take a firmer control over things but it seems a bit like overkill. As Dinoguy says I think this falls within the be bold principle and if that steps on some toes then the long term usefulness should help balance it out on the big scales of wiki-karma. (Emperor (talk) 02:55, 20 June 2008 (UTC))
Agreed! I can see how it could turn into a nightmare if there was no oversight at all. As things look presently, as long as we don't really drag our feet, things should be fine. I'm working on "articles to create" lists, so there should be no scarcity of uses for the stub templates. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 20:38, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Asian comics in scope, possible task force?

Hello to my one fellow working group member! =) I recently joined up, but I notice that Category:Asian comics is not included in the scope of work. My thought was you might be under the impression that they were all handled by the Anime & Manga wikiproject or by their respective 'local' wikiprojets (China, Korea, etc.). To clarify, Anime & Manga has chosen to handle only materials produced and/or published in Japan, and my investigations don't show the 'local' projects have any activity focusing on their respective comics going on. I've conferred with a few other editors, and they believe this to be the case, as well. I've also received no responses to queries posted on the groups' talk pages asking for objections to setting up comic hubs here at the world comics working group. Long and short of it is at least some of the Asian comic groups desperately need a central place to get organized, because their articles are in sad shape. We hope you want us, because we really want you! :)

Naturally, we'd maintain relationships with the 'local' Wikigroups of each comic, and there are some 'who does what' minutiae to work out. We already have a few materials like infobox templates to "move in." Maybe they can use some clean-up or alterations, and I'd like to see how they compare to any other non-English-language infoxbox templates that may be lurking here. I think this would be just one more step in unifying world comics articles, and help us all share the common challenges non-English-language media articles face. Thanks for your time and consideration! --hamu♥hamu (talk) 16:30, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Not having the Asian comics category in the scope of the work-group is an oversight which I'll fix tomorrow. As soon as the Anime and Manga Project tightened their remit I made sure I worked through the various articles and brought added them to the work-group (as you can see for example on Category talk:Asian comics and Talk:Manhwa). I have also been working to make sure Asian comics fit in with the broader comics structure (although things like Hong Kong comics can be tricky to properly classify) and have a good percentage of manhua and manwha on my watchlist (although my usefulness on background is limited as I don't speak any of the local languages. Also I'm sure there is a lot of good material on the home countries articles that a good translator could bring across).
So yes Asian comics are a part of this work-group and are probably one of the biggest areas it covers. Hopefully with a few more enthusiastic people we should be able to get this area up to speed. (Emperor (talk) 03:32, 15 June 2008 (UTC))
YAY! I'm thrilled to hear it was just an oversight. I was afraid there might be a complex logistical reason for it, and I would have to really make my case. :) Can we start "moving in"(adding infobox templates, adding links to relevant resources like Koren naming conventions, discussing some priorities) or do we need to wait for a formal change in project scope? Luckily some of the interested editors have experience with project structure, how categories work, and all the areas in which I'm deficient, and we'll all be grateful to you, as well, for your oversight and guidance. Meanwhile, I'll spread the word to get people signed up here, and we can start tagging manhwa articles as part of the project & work group! I'm really excited about this, Emperor -- thanks!! --hamu♥hamu (talk) 04:02, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Simplest thing is if I just correct the oversight (which I suspect is to do with not updating things after the Anime & Manga Project tightened up their scope). All fixed now. The general project guidelines can be found via the front page, most things are covered in the main guidelines and they pick up anything specific they don't address. Obviously if neither cover something specific that Asian comics specifically might require then we can usually thrash out a way based on existing principles and precedent so if there is something then drop a note in here and we'll sort it out. Make yourself at home - create what sections you need here to sort out any initial issues and add useful stuff to the front page. I have tried to add the project page to the main articles' talk pages but clearly it needs to be rolled out further and that would be a good initial step. (Emperor (talk) 04:12, 15 June 2008 (UTC))
Also it'd be worth everyone either singing up to the Comics creators work group or at least taking on board the things outlined there. This is a slightly different work group which crosses over into the other work groups and is important because there can be serious WP:BLP issues which need addressing. Properly tagging a comic creators talk page means it is easier to monitor for changes which may violate biography guidelines, as that is a serious issue and requires a broader approach. (Emperor (talk) 16:03, 15 June 2008 (UTC))
Thanks Emperor! I tagged the small number of articles currently in Category:Korean comics artists with the WP:Comics tempate, as well as WP:Korea's and WP:Biography's, and added the comic-creator-stub template. Most of them were tagged with only WP:Korea, if anything. I will go back and add the comics creators working group parameter the the WP Comics template, as well! Thanks for pointing this out - maybe we, as a working group, should make getting all real people involved in Asian comics tagged as "living people" a priority. None of the manhwa folks were. --hamu♥hamu (talk) 17:07, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Definitely - it is one of the big things I've been trying to do and is important as it has a lot of impact on what can and can't be said on a page (I try and check every creator page I run across and update the headers - you can tag it to both the creator and to world work groups so things stay joined up). (Emperor (talk) 18:39, 15 June 2008 (UTC))
One other important thing for integrating with the broader Comics Project - new creations, moves, merges, PRODs, etc. should be flagged on the Comics project Notice Board - that way the entire project can chip in if required. (Emperor (talk) 15:37, 23 June 2008 (UTC))

Infobox fields ([ko/zh]_name[_trans])

There was a recent discussion (started by me! ;) ) on Template talk:Infobox animanga to rename the ja_name_trans field in order to cut down on people putting an English translation in the field, with overwhelming consensus for the change, which resulted in ja_name being renamed to ja_kanji, and ja_name_trans to ja_romaji. I originally started the discussion because of the number of manhu/wa articles I saw misusing the equivalent ko_name_trans and zh_name_trans fields in Template:Infobox manhwa and Template:Infobox manhua, respectively. I want to apply this same change to these two infoboxes, but I don't know what the equivalent terms to "kanji" and "romaji" are for Korean or Chinese. Does anyone else? —Dinoguy1000 21:12, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

For Korean it's hangul and for Chinese it's hanzi. :) I don't think the words for "romaji" would be well-known, so I'd use "romanized." I don't know if you've been reading our discussions here (LOL, they're lengthy), but we're trying to work out a way to move to "one infobox" for all comics series, regardless of country/language of origin, since eventually we'll be handling comics from around the world. The main change seen on the reader's end will be removal of "specific" words like manhwa and it will be a different color. I wanted you to be aware of that b/c you've worked so hard on the manhwa & manhua boxes, which has been really valuable and not in vain. Like, if/when we do change boxes, it will be 100x easier b/c of all the cleanup work you've done in the existing boxes. User:J Greb has been looking at ways to adapt the current Template:Infobox graphic novel for worldwide usage. I'm sure he's game for assistance, and your input is very welcomed & valued. If you have the time, I urge you to read the hulking block of text under the "Infoboxes" topic and give your feedback. And, something I know nothing about that might(?) be an issue is encoding, which you may have experience with. Thanks for everything! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 21:41, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
I've skimmed through the discussion (it is quite lengthy... ;P ) and I noticed that you were working to unify the boxes. If I may, I'd suggest first mergin the manhwa and manhua boxes with each other, and that should allow you to identify and correct many of the biggest problems. As for encoding, I would say making a parameter such as language_code or similar, and then using it along the lines of language_code = zh, and that would automatically handle language encoding (which, btw, consists of simply wrapping the text in a
<span lang="lang_code"></span>
tag, where lang_code is the ISO language identifier code (e.g. zh = Chinese, ko = Korean, ja = Japanese, en = English, etc.). And as for the cleanup, you don't have to thank me for it, I enjoy doing work of that sort (much more than how I feel about tracking down sources, writing summaries etc.). ;) —Dinoguy1000 21:49, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
With that in mind... I've cobbled conversons of the manhwa and manhua to {{infobox}} (comparative examples on the respective talk pages) and a combined version.
I am curious though how
<span lang="lang_code"></span>
would fit in... - J Greb (talk) 01:14, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
I played with it in my own crude way, and I think it looks good. :) If this is easier than trying to make the existing GN infobox work, then fine by me. I actually removed the "small" tag from around the romanized title, because I thought it was actually too small (as I did with the original infobox). I know I'd said I thought it should be smaller, but now that the original title is physically separated from the main title, the blockiness I was worried about is broken up. I personally feel "label3" could just totally go away; I don't really like having country/language-specific words hardcoded in like that. The existing boxes were modeled after the anime-manga ones, which have the "manga" coded in because of the modular nature of their boxes; it just made things so much easier for A/M articles. On the occasions we need to cover more than one type of media in an article, we can...figure something out. What do others think? Now that I've looked at the coding behind your box, I understand the process way better than I did when I was trying to mess with them just a couple of weeks ago. It's so cleanly-written. I know for this test you copied the colors on the original manhwa/manhua boxes, but are we planning to use the blues of the other comic boxes? I personally prefer that -- other opinions?
Actually, I was working with Dinoguy's suggestion to go in stages: get a general purpose manhwa/manhua 'box cobbled (and one that is very easy to add manga only to as well), then look at getting that merged into the GN 'box.
Removing the "small" and "type header" is easy enough, and I agree, it is a little overly redundant.
Ideally, for "additional media" there are two solutions: 1) a specialized 'box (ie "manga & anime" or "character and series") or 2) adding the fields here and just limiting what you are entering.
As for the colors, yes, if we are going to put this into use, I'd prefer to standardise it with the other Comics 'boxes. Just like the width, use of the base template, and the image formatting. But if it's just moving to the next step, combining it into the GN, then that will happen automatically.
- J Greb (talk) 11:19, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
I had a look at all three of your samples, and went ahead and made some minor fixes to them, but I've got to say, it does look nice (though admittedly, I've gotten used to seeing one particular spacing method used in template sources... =P )! Both the "Manhwa" (IIRC) and "Manhua" labels were already in the infoboxes when I got to them, so I left them in there, but I wouldn't mind removing them at all. As for merging them, I personally see little point to including options for manga, since all such occurrences *should* already be handled by {{Infobox animanga}}, but maybe you two know something I don't. ;)
Just one thing with the logical field (ja,ko, and zh), those need to be noted in the docs for the template so that users can add them in. Otherwise the header tag and original title won't display.
As for including/showing that it will work with manga, for me this is more looking ahead. Right now, no, I don't see the manga only articles being swapped over. Can I see the anime/manga boxes being converted to be based of of {{infobox}}? Yes, it has the flexibility, so there is little stopping that. Ideally, at least for me, the goal should be to pare down to the fundamental infoboxes. That would mean that at some point there would be a need to visit the anime/manga boxes and collapse them with like 'boxes for other types of comics and animation. - J Greb (talk) 17:14, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Question, how will this incorporate other languages, as we run into them? Will more ja/ko/zh fields be added? I'm thinking Russian, Arabic, etc. Whatever the answer, I like what you're doing! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 22:40, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

(dedent ←)

What I'm thinking is that, as other non-English comics are added, additional likes to

| ko_hangul = <!-- Used with '''ko=y''' -->

will be added along with the if staments to place the "Article contains" tag and the non-English title. This will also allow for a "Language" lable and group using similar logic. This is more for the languages that use the Roman alphabet though.

If this will work, I'll move it to a live template and move over the articles. We can address the GN and manga (I think that'll be the bigger debate) at a later time. - ~~

I think that'll work great. If, from a "tech" standpoint, it's easy to add more lines as we encounter more languages, then go with it. Is there a specific process that one goes through to move a group of articles from one infobox type to another? If it's manual, well, fine by me b/c they all need to be checked for proper creator name order, consistency in publisher names, and adherence to non-free-image usage, anyway. :) Regarding manga, that could be a debate that causes Wiki-servers to explode. So less, later is better, LOL. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 18:50, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Realistically? As long as the fields are the same, or accounted for, all you would have to do is change the old template into a redirect to the new one — 0 editing of the articles needed. If there are fields that are unaccounted for though... editing the articles is a deffinate. - J Greb (talk) 21:59, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Looks like you are going live right now! My watchlist just lit up. I'd like to run along behind you and do bits of cleanup, if possible. As you start on various categories, maybe just drop a note here and I'll know what path you're on. :) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 22:51, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
I was running through the manhua as it was the shorter of the two, but a few of things popped up:
  1. I'm not changing the call, I'm letting it go through the redirect. This is also why I added the category to the primary redirect. I figure people looking to add this are going to look for "manhua", best to keep it easy.
  2. Images are going to need special care since the combined template looks for just the file name and the width as separate fields.
  3. The first sweep I ran was to make sure that "zh_romaized" was there. Mad the second sweep a little easier since that became a natural to split for the logical field.
Right now that leaves 57 or so manhwa to prep before swapping the template for a redirect. - J Greb (talk) 23:04, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Looks like things are going through quite well. I'm following and doing some minor cleanup. Did we lose the "illustrator" field? No big whoop, it can go with "author" but I'm just making sure I'm not going crazy and/or blind. :) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 00:16, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
OK... and the major stuff is all in place. And yes, "illustrator" is a hold over from the previous formating.
Couple of thoiungs of note:
  1. The 'box is now autoplacing article into Category:Manhau titles and Category:Manhwa titles based on the language logical.
  2. I'm going to a a "sort=" argument to the coding. Right now the pagename is overriding any default sort setting. A few of the articles are going to need this argument added to the infobox.
- J Greb (talk) 01:27, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
I just discovered the auto-categorizing feature. Manhua is a little tricky though, b/c Hong Kong comics go in Category:Hong Kong comics, not Category:Manhua titles. HK is a sub-cat of Manhua titles. And Taiwanese titles go in Category:Taiwanese comics titles, not a sub-cat of Manhua titles...this is all for political reasons. Yes, I know, confusing. So I have a boo-boo now on Weapons of the Gods, right under the page title, where I manually added the new infobox (it was using a book one). I also notice it's pulling the infobox name from the article name(?), which is funky in some cases (like on that article). LOL! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 02:59, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
OK... fixed what looks like the major problem, so the categories are propogating now.
I've added a subcat field and appropriate docs on the template page. The upshot is, and see Weapons of the Gods (Comics) for this in use, the name of the category the article should sort to other than the default need to be entered at the "subcat=" field. This will override the sorting into Manhua titles or Manhwa titles (I'm not sure the second is needed since all the articles had [[Category:Manhwa titles]] anyway...). - J Greb (talk) 11:04, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Awesome! Thanks so much for your hard work on this! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 22:00, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Comic Champ

User:Jump Guru, who is active on Weekly Shonen Jump and related articles, has been working to split the main SJ page up and wants to get started on an article for Comics Champ, the Korean adaptation of WSJ. Please post any info and resources you have here to help him get the article started. Jump Guru, if you have the list of currently-running series, we can try to get you the hangul for the titles, as a start. :) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 23:48, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Don't forget we also need the dates for its serialization n' stuff like that. – 「JUMPGURU」@Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 00:14, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Well I don't think anyone here is in a position right now to actually write the article at this moment, as we're still essentially setting up house here. If you can provide the info you've dug up, we can try to help with getting you hangul, transliterations, and things like that. I don't know about anyone else, but I'm not in a position to actively develop articles right now. In my experiences, it's a lot harder to find Korean publication info than it is Japanese, so this process will not be a quick one. From your note on my talk page, I had the impression you already had the list of series currently in Comic Champ. Can you provide that info? Here are some things to get you started. Babelfish may produce gibberish but it is occasionally your friend.  :) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 00:30, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Hangul for Comic Champ: 코믹챔프
  • Korean wiki page [1]
  • CC page on Daiwon's website [2] bad. ~_~ I just need the Korean pronunciations like for example Majeh (King of Hell). – 「JUMPGURU」@Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 16:30, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
We can help better if you give us the list you're working from. :) I have at least some of them: 마제 (King of Hell), 웨스턴 샷건 (Blazin' Barrels), 리버스 (Rebirth), 나루토 (Naruto), 아이실드21 (Eyeshield 21), 크로스 게임 (Cross Game), 원피스 (One Piece), and several manhwa whose titles/authors I haven't identified yet. When you say "pronunciations" do you actually mean romanizations and/or translations? Because I don't know anyone I don't know anyone who knows how to write "phonetic style" with schwas and all that, except maybe a hard-core linguist. :) I've never seen it in any anime-manga articles, either. (?) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 18:34, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, kinda like instead of JoJo's Bizarre Adventure it would be JoJo no Kimya na Bōken. You get what I mean? But we can always just do it the translation way, I just thought it might be kinda cool to have the Korean names. – 「JUMPGURU」@Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 20:23, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Pitch in people! Here's the code: User:Jump Guru/Sandbox#Comic Champ, you can edit here. I need a few names translated if anyone can help, or does anyone where a free Korean (phonetic style) translator is. – 「JUMPGURU」@Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 20:57, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Oh I see what you mean. You're interchanging the terms translation, romanization/transliteration, and pronunciation, which is confusing (no offense! :)). JoJo's Bizarre Adventure is the English name of the series (also a translation of the original title, in this case). JoJo no Kimya na Boken is a romanization/transliteration of the original Japanese title. Neither of them is a pronunciation, per se, and it's not necessary or standard to put in pronunciations unless it's a person's name and might be horribly mauled by readers. What you are wanting, I believe, are romanizations of the Korean (hangul) titles. Keep in mind that you need only include hangul and romanizations for titles that don't have articles on Wikipedia (which, admittedly, is a lot of the manhwa). You only need to list the series' English name in your article; the hangul and romanizations should be in each series' respective article. I'll check out your sandbox and see what I can offer. ^^ --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 21:28, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Mmmm aren't planning to use the phrase "Korean immitations of manga" in the CC article, right? -_- --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 21:50, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Of coarse not! I said that before because one of them was a Manhwa adaption of Switch. – 「JUMPGURU」@Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 22:48, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Maybe.....I was exagerating a bit.....sorry... – 「JUMPGURU」@Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 22:53, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

LOL, I forgive you. An adaptation isn't an imitation, though.  :) I think the page you found belongs to another publisher/distributor, Seoul Munhwasa. I could be wrong but those look like their titles. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 23:22, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

It's okay.. : ) I just wan't to know what Biweekly Jump is. I saw Matsuri Special (a Jump SQ. series) in the bottom right corner of the issue. I'm just curious, i've never heard of that Jump magazine (which is pretty rare for me, I know every single one going back to when Shueisha started in the 20s). And the website said at the top "Jump Comix", which definatly has something to do with Jump Comics. – 「JUMPGURU」@Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 00:01, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
I think the imprint is called "Jumps", and they do appear to have some SJ content, like Bleach. You may not have heard of it b/c it's not part of Shueisha; nothing outside of Japan is. I think S's content is spread across numerous distributors in other countries, not just one company per country (unlike currently in the US with Viz), so it seems reasonable that the word "jump" will show up in a lot of mags/imprints in other countries. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 00:08, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
Makes sense, but what about Jump Comix? That's like saying that a massive billboard in China that says "LEYD ZEPPELIN" (I spelled it wrong on purpose) has nothing to do with Led Zeppelin. Just really weird, there can not be a coincidence like that. – 「JUMPGURU」@Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 00:33, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you're asking? I'm not here to justify a company's use of a comic line's name, though if there was some problem I doubt Shueisha would be licensing the stuff out to them. You asked for background and I'm trying to give it to you. If you have a problem with the subject matter, maybe this isn't the best article for you to be writing. Someone else will write the article soon, I'm sure. :) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 02:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
It's not that big of a deal. : ) I'm not writing about Biweekly Jump so we shouldn't even care. : ) Soooooo....back to Comic Champ, I just started the History section. – 「JUMPGURU」@Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 03:32, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
I was at the Daiwon website, I went through 236 pages and dug up this out of Comic Champ:
  • 강호패도기
  • 파검기
  • 데스노트(DEATH NOTE)
  • 영웅서기 - 솔티아의 바람
  • 검정 고무신
  • 캐스팅
  • 체인지가이
  • 수호지 EX
  • 파인애플
  • 마스터스쿨 올림프스
  • 유희왕
  • 사립영웅학원 천(天)
  • 아메리카 아메리카
  • 가디록
  • 쥬신 (Jushin)
  • 홍길동 Neo²
  • 슈팅
  • 불타는 오리꿘부
  • 굳세어라! 마가크-A
  • 미소라
  • 박카스
  • 플러시 (Foushi!)
  • 묻지마 가족
  • 쉬콜러
  • 레이븐
  • 터치 - ADACHI Matsuri
  • 봉신연의 (Hoshin Engi)
  • 점핑
  • 바스타드-암흑의 파괴신- (Bastard!!)
  • 용열이
  • 파이트볼 (Fight Ball)
  • 당신은 천사에게 맞아 본 적이 있나요
  • 고스트 스위퍼
  • 점핑
  • H2 - ADACHI Mitsuri
  • 포켓몬스터 개그극장
  • 개그존
  • 야호
  • 개그존
  • 정글벨
  • 굿모닝! 티처
  • 마도전기 알비온
  • 점핑
  • 미스터 부
  • 검빵맨
  • 코와! (COWA!)
  • 미스터 부
  • 레모네이드 스쿨 상
  • 사신전
  • 타이의 대모험 (Dragon Quest Dai no Daibouken)
  • 대마왕
  • 슬램덩크 (Slam Dunk)
  • 노노 보이
  • 태풍의 공격수
  • 태권특급
  • 어쩐지…저녁
  • 출동! 119 구조대
  • 소마신화전기

All we need is a Korean translator and we're done. : ) I just need the dates for the series, if there's no Korean translator then maybe someone here can translate them. : ) For eyes hurt i've been looking at a computer for a long time, i'll take a nap. -_- – 「JUMPGURU」@Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 17:37, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Some of these are already translated. Please use Babelfish as a first try, and a hangul romanizer (there are links on this page, or try google). I know it can give gibberish, but a rough translation plus cover art can help you recognize what it is if it's been published in Japanese or English. You can also look through our lengthy to-do list of manhwa series articles to create for possible titles to match up. (a lot of them are shoujo type titles released in the US, so might not really help.) Also, did all these series run in Comic Champ magazine as opposed to volumes just being published under the Champ Comics imprint? And as I said, your timing isn't real great in that we are awfully busy doing behind-the-scenes work but as long as you're not in any hurry I'm sure we can contribute. I don't know a drop of Korean and I usually manage to slowly but surely get info I need all on my own. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 21:55, 23 June 2008 (UTC) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 21:55, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Anthologies category

Allo. I'm starting to run into a few articles about manhwa anthology magazines, like we talked about uh up there somewhere *points*. For now, I'm sticking them in Category:Comic book publishing companies of Korea, just so they don't get lost again. Whenever you have time, Emperor, I guess we can fire up a category for them. I haven't run across any manhua ones yet. Thanks! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 22:17, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

OK: Category:Manhwa magazines, following the discussion above. It is also under comics anthologies although if they aren't all like that we can remove that and only add it to those that are. Might also be worth adding Category:Korean magazines
Great, this should work just fine! This cat should definitely grow over time. There are more of them than I'd previously realized. Thanks! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 21:58, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

All right...

You guys seem to be pretty on-the-ball with all this, so I'm going to go ahead and pull out... I've already removed most of the manhwa and manhua articles from my watchlist, though I will continue to watch this page and the templates (and some articles in which I have a personal interest). Other than that, if any of you needs my assistance with anything, drop me a line on my talk page (since I'll be more apt to respond to messages there than here), and I'll help as I can. —Dinoguy1000 17:49, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for everything! I'm sure we'll bump into each other from time to time, especially on those "OMG is this manhwa or manga!!!!" series. :) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 21:57, 23 June 2008 (UTC)


  • I'm pulling this topic out to help with page readability. Emperor, I'd be happy to have you create categories to make sure there are writer and artist categories for both Korean and Chinese-language creators.
  • I'd like to put together a list of "here's categories you should generally put this type of article into" and "here's some other categories that may apply, also." For instance, I'd have never known about the "comics by year" category and lists if Emperor hadn't mentioned them above. I can put something together, but I'll really want other more experienced users to look them over for accuracy and some degree of logical completeness. Categories are just overwhelming for me, and others may run into the same issue if the number of totally-uncategorized articles I've run into Wikipedia-wide is any indication. Do others think this would be useful to the group's editors? (esp for those who are new editors or non-specialized editors in any one area.) edit: please take a look at what I added to the "categories" section of the group page and let me know what you think.
  • Another category question! There's at least one article for a manhwa magazine floating around -- how should these be categorized? If you're not familiar with them, a magazine like this comes out at some regular interval, and each issue features one chapter from each of whatever manhwa series it's running at the moment. ((Then later, when so many chapter of a certain series has been published, the collected chapters are released in book form -- the "volumes" I spoke about earlier.)). In Korea, a single magazine is usually running original Korean manhwa as well as translated Japanese manga simultaneously, so you might see a lot of the articles with anime-manga tags, also. For manga examples, look at Shonen Jump or Hana to Yume. An article about a manhwa magazine would cover the magazine as a whole, and not specific issues. The analagous manga hierarchy is Category:Manga --> Category:Manga industry --> Category:Anime and manga magazines --> Category:Japanese manga magazines. I don't know if we'll ever need that level detail in subcategorization. Thanks! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 13:50, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
We can largely work to precedent and we try and clear out the main category of a country's comics into sub-categories, which link into a broader structure (like Chinese comics writers hooks into Chinese writers and writers by nationality) - if everything is stuffed into the main category it because a mess and becomes rather meaningless. See for example: Category:American comics everything is moved off into writers, artists, titles, publishing companies, etc. and blow some of them (especially the last) there can be various other categories. We'll aim for something like that. So for a first step:
We now have:
Category:Chinese comics writers - needs some articles
Category:Korean comics writers
I also put Category:Hong Kong comics artists under Category:Chinese comics artists
I didn't do the same with Category:Taiwanese comics artists, as I suspect there could be some political sensitivity (they are Chinese but aren't part of China - there are similar geopolitical political considerations elsewhere). Having Category: Taiwanese comics as a child of Category: Manhua might be similarly problematic.
On the categorisation front, for the sake of accuracy it is best to put all Hong Kong produced comics in Category:Hong Kong comics titles, even if the distinction is only really important historically these days. I've set it up so that category is a child of Category:Manhua titles so it is technically categorised right either way.
We can now move the titles out of Category:Manhua and into the relevant category. One question raised by rooting around in there: Isn't The Celestial Zone a Singaporean comic? This may be connected with the question of Taiwanese comics. I did once pondered whether the "manga" category should really be "Japanese comics" (or a child of it) - are we saying Manhua = Chinese comics or are we saying it is a distinct form of comics that occurs in China, Hong Kong, Taiwan and Singapore? If so then it may be we need a Chinese comics category as a child of Manhua alongside Taiwanese comics. If not (and Manhua = Chinese comics, as with the definition used by the Anime and Manga Project of manga = Japanese comics) then Taiwanese comics should be moved under Category: Asian comics.
Getting back to your questions. List of Chronicles of the Cursed Sword characters should be in a category either called "Chinese comics characters" or "Manhua characters" (possibly depending on the answer to the above issue). It can then also go into Category:Lists of comics characters until such point that there are enough of them to make it worth making a new category (like "Lists of Manhua characters" - not needed yet but it might be something for the future). It looks like we will probably need a category for publishers which would be in the form of "Comic book publishing companies of China".
What you call magazines are Comics anthologies and comic magazines and are petty similar to things like 2000 AD or Tintin (magazine). I don't think I have ever got a satisfactory answer to how you'd define the stories that run in such titles. What I'd suggest is having a "Manhua magazines" under Category: Comic book magazines and possibly Category: Comics anthologies (if they are all anthologies). So then if magazine X has run a series of stories you could then create further categories like "X titles" into which these stories could go. It is getting a bit complicated and we can thrash out the details further down the line. For now I'd say we put them in "Manhua magazines".
All of which suggests you may need further categories: "Manhua magazines", "Chinese comics characters" or "Manhua characters" and "Comic book publishing companies of China" (and something similar for Manhwa). That should allow the main category to be cleared up and the articles moved into more accurate categories. We can then work on refining things further once we get an idea of what is needed.
On the the important categories front the main ones that get used the most elsewhere are the titles ones, Category: Comics by year and Category:Comics genres (the last one allows you to put them in horror comics, sci-fi, etc.). Also ones that might be handy are Category:Comics by source/Category:Works based on comics for comics based on films/tv/books and vice versa. It is best with titles to keep things simple and the categories do most of the work (so a well thought out category structure means you can cut down on the number of categories used, for example I see a lot of Hong Kong comics were also in the Manhua category but as it is a child of it then it is already classified as Manhua so the main category is redundant).
So basically we move the titles out of the main category to their specific categories (and they can be tagged with the year they started and their genre) and then we can see what else is in there which needs their own categories (which seem to be characters, magazines and publishers). take it slow and steady and we can great further child categories as we see the way things shape up. (Emperor (talk) 20:18, 17 June 2008 (UTC))
I'm glad you're a pro at this.  :) Thanks for making the additional creators categories, and I saw you moved Youn In-Wan already. Regarding the Chinese-language issues I checked related categories, and you've followed the structure found in Category:Cinema by country, Category:Music by nationality, and Category:Literature by continent. But Category:Literature by nationality has Hong Kong and China both at the same level...even though it's also part of the Literature category. :). Six of one, half dozen of the other? I'm happy with whatever you decide. (There are significant differences in both written and spoken Chinese between China and Hong Kong, and their publishing history has been - and still is, really - separate, so I can see why discrepancies exist.)
Regarding definition of manhua...oy. There will be articles about manhua as an ancient art form (Manhua), and then there will be (a lot more) articles about manhua as post-Chinese Revolution/World War II comics, analogous to common usage of manhwa and manga in English. I think we can firmly put Hong Kong, China, and Taiwan comics under manhua. I'm trying to research precedent on other possibly-Chinese-language comics like Singapore's but it will take some time. For now can we just sort of "hang loose" on those? Is there a working-group-specific tag that can be attached to those articles as we run across them, to flag them for later categorization considerations?
Your understanding of manhwa anthologies sounds perfect, and I'll defer to your judgment on how to set up categories for it. I would do manhua anthologies the same way, using whatever structure we settle on for manhua and creators. I'm also happy to follow any other category structures you set up for non-controversial things like character lists, character articles, etc. I'll just keep reporting needs as I run into them and give some background & comparison, and you can guide from there. Thank you so, so much for all your work on this.  :) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 22:21, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
Really I'm happy to leave it unless someone causes a fuss. Most of the best known HK titles were when they were a British colony so it makes sense to have them as distinct (especially as they had a thriving industry so there is enough material to make it workable). It is Taiwan that could be tricky we can change it at any time (as it is only a couple of categories that would need changing, although it might be worth running it past the Taiwan Project but we can tag up the relevant articles and categories and keep and eye on them and see if anyone objects.
There isn't a "check back on this in 6 months" tag (I wish there was - I sometimes find an issue I raised years ago still unresolved) but the simplest thing would be to either put something on your user page or in your sandbox to remind you to check back or just start a section here for people to drop things in that we can wait and see on, open and ongoing topics of discussion. That said if we just leave it in the main category I'm sure someone (probably me) will stumble across it and wonder if it has a better home. Actually there is Category:Singaporean comics, perhaps the simplest thing would be to put them in there and then decide what to do later.
I've had a run at Category: Manhua and as it cleared the next steps presented themselves - which look like characters and publishers/distributors (see discussion below for more on that). I might just make it Chinese comics characters and bung the lot in there - if it needs renaming or refining we can sort that out then. The trick is to do it in small steps and see if any more are needed. There is a pretty solid structure to most of the country's comics categories (I've been through nearly all of them and made sure - or I made them. They are pretty much based off the way it is done elsewhere in Wikipedia so just about every time it slots into place nicely) so we can easily roll out the new categories based on solid precedent. I might have a go at Category: Manhwa and then see what else we need as it'd make sense to make the characters and distributors categories at the same time. (Emperor (talk) 00:40, 18 June 2008 (UTC))
Or perhaps check the category first. Category: Manhwa is already clear and they have Category:Manhwa distributors and Category:Comic book publishing companies of Korea (objections noted, see below - it is just easier to do it this way and change it later). When I make the Chinese characters category I'll make for one Korean ones and drop that list in - it'll make it easier for people down the road. So that all seems pretty straightforward, I'll make some corresponding manhua categories tomorrow and just make sure everything is joined up properly and I can move most of the Manhua category articles off to new categories and things should be straightforward from there.
On an unrelated note (just one I noticed while going through the various titles) is that it'd be handy to have a "Historical comics" category under genre as a lot of the comics would tend to fit in that general field. (Emperor (talk) 00:49, 18 June 2008 (UTC))
Historical comics would be a great idea. Actually the whole concept of genres needs to be looked at, as the current manhwa infobox uses...Japanese genres. They are an excellent choice for manga, as they reflect real marketing niches in that industry, but I don't know about the transferability to other markets. I vote to leave that until, like, way later. LOL But yes to historical, as than can have relevance to other wikiprojects and categories etc.
Yes, that's partly my fault. As I was going through manhwa and manhua articles, updating infoboxes to use the current parameters, I frequently came across (Japanese!!!) demographic tags in the genre parameter. Since I don't know anything about Chinese or Korean genres, either, I just shoved this demographic info off to its own parameter and figured that someone else who knew more/better would follow along eventually and correct/add the demographic info. —Dinoguy1000 17:02, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Oh I think you made the perfect choice. I don't think any of us are experts on every series in the category, and during these early cleanup phases I can just see mistakenly sticking some Korean version of Kite next to Pokeman. =D --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 00:29, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
OK I made Category:Historical comics. (Emperor (talk) 16:25, 24 June 2008 (UTC))
Oh also, regarding the companies, just so I understand correctly, LOL... There are companies that license/distribute/publish translated manhwa and manhua in other countries. I don't know if there is a need to distinguish between the three manhua countries of origin or not for this. And then there are companies that publish manhwa and manhua within their own countries - these companies act both as native publishers and as distributors/publishers of comics licensed from other countries. Tokyopop, CMX, and Dark Horse are some names you probably recognize that do this in the US, and hence they fall under a lot of categories. Because these companies fill so many roles, I get overwhelmed with the hierarchy. So as long as you understand what they're doing, you are "the category man" as far as I'm concerned. :)
On a side note, if we can avoid referring to "comic books" in these categories, it might be for the best. While a collection of comics published in a book is, well, a comic book, I think for most English-language readers it will conjure up Comic book when what we really mean is something like Tankōbon (the "volumes" I've spoken of) or its component serialized comic. Stupidly, I don't know the corresponding terms in Korean or Chinese yet. (My background is really in manga and Japanese language, LOL.) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 22:48, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
The best bet is to do follow manga's example on this and make the distinction between distributors and publishers. Folks like Dark Horse would then go in "Manhua distributors" and "Manwha distributors" (it'd make sense to do them both at the same time) and save the respective publishers categories for those companies producing original works.
Oh and don't get me started on "comic books"!! I'm British so one of the first things I did was make sure British comics weren't listed as comic books. One of things I've been trying to do was keep things as general and international as possible (hence the emptying of Category:Comic books), there are still relics of this lying around (for some reason we still have Category: Italian comic book titles and Category: Spanish comic book titles - which is quite frankly weird), I'm afraid that the Category:Comic book publishing companies by country structure is one such anomaly so it makes sense to stick to that format, so when we change it everything gets done at the same time (I really should get a big batch of renaming done as they do niggle me - I can usually ignore them until they are pointed out). Other than that I will only refer to comic books when they are American comics of that specific format. Promise. (Emperor (talk) 00:40, 18 June 2008 (UTC))
LOL @ your reaction to "comic book." Everything sounds just excellent. I will get myself familiarized with everything and keep plugging away. I'm working on getting stuff up on the front page, too. I'm having so much fun but feel perhaps I need a clone. :) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 01:23, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Clones are always good - I could do with about 8. (Emperor (talk) 01:39, 18 June 2008 (UTC))
Just to pick up on your mention of Tankōbon: what I'd like to do is make the distinction between the original comic magazines/comics anthologies and the trade paperback collections of the stories. The latter are often marketed as graphic novels but the distinction is important (also there may be the equivalent of original graphic novels) and tankobon doesn't necessarily make that quite so clear. The good thing is that {{Infobox graphic novel}} is flexible enough to cover the trade paperback-like collections as it includes original publication details as well as the collection details and the translator details. I am unsure how many of the former we will have here (as they'd usually be translated and distributed in their collected forms) but if we do have some then {{Infobox comic book title}} is the more general comics template (despite the name!!) that is flexible enough to be used in various circumstances. Although we can cross that bridge when we come to it - for now I suspect {{Infobox graphic novel}} will be the main one and we can see how things will work for the original magazines. (Emperor (talk) 01:53, 18 June 2008 (UTC))
Thanks for the GN & TPB links. I think something like tanks are ... close but not exactly either one. Terminology-wise, there's never been a good solution in English, which is one reason the word "manga" has become so widespread in usage. I know it was hard for general (non-Asian) bookstores in America to get their computer systems and their minds wrapped around the nature of these types of serial books b/c they weren't the same as the American superhero GNs they'd always carried, but they weren't comic books either. Articles should already be incorporating info about both the original serialized release and the collected volumes release, although info on the former is often just not available or at least will take a lot more digging to come by than the original article author has put in. Asian comics are proportionally a much bigger business than Western ones, but also much more ephemeral. Translator info is something that's typically largely ignored -- yet so easily obtainable -- and that needs to change. That goes only for officially translated translators, especially those who scan the whole damn book in and then replace the original text with their own language, will receive credit only over my cold dead rotting corpse. =D --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 03:09, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Oh yes but that is the closest approximation I can come up with an it would tend to suggest we aren't going to have many "Manhua magazines" - if they do crop up then we can sort out a category for them but until then we might as well just focus on the titles.(Emperor (talk) 21:27, 18 June 2008 (UTC))
Sounds good to me! To be honest, I don't know a thing about the prevalence of manhua magazines. Cross that bridge...etc. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 00:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
Anyway I have made a number of other categories and largely got things categorised:
  • Category: Manhua - characters, distributors, publishers (although I couldn't actually find anything to go in there, like Jademan), etc. and put the Singaporean comics into their own categorises.
  • Category: Manhwa - I think just characters
We'll see what the demand is for other categories and work from there. (Emperor (talk) 21:27, 18 June 2008 (UTC))
Excellent, we'll work from there! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 00:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Ditching the "demographic" field in series infobox

Anyone thought about just ditching the "demographic" field in the series infobox? Reason being, current contents are all for manga industry-defined demographics, using (mostly) Japanese words. (Article contents use the terms a lot too, but those all have to be removed/changed individually.) I'm not sure, at present, what the correct corresponding demographics in the other countries' industries are. Is it better to leave the Japanese terms for now, since they are accurate in spirit but wrong on a technical level, or should we yank them all until we have something that is correct both in spirit and technically? --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 05:26, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm taking them out. If we keep them on, people will think they are manga, which we are trying to avoid. Many folks think that they are manga, which is wrong so why add to the confusion? – 「JUMPGURU」@Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 16:05, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
I have to agree with JG here... Until we can find the corresponding terms for manhwa and manhua, the demographic field should be removed from the infobox, although I feel more like we should just comment out the actual demographic tags on individual articles, so we wouldn't have to root through page histories when we do get the correct terms... But then, that's just my POV =) —Dinoguy1000 16:10, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
I'm in with Dinoguy1000. : ) – 「JUMPGURU」@Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 17:00, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Yeah you guys may be right. That's the problem with using such specialized terminology, but oh well. =P Dinoguy, when you say "comment out" the demos, what do you mean? Sorry, I'm dense. :) I was debating doing manual removals or asking to have the field removed, en masse from the infobox itself. Many article bodies need the terms removed too, which can't be automated. Hopefully when removed, editors will be mature enough to put a simple "removed Japanese terms" in the edit summary, and forgo the "OMG this isn't Japanese DUH!!!!!". :) Until yesterday I had no realization of how prevalent the Japanese terms actually were in those boxes...! Oh, side note -- Dinoguy, do you think any butts will get chewed if the OEL series that are still using the animanga boxes are moved to a comics box? --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 20:03, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
By "comment out", I mean using an SGML comment tag to prevent them from being seen in the rendered page. For instance,
<!-- this is a comment -->
will result in . To get a bit technical, it's not *really* an SGML comment tag, since the MediaWiki parser looks for and removes them before sending the rendered article off to the client, but they are otherwise identical to the SGML comments.
As for switching OEL manga from using the animanga box to a comics box, I'm sure at least some of our members would be quite happy to see them off, since they're explicitly beyond our scope. You may even get some help with it... ;) —Dinoguy1000 16:27, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
OH yes yes! I have run into that before, in fact I've entered them! :) What I'm finding that's making this even more irritating, is that foreign distributors & publishers even use the Japanese words. It's more than just Tokyopop calling everything "manga". DrMaster describes its very shoujo-esque manhua as "shojo" and a Chinese publisher categorizes its domestic girls' magazine as "少女" (and yet using the Chinese word on Wikipedia would be pointless b/c it's not used in English). Using the English equivalent shows...well, shows why the anime-manga project and English distributors don't use it: it sounds stupid. "Demographic: girls" LOL. Also, once you use the English term people start to disagree with it and find it sexist, whereas they take the Japanese term at face value. I will look at how non-Asian comic series are handled, and it may turn out to just be something best handled smoothly in the article body and not entirely appropriate for an infobox. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 21:38, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
I guess we can, ~sigh~ -_- It does bug me that Tokyopop labels everything as fact it drives me crazy. I understand though, they do that so bookstores can catergorize it in the manga section.... – 「JUMPGURU」@Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 04:32, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Well, you've been pretty clear on your personal feelings about this sort of thing, and there's no reason to get into all that. What I'm trying to figure out is how to handle things from here on out.--hamu♥hamu (TALK) 04:50, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Comics by year

Just a note. Most of the "old" Chinese manhua series (Fung Wan, Oriental Heroes) are probably accurate, but just FYI, I think the modern manhua and (especially) manhwa series' debut dates probably need to be verified before taking the time to put them in Category:Comics by year. During my quick and dirty infobox checks, I ran into dates that I suspect are for the US or other non-native releases. So yeah. :) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 20:31, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Its not set in stone - you can always change it later. However, the best solution is to make sure the articles are all linked through to at least the native language equivalent article which will have the original dates, so we can double check and adjust accordingly. (Emperor (talk) 15:34, 25 June 2008 (UTC))
Oh of course, of course. I just wanted anyone who was linking up the dates to be aware of the situation. It's definitely in the to-do pile. :) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 23:31, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Navigating Korean and Chinese publishers' websites

I'm struggling with navigating Korean and Chinese publishers' websites. I find that searching for an author or title on a publisher's site usually takes me either to "current issue" information, or a product listing. Those are helpful, but what I really want is the page about the person, series, or magazine. I know they exist, but I never find them in any straightforward way. Once I get to the content I do okay, but navigating is killing me. In particular I've been trying to work on series from Daiwon C.I. and Tong Li Comics. If anyone knows how to better navigate or knows anyone with language skills who might be willing to help with navigation, I'd be really appreciative. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 01:42, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

The latest

Okay, here's a quickie update on some tasks I've completed for most of the Chinese-language and Korean comics:

  • Added infoboxes for series, creators, magazines; working on characters and companies.
  • We should have over 60 manhwa and over 60 manhua stubs as of now.
  • Added images for most series, and resized images for others; all should now have fair use statements in articles, and all images should have fair use statements on image page.
  • Removed Japanese demographic terms from infoboxes, with comment to please not use them in the demographic field.
  • Updated references to ICEkunion as a series publisher to current info.
  • Tried to remove Japanese terminology from article leads ("manga", "shojo") from article leads as I noticed them.

Here's next on my immediate to-do list:

  • Verify original publishers and publication dates for many series; add/adjust appropriate YEAR in comics and YEAR comic debuts info.
  • External link cleanup. What a flipping mess. :)
  • Obtain publication data for other countries.
  • Move "OEL manga" now using animanga infoboxes to comics series infoboxes. I'm not sure how to find them, but isn't there a way to see a list of all articles using a certain infobox? They're all using a parameter in the manga module of the animanga boxes that makes their label say "OEL" instead of "manga" or something like that. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 14:21, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Small suggestion - Double check the OLEs. If a particular title is a single, stand alone volume, {{Infobox Graphic novel}} would be a better fit. - J Greb (talk) 14:32, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Your best bet is to start here: Category:Original English-language manga. A quick check shows that a lot have no infoboxes, some we've looked at recently (like the Dirty Pair) use numerous comic templates and probably a weird mix. I also note the disambiguation is all over the place - I don't think we can use "manga" it might mean "comics" in Japan but outside it is more of a description and one that is potentially inaccurate under the strict interpretation of "manga" being used here. Some efforts have been made to address this - The Dreaming (manga) has been moved but The Dreaming (Tokyopop comic) isn't right either ("(Tokyopop)" is the right one using WP:NCC - The Dreaming (comics)]] is, rightly, the Neil Gaiman one). So if you spot anything like that then flag it and we'll sort it out. (Emperor (talk) 14:50, 1 July 2008 (UTC))
Oh looks like this should be fun. :) J Greb, we're probably okay there as most of these are most likely "manga style" series but I'll def keep it in mind. Emperor, yes, the terminology is, erm, something upon which I could expound for quite some time. I think the OEL part of it is probably useless, too, as companies like Tokyopop are aiding development of domestic "manga style" comics for marketing as manga in other places too, like Germany. Proper categorization will take some thinking. Sounds like the category as a whole will need some scrubbing if it's got stuff like Dirty Pair in it. I'll report weird stuff as I find it! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 15:17, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Oh. My. You weren't kidding. :) First, I never knew there were American-made Dirty Pair comics. Learned something new. Second, I can see generally what this category is for and I see its usefulness, but I guess I need to ask exactly what all we want this to encompass. As I mentioned, there are comics of "this type" being developed in Germany by Tokyopop. As they get translated into English they'll be, for all intents and purposes, just like OELs from a consumer POV. Yet it is (probably?) silly to make an "original German-language manga" category. (And since the authors are ethnically Asian, most English-speakers won't be looking in the German categories...) We could call it "Asian-influenced comics" or something, but that omits that the series were created and marketed as manga; people would want to stick in every comic in which some Asian influence is discernible. "Western comics specifically marketed as manga"? UGH LOL Speaking of "ugh", was anyone ever party to any discussions about classifying Princess Ai I should know about? Meanwhile I will try to put best-fit infoboxes on some of these while we all stew over naming. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 16:33, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Well worse is "Amerimanga"!! I mean... really.
There is a list here: Original English-language manga#History and nomenclature. Personally I've seen "world manga" used quite a bit (I'm signed up over on Sweatdrop Studios' forum). There is some discussion here, which might be a good opportunity to address the situation.
As you examples outline it is a bit of a weird category - anyone trying to start "English-language comics based on American comic books" would get a poke in the ribs and the category/article speedied. OK I know it is a well understood concept but it has to be secondary to the more important categories e/g/ Category:Tokyopop titles, etc. (or at the very least Category:German comics titles) I think a lot of people are just saying that they make comics in varying styles, some just happen to take stylistic cues from Japanese comics (I'm sure I've read an interview with someone along those lines, possibly David Hine?). I mean decompression is said to have become popular thanks to manga but things like The Authority keep other comic book styles, others vary - so it could be seen as a spectrum with no easy dividing line. All that said I do think it is worth having a category/article that brings these together, the current category (and presumably article) will probably need renaming.
And Princess Ai? I have never seen it before but.... I could also ask how Stu Levy (DJ Milky - I think if I was going to have a nom de plume I'd have come up with a better one than that) only has the Japan talk page header? (Emperor (talk) 20:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC))
Princess Ai is a steaming pile of dung I mean, vanity project by Courtney Love and Stuart Levy (I can't even say his pen name). They got a very famous Japanese manga artist (Ai Yazawa) to do the character designs (how??) and a lesser known Japanese manga artist to actually do the illustrations for the comic. It was originally written in English and, somehow, got published in Japan, where it was serialized in a magazine. Without doing a drop of research, IIRC Japanese publication may have predated American publication, which by many Anime & Manga project editors' standards makes it manga. It's clearly a collaboration and who cares where it was published first, which is why I was wondering if I'd missed some discussions. The article's goal is to help readers understand the subject matter, not foist someone else's labeling preferences on them, so it makes sense to me the article be tagged with both projects and not use an infobox that specifically calls it manga. (Visions of Blade of the Phantom Master lol.) Meanwhile, coming up with a correct name for the category continues to elude me. Asian-style comics? Asian-style graphic novels? Tokyopop is starting a new line next year of imported French and Chinese titles and they're actually calling them graphic novels. I'll check out the links you suggested, too. *shrug* --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 22:22, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Just a small thing, but if the Asian comics tempolate is going to be used for the EOL manga, here's a variation for it — {{Infobox original English manga}} - J Greb (talk) 22:51, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Oh okay, I'll use it. I was using the Asian one but not choosing a either language. Do you want me to go back and make changes to the ones I did? It's no biggie. Will this place them in the OEL category? --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 00:24, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Using "OEL=y" wil autoplace the article into the OEL cat. As for going back, it's a case of 6 of 1 — it doesn't need to be done but it can be for consistancy. - J Greb (talk) 00:40, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
I posted about the OEL manga name on the main project talk page. I read the 2006 discussions on the article's talk page and found it...well, I thought they sounded like a bunch of jerks, saying a lot of things that were factually incorrect. :) The German comic issue hadn't been resolved there, either. So I thought input from relative "outsiders" might be helpful. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 19:32, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I got to the American Dirty Pair in my list... It's now down to 1 infobox and a couple of minor things fixed in the lead, but it still needs work. - J Greb (talk) 21:20, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh good good. I've been tackling the straightforward mostly-Tokyopop series from recent years and leaving all the webcomics and "oddities". Everything I run across needs a ton of work so I'm just focusing on the infoboxes for now. Regarding your earlier comment, I did run across a one-volume title, but I experimented and felt the series box worked best after all, but everything's debatable. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 22:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Getting infoboxes is my priority for most series/one-shots until we have time to work on the articles for refs and such. Manwha and manhua (and OEL) have been really neglected, so very few of the articles are in good shape. I got Peach Fuzz an infobox so far, but I'll be working on others. The ones that really need help are the rare series that aren't listed anywhere.WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Oh hell yes. Darn near every article needs significant work. And yeah, I've been a bit lazy and skipping the "tough" ones for the time being. I can only spend so much time looking at Korean and especially Chinese websites. Can you read either language, by chance? Either way, glad to have you own board! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 00:46, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks! Too bad manwha and manhua isn't as popular in the US...Or at least have companies like Tokyopop stop calling it that. Unfortunately, the only other language I can really read is German...And I'm not altogether fluent yet. If you need help with websites, though, post them. I'm pretty good at deciphering those horrid google translations. But some random good news with Jack Frost (manwha) is that it's coming out in the US (thank you Yen Press!!), so finding references and information will be a little easier.WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 00:58, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I saw JF on YP's website! There are actually some German comics sites you might be able to navigate. Some, like Tokyopop's are easy but some...not so much. I like to use all the sites for international publication info. BTW, any clue why JF got tagged for notability? I mean, as opposed to all the other comic and manga related stubs out there? LOL! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 01:06, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
I'd be glad to give it a shot! Hopefully I can navigate it, and for words I don't know I have my trusty German dictionary. (actually it's right next to mexD) The notibility tag was left there from when it was a teeny tiny little stub a sentence long and labeled under manga. I don't know why I never removed it, but right now is probably a fine time. Anyway, I also like using international sites for information. It's especially useful for foreign comics and goods.WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 01:13, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Update again

  • Added/changed infoboxes & images to all the OEL category items w/these exceptions:
    • Webcomics or things that used to be webcomics
    • Things that looked like straight-up comic books
    • Non-series things like characters or creators
    • Sakura Pakk and Rumble Pak, as I just wasn't sure about them. Images were uploaded by publisher and even the image pages sound like advertisements.
    • Work Bites -- was this ever published? It's not on Tokyopop's site or places like
  • Renamed a few OELs that were no-brainers
  • Added infobox on all characters in manhua & manhwa categories; may need some tweaks but it's a start
  • Did a somewhat-diligent external link scrub, though to be honest I didn't check all those Tokyopop links for working condition...TP likes to change its website around every 10 minutes, I think.

General maintenance still to do:

  • Add infoboxes on company articles. I hate these b/c the boxes are always so pathetically empty. :)

Then comes the hard stuff:

  • Copyedit the hell out of everything in manhwa, manhua, and OEL.
  • Verify/obtain publication info (including countries besides the US and original country)
  • Stub creation out the wazoo. (see the extended to-do list for proposed articles - feel free to add)
  • Wash, rinse, repeat.

Chime in if I've missed any general maintenance tasks for completion. I know the OELs aren't technically in this category, but b/c the marketing and publication patterns for many titles follow those of many "real" Asian comics it seems somewhat natural and a lot of the same resources can be used. I've been tagging the Tokyopop articles as world & US work groups both. If someone has issue with this, feel free to speak up, though I can't imagine anyone else is just dying to work on them. =P --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 09:21, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

External links

I'm trying to do external link cleanup, and need opinions.

  • I see a lot of external links to interviews, reviews, stuff like that. Good info, but shouldn't it be used in the body of the article and the link used as an actual reference? I started moving some of the links to the talk page with instructions to do that, but am I doing the right thing? (For the record, most of these articles are plot-and-characters only, with little-to-no coverage of other areas...they, like, need the info in those external links.)
  • Links to a series' page on Anime News Network or similar databases are for...general verification purposes? Kind of like an IMDB page for a movie or some of the comics databases used for Marvel, DC, etc?
  • I deleted a fansite that was claimed as "author approved." They were illegally scanlating her stuff so, uh, I don't think so. Y/N?
  • If I see another fanlisting, I will cry. =D --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 03:30, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • I see a lot of external links to interviews, reviews, stuff like that. Good info, but shouldn't it be used in the body of the article and the link used as an actual reference? I started moving some of the links to the talk page with instructions to do that, but am I doing the right thing? (For the record, most of these articles are plot-and-characters only, with little-to-no coverage of other areas...they, like, need the info in those external links.) They should be used in the body; just make new sections like 'media' and 'concept and creation' and the like.
  • Links to a series' page on Anime News Network or similar databases are for...general verification purposes? Kind of like an IMDB page for a movie or some of the comics databases used for Marvel, DC, etc? Anime News Network is good for verification; they are best used for starting dates, ending dates, artists, etc. They can be used as references; just make sure they are reputable. Post them if you are unsure, because some are very tricky with their wording and what they are.
  • I deleted a fansite that was claimed as "author approved." They were illegally scanlating her stuff so, uh, I don't think so. Y/N? Incredibly easy to lie there, so unless the author actually comes out and says they support it, don't use it. I wonder why they even try without an interview and when they have illegal scanlations sitting aroundxD
  • If I see another fanlisting, I will cry. =D Most correct sentence of the day...or week...or year...
Anyway, I'll go get to work on weeding out the external links, too.WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 04:08, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes I see you weeding now! Thanks for the advice. I'm not in a place to work on "real" article content right now, so I'll just move the links with good stuff to the talk page for later inclusion. Yes, I love fansites that claim to love an author and then promptly gyp her out of her livelihood. *sigh* LOL So what you're saying about ANN is that it's okay to have them as an external link? I think it's kind of repetitive (esp as they have very little on non-Japanese series) but I guess it doesn't hurt? A good "interim" link until some real sources can be dug up, I guess. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 04:40, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
It is okay to use them as a reference, but external links are fine, too. It really depends on how much information that have for the series, too, because, as you said, they don't have much on non-Japanese series.WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 12:10, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Some thoughts:
* I add a lot of interviews and reviews into external links - this isn't just link dumping (or further reading sugegstions) as all articles need solid out-of-universe sections (discussing the ideas behind the story, the development of the series and the reception) for which these are important. However, I don't have enough time in the day to work through them all the links extract the relevant information and hammer them into shape (at least not for every title, see what I've done on Captain Britain and MI: 13 - I tend to accumulate the next issues reviews before going through them and extracting what I need). Obviously those clones we discussed could come in handy right here. If there is a need to clean-up lengthy links sections then feel free to move such things to the talk page but they do stand a better chance of getting used - I was recently able to grab a number of links out of an articles external links section and hammer them into an article allowing me to remove an unreferenced template because the links were there ready to use [3]. So the main aim is for these to be used (if they can't be used or are redundant, then delete them ro drop them into the talk page as someone might find something useful in them) and making use of such resources would be the next phase after the run through taking place at the moment aimed at getting things up to standard. So it might be worth leaving them in for now. If no one wants to make use of them in the next round of improvements then it could be worth cleaning them away to the talk page but bear in mind that once there they are even less likely to be used so I'd only do it if they were a problem.
* Fansites and fan listings can be a big problem - there are clearly dozens to hundreds out there so how do you chose? There are a few that are very good but it might be worth coming to a consensus about those, otherwise I'd say chop them out. I have noticed some articles using links to Dmoz but it seems skimpy in this area - I only found the one for Manga.
* Links to sites like IMDB are good for WP:V but they should be as specific as possible - links to the front page of general site are usually unhelpful and could even be confusing (what do people do? Search the site and wade through the results?). I started a discussin on the problems with some external links here.
Just my fourpennth. (Emperor (talk) 15:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC))
Ah, I see your point about the interviews and such. I didn't mean completely removing the links. :) My impression, possibly wrong, was that potential editors were seeing those external links and then figuring, "eh, there's a link there, why bother putting the info in the article?" or something. I thought if I moved the links to the talk page and told people "here's some good stuff - use it! :)" it would work. Who knows! :) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 19:44, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Move assistance

If ever a page needed a new name, it was this one: iD_ᴇNTITY. What is that, unicode? Taking suggestions on a new name. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 05:38, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Because Tokyopop licensed it under that name, it ends up having to stay that way. However, I thought there was a rule that I came across once that said to use proper English in titles. So we may not be able to get it a better name, but I personally think ID_Entity looks better. I'll try and find the rule first, though.WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 12:13, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
I found the rule, but unfortunately it's used for music and the like; WP:NC. Does anyone know if there is a rule like it for comics or just a rule in general?WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 12:20, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
That page title has been bothering me for some time, I've just never done anything about it. In any case, WhiteArcticWolf, you may be thinking of WP:CAPS, which says to use common English capitalization rules, regardless of whatever stupid capitalization the company has the copyright/license/etc. under, although there may be more specific guidelines for this situation - one of you may want to ask on the animanga project talk page. —Dinoguy1000 16:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
The problem with this isn't a common naming issue or capitalization issue, it's a basic usability issue. The smallish capital "E" is actually "%E1%B4%87". The article title isn't even typeable. D'oh! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 19:35, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
I knew about the special "E" before you mentioned it - on the computer I'm currently using, it appears as a square. Looking through the page's history, you'll see that Remember the dot moved it to its current title from iD eNTITY on May 7, 2008, citing "corrected title" as the reason. In any case, there is a redirect from the old title (and from Id entity), so the page is definitely still reachable via a keyboard. —Dinoguy1000 19:46, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
But only if you happen to hit on the right combination of keys. I spent forever trying to wikilink the damn thing the other day, and wound up having to do a copy and paste. Hmm I'd looked through the history and must have missed that. I give up. I'll let someone else handle it. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 20:51, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
I think maybe going back to using a lowercase 'e' would be better as the character shows up as a '?' on my system, which I imagine could be very confusing to some readers. --Eruhildo (talk) 02:01, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Moved to iD_eNTITY with an abundance of redirects to accommodate various capitalizations. This is how it is on Tokyopop's site. Added a note to the talk page about issue. A little note shows up at the beginning of the article stating that it's not technically possible to have the "correct" name as the article name. Bleah! LOL --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 09:40, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


Okay, I think maybe this article, er, shouldn't be here. The lack of even the author's name in the article has bugged me from the start. So, I followed the link on this page to the author's xanga. The article was created by User:Ajshim, whose user page is a draft of the article. The story's author is Alex Shim, and it looks to be an amateur effort. It was immediately nominated for speedy delete but escaped due to ... I'm not sure, a technicality regarding the criteria under which it was nominated? Opinions? --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 02:14, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I vote to get rid of it. I think you mean this page, right? [4]--See that picture in the background? I think we've found the apparent manwha. Looks to me like no more than a comic created by some kid. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 02:25, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. Cute, but uh not notable. Just wanted a 2nd opinion. I will PROD it. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 02:45, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
Just wondering if you listed it yet. I'm not all to familiar with deleting pages, so forgive me if I'm wrong, but I think we have to list articles for deletion or the prod won't work.WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 21:18, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Nope. :) Just stick a prod tag on it and if after 5 days no one has objected, an admin will delete it. The tag sticks it into some sort of queue. (I learned this just recently myself!) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 21:26, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Ah, I get it now! Thanks! Not to mention you saved me from making some mistake later on. And I was just recently planning on prodding something myself. Thanks again! WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 21:37, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
You're welcome! It took me a long time to sort through, as well. :) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 21:53, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
A dated prod tag by itself does nothing at first. However, after five days have passed and it hasn't been removed, the tag sorts the page it's on into a category (I'm not sure which one, I'd have to look) at which point an admin will review the prod and, if it's valid and uncontested (since you can contest a prod without removing the tag), will go ahead and delete the article. Sorry for essentially rehashing what hamu2 sxaid above, but it's not like I've got much anything better to do ATM... ;) —Dinoguy1000 23:41, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Ooh if you're bored, could I pick your brain about the notability issue below? You've been around the A&M project for a while, so maybe you have some background as to how their notability guidelines came to be, what challenges they may have had, etc? Feel free to comment down there *points*. =D --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 23:46, 4 July 2008 (UTC)


I was wondering what the notability requirements for this project are? Guess we never really talked about it. I was using the guidelines set out by the Anime & Manga wikiproject since it's a child project of Comics that deals with the "same kind" of stuff this work group deals with. Namely, series/books have to pass WP:NB for books or have been published in at least two countries outside of the native country. Without this, very very very few "world comics" or even manga will pass WP:NB. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 21:48, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Seems good, although I'm willing to still accept manwha/manhua regardless, as it's market is small compared to the manga market. I'm fine with adding any as long as references can be dug up. And I've actually found that reference-finding is one of my pretty-much-useless talentsxD WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 23:56, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Reference-finding is probably the most un-usless talent on Wikipedia! =D I have trouble finding references that meet Wikipedia's guidelines, as non-American comics just don't get talked about much in the mainstream press, and almost never ever get reviewed by them. Even the publishers themselves have to use blog reviews in their advertising, LOL. I'm stuck at the "proving I'm not making this up" point in references, nothing going so far as to be able to show notability! (I was once challenged to prove that a Korean comic was actually published in Korea...yeah. So now I make a point of finding some publication evidence for every single country I claim, instead of just copying it verbatim from Anime News Network like everyone else.)--hamu♥hamu (TALK) 00:15, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Wow0.0 I can't believe someone would actually challenge that. I don't really read AM, but I've already noticed that it's hard to find anything, save for the publisher sites. A lot of anime and manga seem to be left alone for some reason when it comes to notability. Probably because there's just so much of it or people are afraid of rabid fandom;). I havn't really had that much trouble with finding refs; my first was the Lassie manga, but I had Collectonian to help my through that one and the worst one has been and is being Last Order: Final Fantasy VII. I'm still working on it, but comparing what it was before I started editing and right now...If it gets merged I swear I will scream=D But it's good to know we have two people great at finding references on this project. I think I may got to that List of Manwha/Tokyopop Manwha, click on a series, and just start improving the article.WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 00:27, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
(edit conflict) (in response to your above query) Unfortunately, I don't actually have a great deal of experience with notability at the article level... I usually stay away from articles without a clearly established notability. However, I really can't see what the problem would be for you guys to just use the animanga project's notability guidelines for now, since there shouldn't really be any significant difference between manga and manhwa/manhua notability-wise. you may want to ask on the animanga talk page, the project as a whole could probably answer your question better than I can. ;P —Dinoguy1000 23:58, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
This came up because someone slapped a notability tag on a recently-created stub and I got torked. :) It had several references, not third party but sufficient to establish that, yes, it has been published in (at least) five countries including the USA. Considering many (most?) AM or manhwa/manhua articles (stubs, in particular) have zero references and consist only of plot/characters, I was a bit peeved. =D Then I realized that in relation to this project, we'd never talked about notability, so... :) I'll make a post at A-M (MOS page probably) and await others' responses here, as well. Thanks, both of you! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 00:08, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Actually, I would go ahead and post it to the main project page, since it has a higher visibility than the MoS does... you could always cross-post it to the MoS page, though (or at least leave a short comment there pointing to the main discussion). —Dinoguy1000 00:18, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Oh whoops, I just posted it on the MOS seemed inhabited, LOL. I'll scoot to the main page now. :) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 00:34, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Manual of Style

Hey, I know this project has the "Exemplars" page available, but I was wondering what goes into/what is appropriate for something along the lines of a manual of style. Having something cohesive, something that can be pointed to, could be beneficial to all editors, including me, LOL. Here's a few areas I see in need of touching on:

  • Appropriate and inappropriate phraseology. For instance, use of a phrase like "manga-style manhwa."
  • How not to violate the Anime & Manga MoS. They have an enormous amount of rules that directly impact what can and cannot be done with articles about non-Japanese comics. Many are not intuitive to people who aren't deeply involved with that project.
  • How to avoid unnecessary lingo, especially using non-English words with varying meanings to different people. There's a proper time and place for it, and outside of that, it just causes problems. (I took heed of this myself and suggested changing Category Manhwa to Category Korean comics.)
  • What should be covered in an article. For instance, some projects only allow certain versions of a release to be covered, in the infobox, in the article body, or both.
  • Help for determining notability. It's not as easy as just saying "follow WP:NB." I know there is help in place for a lot of what's covered outside of this work group, but at least for Asian comics, this group will use a lot of the same sources as Anime & Manga, and it's helpful to know whether this project adheres to that project's guidelines and MoS on notability (including the additional criteria for notability they created).
  • Help with categorization.

I'm sure there's more stuff, but those are the things off the top of my head. I really feel this would be beneficial, and I really want input from people who are already established in this project. If there is support for doing something like a manual of style, then each point can be discussed individually, to avoid an enormous, incomprehensible Mega-Topic of Doom. =D --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 23:43, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

-removed-WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 04:00, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, I meant to have the individual issues discussed separately, and just discuss here whether something like an MoS is needed. Are you saying yes, we need one or no, we don't? :) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 04:05, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
xD My mistake then. Yeah, I think a MOS is needed. Just because my comment was ungodly long, I'm going to remove it; I'll bring the info back when the time comes:) Ah, but while we're on a MOS topic, should we also include a little bit better...Assessment box-thing? We go up to B-class, but have not at all added C-class, and GA and FA are missing the boxes, though I assume it's because there aren't any. Assessments and MOS are, in some way, connected to each other. Should we update that, too?
I haven't given assessments much thought at all b/c article improvement hasn't really started yet. I did assess a lot of them in a super-loose way. I think the box doesn't show GA or FA b/c there aren't any, and C-class was just created a few days ago. I agree MoS and assessment go hand in hand, and we can definitely take a look at any special needs this category might have that need explanation in that area! :) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 04:17, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Oh FYI, on the project template "image=yes" and "infobox=yes" means the article needs those items, not that it has them. :)--hamu♥hamu (TALK) 04:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
I knew I was not remembering something there...This is why I should edit so late (it's past midnight where I live)xD Thanks again! Random, but do you know why Off*Beat is on the list? Wouldn't it just be under US comics? Also, isn't manga not supposed to be under our scope, too? I realize it may influence some series, but I thought that the Anime/manga Wikiproject took care of all of that. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 04:41, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
What list do you mean? If it's in something other than the OEL category, then it's just a miscategorization. If you're talking about the project tag, well, I figured they might as well be here as well as the US work group, for workability and to avoid reinventing the wheel. The resources used and editors those articles attract are going to be largely the same as world comics rather than 'typical' US comics. It's a back-end, editor-use thing rather than a front-end, wikipedia reader thing, if that makes sense (i.e. no one's gonna go to Category:Manhwa titles and see OEL titles) That was my thinking anyway. What are your thoughts? (P.S. If you see OELs that are missing the US-work-group tag, it's a mistake and please add it!) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 05:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Most of the MoS guidelines follow WP:MOS, with the comics specific stuff here. I am unsure a work group needs its own MoS but it might be helpful to have a few pointers if the information at the previous two links need clarifying. Might be best to get a couple of articles up to FA/GA and use them as examples (as it is usually simpler to look at an example than read through a MoS and try and get everything). Too many MoS could also end up being confusing and pptentially unhelpful if people have to check too many pages for the answer to their problem. (Emperor (talk) 21:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC))
I agree it would be weird for one work group to have an entire MoS. I don't know how to handle the info, though. A lot of the stuff in the editorial guidelines just doesn't apply (or is impossible to ever get) to something like Asian comics, and I think editors of this stuff will just ignore it because they can't see its applicability. A tl;dr situation. (How to solve this? Ideas?) Honestly, Asian comics should, for all intents and purposes, be handled just like manga, and manga aren't handled according to this project's guidelines (for better and for worse, IMO). Editors are trying to follow that project's rules for this project's articles, and in some ways I understand why. Meanwhile, the articles are full of non-English words (emulating Anime & Manga articles); are being put in "Anime & Manga only" categories like "shonen," which is understandably confusing to editors since "shonen" is used in English for more than just Japanese comics; I'm having to continually remove JPOV nonsense phrases like "manga-style manhwa". At this rate, I don't think there's any chance there will ever be any GA/FA articles. I'm just really discouraged right now. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 22:34, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Inclusiveness of articles

Okay, I posed the question about setting guidelines for how inclusive articles should be. For instance, the Anime & Manga project prohibits inclusion in the article body of any information about a series' release other than Japan and English-language, because if people want to know about other countries they should go read that country's wikipedia. WhiteArcticWolf says we "should" have the same prohibition. I am curious as to why. :) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 04:11, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

My reasoning is that it's just unneeded and can easily be put in the infobox:D Of course there are exceptions, but unless that release was something special or was significant, I don't see why it's needed other than to bulk up the article.WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 04:15, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
I feel pretty strongly that it's useful information and contributes toward an article's completeness. But you make a good point that we don't want to contribute to bulk by putting it one place where it might be better included elsewhere. This dovetails right in with possibly having the information present on publishers' articles. Right now those are huge, ugly lists of varying completeness and usefulness, that make mention of 12 million manga, stick everything else at the bottom, and usually ignore domestic releases. I've been pondering how to better manage those pages, and if they can be brought up to snuff, then the soundbytes provided by the series infobox about "other" releases would act as links to useful, usable info. I feel it's important the info be on Wikipedia somewhere. Are you open to that? --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 04:29, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm open to that. The issue doesn't matter that much to me, and I've actually used the German release of Cherry Juice in the article (mostly because it was so small and I was annoyed by how little info I had). It's most useful for articles that are small, too, because they need the bulking up. Plus adding extra releases gives the article a larger "Release" section, which of course makes the article look more professional and will increase the chances of it getting to GA status. *thinking way ahead there*WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 04:36, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Good point! I also feel that when still a stub, it can help establish notability, since it can take time and collaboration to get those third-party media references. Anime-focused sites like ANN and AoD are skimpy on non-Japanese stuff and it's hard to find other comprehensive sites that aren't centered around scanlations. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 05:08, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
I don't think there is anything specific in the Comic Project guidelines but we never put in details on languages other than English and the original release. With popular titles this could get out of hand and as different distributors might package things up differently there could be the need for substantial coverage which could lead to massive bloat. You could easily end up with a substantial section of the article devoted to translations. (Emperor (talk) 20:56, 7 July 2008 (UTC))
Really? I'm quite surprised. Is that information not considered important? I don't even see the point of listing other publishers in the infobox if it won't be provided somewhere what the series was called in that language. Telling who published it and what it was called? I don't see how that could ever be bloat or require substantial coverage. I'm really disappointed and actually quite shocked that such information would be intentionally omitted. =( Oh and to add, I read the archived discussions at Anime & Manga on this subject. It was spurred by what really was enormous bloat, when editors would add entire voice actor lists for a dozen langauges of a long-running anime. I think there can be some kind of happy medium to keep that under control while not saying "if it ain't English, we don't care." --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 21:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
The details of, say, the German language reprint of... Batman: The Killing Joke is of importance to the German Wikipedia project. It is of some minor interest to the English language Wikipedia but that is balanced out by the opening of the door to vast bloat in material that is best dealt with elsewhere.
After all we don't even include comprehensive publication details for all novels, e.g. Great Expectations and even recent books are pushing it rather Goldfinger (novel)#Publication history (and that still only really covers the English language releases), ultimately a link to an external sites (comprehensive lists like the Goldfinger one are best left to fan sites or databases) or, in the case we are talking about, the specific language.
Feel free to ask the Comics Project if you like - that is just my opinion and extrapolation from the lack of precedent for such a thing. (Emperor (talk) 21:16, 7 July 2008 (UTC))
That's a good point, and I hadn't thought about it in the context of other types of books (though I do like learning that kind of info and would consider it an asset to a book article). I guess it's the fact that everything in this category is non-English, to a large degree, and part of its significance (IMO) is its international nature. I can't read German, Chinese, French, etc, so I can't look the series up on those Wikipedias. I can read a decent amount of Japanese, but I can't look anything up on a series if I don't even know its name in that language. Despite the practice, this isn't a done deal at Anime & Manga, as attempts to formally a enact a prohibitive policy have been repeatedly blocked. I mean, most of the articles in this work group are just plot and characters. The bloat isn't coming from publication info, and probably never will, IMO. But, can this issue be addressed by the publisher articles (see below)? --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 21:49, 7 July 2008 (UTC)


Can anyone help setting up a bot to archive this talk page after X number of days? What number do you think is good for X? 14? 7? --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 08:05, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Anime and manga uses the following code (see also [5]):
{{archive box|auto=yes|<br>[[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Mascot|Mascot Discussions]]<br />[[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Index|Archive Topical Index]]}}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Index|mask=Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Archive <#>|leading_zeros=0|indexhere=no}}
|maxarchivesize = 200K
|counter = 29
|algo = old(15d)
|archive = Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Archive %(counter)d
Note that the above code includes the archive index box, an archiving notice, and the actual auto-archive template. For this page, I'd recommend an archive age of 30 days, and you could probably get away with one as high as 60 days for now. In any case, some possible code for this page (with the aforementioned 30-day cutoff) would be along the lines of
{{archive box|auto=yes}}
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/World comics work group/Index|mask=Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/World comics work group/Archive <#>|leading_zeros=0|indexhere=no}}
|maxarchivesize = 200K
|counter = 1
|algo = old(30d)
|archive = Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics/World comics work group/Archive %(counter)d
You may also want to look at the documentation on the archive box, auto-archiving notice, Indexer bot, and MiszaBot. Other than that, if you need any further assistance, feel free to ask. —Dinoguy1000 18:42, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I read the page and it confused me. That's why I asked for help, LOL. Thanks! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 20:36, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Do you want one of us to add it here? Set for 30 days as Dinoguy suggests? I recently update the robot indexing my talk page so it is still fresh in my mind. (Emperor (talk) 20:49, 7 July 2008 (UTC))
I gave it a go, but it looks different than what I see on the main Comics talk you mind taking a look? --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 21:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Ah yes I just spotted it. I had a quick look - it seems fine. We'll wait and see if it does the archiving later and then if need be we can tweak it. (Emperor (talk) 21:18, 7 July 2008 (UTC))

Setting up task lists

Okay, this is my inexperience showing though. I want to start organizing some to-do lists to go on the project page, and I'm trying to figure out the "how" of it all. Here is a nice bulleted list of Stuff I Want to Know:

  • Is the Task Template still actively used?
  • Since darn near all manhwa and manhua articles would fit into at least one of the categories, is there a way to have, like, another one, too...or something like that? We will need a few more fields, and I'd like to be able to do it in bulleted format to allow for addition of brief notes. And I don't want to flood the existing list with stuff no one outside of the world comics group has ever heard of.
  • Is there a way to get transcluded lists (if I'm using that term correctly) that pull from the "needs image" and "needs infobox" portion of the project template on the talk page? Ex: Category:Musicians work group articles needing infoboxes
  • Is there a way to have a "watch list" for recent creations/recent changes to world comics articles? I swear I saw that "somewhere" on my journeys around Wikipedia.
  • Is there a way to make a template in this vein Category:Musicians work group articles needing discographies to slap on articles that need assistance with adding native-language characters, particularly for creators' names? B/c of the research or specialized knowledge this requires I think it'd be useful to help editors not get stuck on this aspect during article creation/improvement, and allow other editors with the needed knowledge to just zoom through a list and complete this taks for chunks of articles at a time. Do we, uh, have to get permission to make something like that? LOL

Okay, shutting up now! I've begun a list in one of my sandboxes about articles that could/should be created, and I'm like...well it's not doing anyone else any good there. :) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 20:35, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

That link doesn't work. I assume you mean: Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/Task template?
Yes it is "active" although there isn't a lot of movement beyond people adding redlinks and removing them when they get started.
I'd suggest adding a to do list to this page so that the project can focus attention on specific articles. I suspect this would work well for the other work groups and might encourage a bit more activity - it'd mean each project's requirements wouldn't get lost in the mass of other links.
On a watchlist it is doable although I am unsure how. I have suggested making {{comicsproj}} create specific categories for the different work groups so you'd have "world work groups that require an infobox" and "world work group creators that require an infobox". This would allow the work groups to spot specific things within their remit which need work. Best people to ask are J Greb and/or Hiding.
I am unsure about the last bit - it could possibly be added {{comicsproj}} as one of the variables that can be flagged (like cleanup/image/infobox/future) and this would then make its won custom category that cna be checked and cleaned out.
Hope that helps. (Emperor (talk) 16:34, 21 June 2008 (UTC))
Sure does! I will look into the to-do list and go from there. The rest, well, those may be future to-dos! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 22:43, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Tried the to-do template but it gave me fits, so I threw something together on my own. It's not perfect, but I had to get that stuff off my sandbox and out for the public to use, LOL. Right now it's mainly a "to be created" list. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 05:47, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Gave you fits how? I've used them beofre and they work fine. I've added one here and will experiment with it ( we can always get rid of it). (Emperor (talk) 13:47, 22 June 2008 (UTC))
OH that works great! I had put it on the to-do page itself, and when I'd edit the box and hit save, it'd threw me into some non-existent page, at /World comics work group/to-do/to-do list, and I couldn't "get out." I have no idea. And I was having trouble making it link page headings, but that was probably my inexperience. Now that I see it done, I can learn from it. It works so much better on this page (and is more logical, too!). I really like it on this page as it really calls attention to it. Thank you so much!
I've also made a few suggestions about getting {{comicsproj}} working with work groups so it might be possible to do things like link image requests through to a category holding all articles within the world comics work group remit that have been tagged as needing an image (or infobox or clean-up) which will help "automate" things a bit, so we only need flag the things that really really need doing as a priority in the to do box and then have a longer list/category at least partly run through the headers (so I included in the to do list those comics that major films are based on or are based on the same material as major films, as that is the kind of thing people could be interested in - it tends to raise their profile and I know information can be patchy, as I went looking for some of the CTHD a while back and found very little). We'll see how that goes - if it all works well I can roll out similar todo lists for all the projects. It could prove very useful. (Emperor (talk) 19:58, 22 June 2008 (UTC))
Awesome ideas! For now, I wanted to get new articles listed in the to-do list primarily, some more high priority than others, mainly to help with that little stub template problem I caused. These are titles that have been licensed or published in English, creators whose works already have articles on Wikipedia, and publishing-related stuff that I have run into (as you can tell, that last list is kind of cruddy). I thought those subjects would be the ones English editors would be most likely interested in and likely to find at least some info on without knowing Korean. I threw these together "fast and dirty" style, and it probably shows, but I tried toput external links next to as many series titles as possible, to give editors something a starting point and so they can quickly figure out whether it should be a priority or not. Also, my sandbox was about to explode. :) Love your ideas about prioritizing. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 22:49, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
Just a quick update to say we now have the relevant categories for infobox requests and the like so I have added them in as a "more" link in the to do list above. Feel free to add ones that specifically need infoboxes as a priority and the "more" link will let people peruse the the whole list (I don't think it has yet been populated as they all seem empty last time I checked).
As that seems a helpful way of pointing people directly to things flagged as needed I'll probably drop that into the other projects too. (Emperor (talk) 14:00, 8 July 2008 (UTC))

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

  • The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
  • The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
  • A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:03, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Just a note to say this is now working for the Comics Project header so feel free to use it. You can even see the world comics work group C-class articles here: Category:C-Class World comics articles (not very exciting at the moment). (Emperor (talk) 14:16, 8 July 2008 (UTC))

Cleanup of publisher articles

If anyone's dared to look at articles like Daiwon, Tong Li Comics, or Chuang Yi, they're (IMO) not very user-friendly, and because of varying ways of listing data, some of the titles listed there that don't have articles are kind of useless (as in, you can't figure out what series they're talking about.) They also tend to totally ignore domestic releases. In the grand scheme of article cleanup & creation, I thought because these are so broad and touch on so many series in a small way, publisher/distributor might be candidates for cleanup & creation priority.

I've been playing around with ways to usefully format the lists of releases. This could be a way to include information that could be considered bloat in series articles, but I'm aware that a lot of table cells might be left blank. This is actually useful IMO because it allows editors with that knowledge to see the need and just drop it in. User:Hamuhamu/Sandbox The example is for a fictional Korean publisher - I just grabbed titles and stuck them in. I'd also like to hear ideas on how to keep this from turning into bloat. IMO, the huge, biased lists already present are bloat. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 21:28, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I've added a few sections to Tong Li Comics and that is along the lines of what we'd want to see in such an article with an eye to expanding the history and, ultimately, possibly splitting off the titles into their own article.
What you've sandboxed seems reasonable - tables seem to be the way people are going with lists of publications (see e.g. List of DC Comics publications and List of Marvel Comics publications) and I do think information like the year, the creator, the original title and the original publications are the kind of things that would be helpful for people as they can help someone who might not be sure of the name of the title they are looking for (I've pushed for creator to be added to the limited series at least). (Emperor (talk) 22:51, 7 July 2008 (UTC))
The other two are worse - we need to use the company infobox and keep the section headers as simple as possible (Chuang Yi is especially bad in regard to the latter - it could be simplified to a "titles" section followed by ones for "Chinese-language" and "English-language" with that having a subsection of "English-language magazines". There is no need for a lengthy sentence - if there is a need for more explanation one could add in an opening paragraph). (Emperor (talk) 22:56, 7 July 2008 (UTC))
I took a look at your Tong Li changes, and yes, the info there now is so biased (though true) and incomplete. I've been looking at how the Japanese publishers and magazines are handled, and it seems a lot of the lists are often shifted into the relevant magazines' articles to prevent bloat; when those get too big, they are split off, like with List of series run in Weekly Shōnen Jump. Having an article for each notable magazine is a goal of mine, so that's workable too, as time passes. I, er, was most definitely not a business student; I don't get the financial and organizational terms I often see on company profiles, which has held me back from improving beyond the most skimpy of infoboxes on these articles. If I can find the info, can you suggest an editor that can help flesh out those parts of the article? Meanwhile, I will tinker with the workability of tables. These can help relocate this kind of information from series articles, as discussed above. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 01:50, 8 July 2008 (UTC)


Did some work on Daewon Media, including moving the article to the company's current name. I've learned it's actually a rather large company, with its fingers in many different pies. Most of the history section is from the company's website, but I've been able to fill in a lot with outside references. I'm stuck on many of them but they're okay for now, I think(?). I doubt some of the older stuff will ever be found in English, but I'm surprised I can't find news items about things like Yu-Gi-Oh licensing; I know it's true b/c if you go to the series Korean website, Daiwon CI's logo is on it, but I'm stumped as to how to source it. News is probably all in Korean and Japanese. Opinions about the "okay" level of sourced-only-from-company-website info? Also, suggestions for how to list company website as a general reference? (not listed at all yet)

After history, I'd like to have a subsidiaries section, with sub-sections for each. I'm thinking for Daiwon CI (comics publisher), it'll just be a brief intro about when it was founded, and its magazine/imprints. Then series can be listed on articles for those magazines. Apparently, Haksan is a subsidiary of Daewon, and it already has its own (very brief) article. Considering merging the existing (tiny) Haksan article into Daewon's and then making articles for Haksan's magazines (there is already one for Booking). Opinions? I've not dealt with this type of thing before. I actually put the info on the article before I meant to, but then decided it wasn't worth undoing. I also have a few sources for all that business-money-type stuff if anyone wants to help with the infobox. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 08:12, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

That is a big improvement. The sections can be trimmed down further as "published by Daewon", etc. redundant but you could start the section "Books published by Daewon include:", which is always more friendly than just jumping straight into a list. (Emperor (talk) 14:08, 8 July 2008 (UTC))
Thanks. I will keep going in this vein, keeping in mind it will be a work in progress for a long time, given the broadness of the company and its number of subsidiaries. And the fact I have trouble figure out what subsidiary does what sometimes. :) The company website listed something called Game Champ to do their Nintendo stuff, but all the Nintendo stuff I saw listed Daewon Media or the old name, Daiwon C&A, but it's not really covered on their company website. That may be murky for a bit. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 18:04, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

← I have revamped Daewon Media and created Daiwon C.I., Comic Champ, and List of series run in Comic Champ. Comic Champ is the oldest of Daiwon's and most frequently published; the list of titles should be shorter for other mags. There are about two dozen titles on the list's talk page that I want to look over before posting them to the article. If anyone wants to look these articles over, I'd be appreciative. I don't know circulation info, don't know how to get it. Everything is in Korean, which takes me a very, very long time. :) (I'm not done, just want to know if I'm on the right track.) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 06:59, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

List of manhwa

Fired up a new discussion on this article's talk page! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 18:45, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

A few categories revisited

Pardon any idiocy I may express here. :) Okay, right now Category:Hong Kong comics is in both Category:Asian comics and in Category:Manhua, the latter of which is in Category:Asian comics itself. So it's in two places at different "levels." Is this a problem? (There are a few articles just in the general Hong Kong comics category that are unnecessarily doubly-categorized but that's a quick fix.) The reason I bring this up is in response to a query I made regarding Category:Singaporean comics and its subcats. I've been assured that "manhua" is an appropriate term for Singaporean comics, and I think it would be beneficial to have the category fall under Category:Manhua b/c they are manhua. However, I think it would be good to still have the category show up under Category:Asian comics as well, without having to dig through the manhua category to find it, like Hong Kong comics current does. Does this make sense? Am I even correct, LOL?

Side note, an editor familiar with the comics industry in Singapore felt having a single category for creators, be they writers or artists, was fine based on the small size of the country's industry. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 04:52, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

On the primary concern... IMO, this is one of the rare cases where the tertiary cats (Hong Kong and Singapore) should be listed under the secondary (Manhua) and primary (Asian). My thoughts on it are that "Manhua" is not a familiar term, so it is not a natural navpoint, even though it is the proper grouping for the Hong Kong, Taiwanese, and Singapore titles.
As for the side point... a "Creator(s)" field can be added, but I wouldn't do it at the expense of "Author" and "Illustrator". - J Greb (talk) 10:52, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
Oh regarding the side point, I meant in the categories, not in the infobox. :) I meant the editor felt the current category for Singaporean comics creators was fine, and didn't need to be split into authors and illustrators, the way it is for other countries' creators. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 21:30, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
This goes back to my previous point. Is "Manhua" a style/type of comic or is it the equivalent of saying "Comics made in China"? So do we actually need a Chinese comics category? This would then allow Manhua to cover "Chinese comics" which include comic produced in the Chinese speaking world like Hong Kong, Taiwan and Singapore. This would set it as a separate beast to the Asian comics category and we would list the different countries comics under Asian comics as well as under Manhua.
The case of Hong Kong is a slightly separate one due to history - it wasn't part of China technically for 100 years and it is during that time that they produced a lot of comics. To call them Chinese comics strictly speaking would be inaccurate. Given the fact that they produced so much of the Manhua output it makes sense for them to have their own category.
The same situation cropped up with Category:Manga - the tightened the definition to mean "comics created in Japan" which meant a "Japanese comics" category was redundant and it also meant that things like OEL Manga were largely cast out into other categories.
So that is the choice. Is "Manhua" "comics made in China" or "Chinese-langauge comics"? If the former Taiwan and Singaporean comics can't be under it, if the latter you will need a "Chinese comics" category.
Either way Hong Kong comics is an exception to the general rule - at one point it was its own part of Asian comics, although it is now part of China so should be under comics made in China as well as the Asian comics category.
Manhua would suggest we are looking at "Chinese-language comics" in which case we'd need "Category: Chinese comics" for comics created in China. (Emperor (talk) 14:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC))
I'm sorry it's taken me so long to understand this all. I've had to work in and around the categories a bit longer to really "get it". These are the same kind of ongoing organizational issues encountered by Wikiproject Chinese-language entertainment for actors, music, and singers. "Manhua", just like "manga", has more than one meaning, but I think the cleanest use for Wikipedia categorization is analogous to the way "manga" is used: "comics originally produced in the Chinese-language." This means comics from PRC, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore are manhua - basically anywhere Chinese is the major language. I see no reason for any cultural-related category like this one to squish Hong Kong and PRC together, regardless of political status. HK movies and music haven't been merged into PRC's, either, and won't be. The languages remain different, and endeavors that encompass both, say PRC and HK, are simply categorized as both, just as any other collab would be. So basically, Chinese-speaking countries' comics need to both be separate and distinct, as well as lumped under "manhua." Again, I'm so sorry I couldn't get this all sewn up right at the start. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 21:30, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
hrm... If I'm reading that right, then "Manhua titles" would be a category in and of itself with subs of "Chinese comic book titles", "Hong Kong comic book titles", "Singapore comic book titles", and "Taiwanese comic book titles". "Manhua" would become a sparsely populated grouping category at that point. (As an aside, this would also allow 1) a streamlining of the auto-cat setting in the infobox and 2) allow it to be used to point out articles that need to be looked at for fine tuning.)
It still leaves a question though, Should there be a "Chinese comics" and "Taiwanese comics" cat to serve the same function as "Hong Kong comics", "Singaporean comics", and "Japanese comics". It looks to me that the "Foo comics" are structure for all aspects of comics in an area, where "Manhua" and "Manga" are limited to publications. (Similar points can be raised for creating a "Korean comics" category.) - J Greb (talk) 22:40, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
At this point I'm so confused I can't even answer. There are just too many levels of organization and no matter how often I look at them I just can't get it, and I seem to be confusing everyone else. I don't know what ""Manhua" would become a sparsely populated grouping category at that point" means. This is my lack of experience and familiarity with the organizational lingo speaking, I'm sorry. I'm also not sure what you mean that "manhua" and "manga" are limited to publications. Also, regarding seems less complicated b/c we're only dealing with one country. Korean comics = manhwa, so the terms can be used interchangeably. Using "Korean comics" in the categorical structure may actually be better for consistency. I consistently am running into issues of confusion b/c Japanese terms have been allowed such prevalent use on Wikipedia, which really screws up every other language and country. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 23:29, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
The thing is though that "Japanese-language comics" is almost identical to "Comics created in Japan" as "Korean-language comics" is identical to "Comics created in Korea", however, "Chinese-language comics" means "Comics created in China/Hong Kong/Taiwan/Singapore" for a variety of political reasons and it is these reasons that can make things like putting "Taiwanese comics" under a category that means "Comics created in China" a very sensitive issue, more so than trying to tease out Yugoslavian comics vs Croatian/Serbian/Macedonian comics.
Under this formulation you would then have "Chinese comics", "Singaporean comics", "Hong Kong comics" and "Taiwanese comics" under both "Asian comics" and "Manhua" where the latter is out on its own (probably just as a child of Category:Comics types, which technically it should be a child of anyway).
You could have "Manga" and "Japanese comics" but the two categories intersect perfectly, as "manga" is just the Japanese for "comics" (ditto Manhwa for Korea), so you don't need two categories and manga and manhwa are the more commonly known terms so we might as well stick with that. Clearly manhua is different and needs more categories to deal with it. (Emperor (talk) 23:34, 27 June 2008 (UTC))
A few things for clarity, and most of these are from my understanding:
  • The "Foo comics" categories appear to cover all aspects of comics in a particular country or region. This includes publication titles, but it also includes creative people, publishers, characters, etc.
  • "Manhua" and "Manhwa" currently only collect series titles.
  • "Manga" looks to be a special case. Mostly this is because it is a relatively familiar word in English. "Japanese comics" could collapse into it entirely and the average user would understand what the category is. The same wouldn't currently happen with "Manhua" and "Manhwa".
  • While I'm aware of the touchy aspect of separating things by "China" and "Taiwan", there appears that the comics are culturally different - tone, style, subject mater, and so on — otherwise there should only be one grouping. I know that may be overly simplistic, even nieve, but I'm looking at the comics as comics.
  • As for my comment about "sparsely populated"... basically what, moving the 4 subs under "Manhua" (reading it as "Chinese (general) comics titles) would make "Manhua"'s direct content:
    1. Chinese comics title (sub-cat);
    2. Hong Kong comics title (sub-cat);
    3. Singapore comics title (sub-cat);
    4. Taiwanese comics title (sub-cat); and
    5. Articles that cannot be slotted into those four, or have yet to be slotted into them.
- J Greb (talk) 00:35, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • "Manhua" and "manhwa" categories currently include creators, publishers, characters, etc.  :)
  • Manga isn't actually any more special than anything else b/c Wikipedia, for classification purposes, does not use the word "manga" the way it's generally used in English (or in Japanese). WP uses a niche definition, one held by a very vocal contingent of anime-manga fans, which means exactly the same as Japanese comics. So they call the project and category "manga", whilst excluding material the general English-speaking population and most English-language publishers classify as "manga." I understand the exclusion 100%, but it does make the terminology murky at times. I have no idea why there is a Category:Manga and a Category:Japanese comics. The subcats in the latter show up in the former, although the reverse is not true (but should be). IMO, there should be only one category there.
  • I don't think I catch your meaning about China and Taiwan. From an end-user point of view, I think it's good to have each country's category listed in Category:Asian comics and Category:Manhua. I know it seems like duplication, but people will look for them both ways - because they are looking for, say, comics stuff from Taiwan and because they are looking for Chinese-language comics stuff ("stuff" meaning titles, creators, publishers, etc). Lumping them all together contradicts the way other Chinese-language media are handled, but not having also having something to bring them together under the common language also makes things difficult for end-users. (And for me, LOL).
  • I think it's best to rename categories currently using the word "manhwa" to "Korean comics". I'm happy to make the updates on the articles. Opinions?
  • Also, I'm sorry this is so confusing! I find comfort in the fact that other Wikiprojects have the same problem, so it's not that we're dense or anything. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 01:25, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

(unindent) OK cool - looks like things are moving along so the proposals are:

That all seems pretty straightforward. (Emperor (talk) 15:59, 28 June 2008 (UTC))

Yes! Sounds great! Again I'm sorry we had to have a small re-do. I just had to work in the category for awhile before I really understood it. So just to make sure I'm totally solid, Cat Manhua will be under Cat Comic types, and will contain the four country-specific cats. The four country cats will also be under Cat Asian comics. Cat Manhua itself, will not be under Cat Asian Comics and thus it's necessary that Cat Manhua not contain any articles that aren't sorted into a subcat. Is that right? Regarding disambiguation, this is what I've been pretty much following, using best judgment as I go along. Where will Category:Manhua stubs be? Since it's an editor tool, not an end-user tool it doens't really matter that much, just curious. Holler when things are rearranged and I will happily change the categories on the articles. Thank you again! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 19:47, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
Yes that seems about right. Not a big deal - in an expanding area like this it can take a bit to get the lie of the land so adjustments like this happen and shouldn't be a big deal (I'll look into possible doing it without a CfD - if I am the only editor of the categories I can delete them. However, it isn't a problem as long as we are all on the same page. A robot will do all the changes). Manhua stubs would go under Manhua I think - it is now a useful stub as it covers the output of 4 countries - which addresses some of the template discussion concerns. (Emperor (talk) 20:35, 28 June 2008 (UTC))
Hey, just checking in about this. I wasn't sure what the next step was in getting the categories renamed and whatnot. If I dropped the ball, apologies! :) --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 02:56, 13 July 2008 (UTC)


Okay, so I've been reading a bit of the discussion on the main talk page and revisited the short disambiguation discussion above, and it's only just now starting to sink in. A few points/inquiries:

  • We have to rename a shitload of articles in this category to disambig as "comic(s?)" instead of "manhwa" or whatever. This is because the Anime & Manga project refuses to use English; thus editors who create articles for media closely related to manga likewise refuse to use English. If someone wants to move those articles, update all the appropriate wikilinks, and move every new article that gets created under the wrong name (which will be all of them), be my guest, but I am not up either to carrying out the task or getting bitched at by irate editors. I'm not saying it's "right", but the status quo set by another project makes things very difficult in this area. Again.
  • For anthology magazines that serialize comics, what is the recommended disambig term? When I came to this project, there were only two articles that fell in this category. One was called "Booking (anthology)" and the other was called "Wink magazine." I clearly had to move the latter b/c of the capitalization and just eeny-meenie-miney-mo'd it and went with "Wink (anthology)". An editor from Anime & Manga bitched at me for it, but when I asked for suggestions he of course had nothing to say so I just left it. =P
  • Sanmao (comic book character) was moved to Sanmao (comics). So is it still considered an article about the character Sanmao or is it now supposed to be about Sanmao the series? The ultra-bottom-level disambiguation confused me, and I even changed the infobox and category. I'm not as stupid as I seem; I've simply been editing Wikipedia for only two months is all, and this stuff is not as instinctive for me as for others.

Thanks for input! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 05:18, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

There's an ongoing discussion regarding interpretation of WP:NCC of late. (It's unfortunately becoming a game of musical chairs.)
That said, I have a few questions.
What is the dab term that the anime project prefers? If more than one, please list.
Also, unless there is more than one publication, perhaps "(publication)" would be the better solution for your "anthology" naming concern. (I haven't looked at the articles in question, just am going by your comments above and NCC.)
And if no one has already mentioned it: Welcome! And thanks for your help in developing this great thing we call WikiPedia : ) - jc37 05:31, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Yes, I've tried to get caught up with the dab discussion and I think my brain exploded. I commend you all for undertaking the task, LOL.
  • A&M uses "manga." A lot of the Korean and Chinese comics currently in this category used to be in that category or were otherwise created by similar-minded editors, consequently they are dabbed with "(manhwa)" and "(manhua)" generally. I've even created a few myself, out of reflex. Stupidly, all three words mean "comics" in different languages. In article bodies (which haven't had much chance for improvement yet), I'm trying to move toward using English instead of cool foreign words but it will be a constant battle of reversion and explaining WP:ENGLISH to editors. I don't actually have a problem moving the articles to an English dab term, I'm just wary. And weary. :)
  • The mags are periodicals like Comic Champ, if that helps any. I'll look at NCC again, as well, as I need a refresher. Sometimes too much policy in too short a time leads to everything leaking out like a sieve.
  • Thanks so much! It's adventure! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 05:48, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • OK, and thank you for the information. While WP:ENGLISH is what I was thinking of too, I'll keep the other terms in mind for some discussions that I expect in the future.
  • And you sound like me:
  • "Every edit's an adventure!" - : ) - jc37 06:05, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

While I've got no opinion on the Animanga project's use of "manga" for disambiguation (though it's possibly because the term is widely known enough that it could be considered English in the same sense any loanword might), I may be able to help you out with Sanmao (comics): generally, the AM project disambiguates character articles with the name of the series, not with "character", "manga", "comic", etc. Of course, now that I actually *looked* at his article, I'm not sure what good that would do with Sanmao, since I don't think we have any comparable examples from anime or manga. =P —Dinoguy1000 17:21, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

  • "Manga" isn't a true loanword - too new, too many meanings, too little use in the general population, can be described better and less ambiguously in English, and (unintentionally?) serves only to make Japanese comics seem different and more special than the rest of the world's comics, which they aren't. "Ballet" is a true loanword. However, it'll never change and I realize this was no one's intent. Meanwhile it sets a very odd standard for other projects to work around. :)
  • Thanks for the info about disambiguating character names; that's an interesting take on it. To me, using "comics" to disambiguate a character name (or a real person) just feels weird. It makes me think it must be about the series "Sanmao." Or I saw "Ralph Macchio (comics)" the other day, and my instinct was that Ralph Macchio, the actor that played in The Karate Kid, must have become a character in some Karate Kid comics (illogical, I know!). Turns out Ralph Macchio is a comic artist. Of course these things don't actually matter once a person looks at the article, LOL. I think WP:NCC recommends only disambiguating with a series name once the more primary terms are no longer available, so I don't think we'd be able to use series name as a disambiguator for a character like Sanmao, even if the series wasn't named after him. Now that I've read through the very lengthy discussion on the project's main talk page, I think (?) I understand it all a bit better.
  • This reminds me, Munsu (Shin Angyo Onshi) needs to be moved b/c the series name is wrong. And I don't know what to change it to b/c of the conflicting disambiguation policies between the two projects. If it goes to "Munsu (comics)" someone will try to rip my throat out and if it goes to "Munsu (Blade of the Phantom Master)" it'll violate this project's dab rules. And there is no way in HELL I'm asking about it at the A&M talk page, and reopening all the stupid B.S. from before. If everyone could just agree that a comic is a comic, no matter where it comes from, then this wouldn't be a problem. I don't give a crap if it was published in Japan a couple of months before Korea; it's still just a damn comic and that's what it should be called. *waves angry fist* LOL! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 19:42, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
I changed it to Munsu (Blade of the Phantom Master) just to keep the damn peace. Its workable. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 23:27, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Chinese-language stubs

Can someone please make some more stubs about some Chinese-language comics? We're at barely over 60 right now, but I'm still afraid The Powers That Be will try to axe the stub template and lump it in with every other language, thus making things difficult for the future. The "More" link in the to-do tempate at the top of the page leads to a huge list of things that are licensed in English or otherwise could certainly use articles. All the manhua stuff is in the 2nd table at the bottom; it's just a list I threw together, by no means complete. I'm struggling trying to do everything at once. Thanks! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 00:13, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll try and make some tomorrow. We might want to try and improve that List of manhua article, by the way. I usually would go there to pick up series to make into articles, but how it is now is pretty annoying to me for some reason. I feel navigating lists is much easier when it's aplhabetical, like the List of licensed manga in English, and it encourages people to add them on the spot. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 02:12, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your help!! We need articles about authors, publishers, and publications, not just individual titles, too. List of manhua does need revisiting. It's a little different than the manga list. It does not focus on titles licensed in English and, unlike List of manhwa, wasn't done willy-nilly. The bulk of the work was done by an editor I recognize from Wikiproject Hong Kong, from a bit more of a historical/cultural perspective rather than a straight comics perspective. So we'll want to think carefully and consider all POVs before making radical organizational or purpose changes. List of manhwa, though, has an active discussion going on right now about what to do with it. Feel free to pitch in, and let's put List of manhua on the "to discuss" list. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 02:26, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Categorization issues

Yes again. :) I didn't know if any action had been formally proposed following earlier discussions, as I really have no clue how these things are handled. IIRC, these changes are in line with what we talked about before.

Manhwa categories

Manhua categories

Manga-related categories are currently not in line with the rest of Category:Comics. If "manga" is going to mean the comics of only one country, then the corresponding categories need to be handled as representative of only one country, and as such be subcats of "by country" categories. Right now they're "elevated" in the categorical tree as representing something much more, probably a holdover from when they did. No clue who is supposed to do what to fix that. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 08:48, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

They all seem fine. To get categories renamed see WP:CFD. I can possibly change some of the ones only I have edited but, given the fact we need a number renaming, we might as well do the lot as a batch (they have robots that can then make the renaming automatic which saves a lot of time and effort) - there are only 6 that need it. As we have discussed this here and there seems a consensus amongst the involved editors it should be a formality (although wait and bit and see if anyone spots a problem - best to address this now rather than after the proposal when it gets a bit messier, still possible but not ideal). Once those 6 are renamed we can then recategorise everything else and create those new cats.
On "Comic book publishing companies of X" - this is the current format and we should stick to it. I agree it needs changing though. The best bet would to raise this on the Comics Project talk page and see if there is a consensus there, If so they can all be proposed at CfD too and again with a clear consensus it should go smoothly. I'd support such a move as it is a niggling hangover from the previous system.
Manga-related articles are largely outside of our remit here - we can only fix those we can. Once we get everything sorted out it would be worth raising things over at the Manga and Anime Project and discussing it there. (Emperor (talk) 15:17, 21 July 2008 (UTC))
Okay, sounds good. I will let this sit here for a bit longer in case other eyes take interest, just to make sure everyone's on the same page. Regarding the publishing companies, yeah that's what I figured but thought I'd ask anyway. Worth bringing up down the line, I agree. And regarding manga, yeah, I figured that too, but since it's part of what's been confusing me this whole time I thought it was worth mentioning, since I know that project probably won't change them.  :P
While we're on this subject, I am wondering what the logic behind creating a category for articles related to a specific series like Category:Fung Wan is, verus having a Fung Wan navigational template at the bottom of the articles instead. I'm not saying I don't like it, just wondering about the hows and whys. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 15:50, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
A navbox wouldn't be a bad idea - there is nothing technically wrong with having a category for a specific title but usually this is to help hold together sub-categories. I'd suggest going with the navbox and seeing it makes the category redundant. I'm sure there is guidance somewhere but couldn't find it wit a quick scan of WP:CATEGORY. (Emperor (talk) 16:24, 21 July 2008 (UTC))
Generally, series-specific cats are frowned upon in favor of navboxes - there was a big CFD awhile back involving many animanga series cats that resulted in deletion. You can still find some of these cats looking through articles, but many of them may be leftovers from the CFD that were missed in the subsequent deletion, or ones that were recreated and no one's bothered to get them deleted again. (meow! ...sorry, couldn't resist =) ) —Dinoguy1000 20:24, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the input! Series-specific cats (prrrrrr) throw off my sense of anal-retentive orderliness, and I can't figure out logically where they should go -- with the titles? with the characters? what? And navboxes, AFAIK, involve a lot less bureaucracy-type stuff. I will experiment with navboxes for a couple current cats and let them co-exist for a while and see what happens. I did notice some A&M series with large casts that have both navboxes and their own cats, like Prince of Tennis and Naruto. Didn't see any discussion on relevant talk pages -- do you have any background on those, or do you think they just fall into that group of leftovers/recreates? --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 21:25, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Hmm... For Naruto, if you look at Category:Naruto, you will notice that it has six different subcategories (one is a subcat of Category:Naruto images), and seven pages at the top level, with about half of the subcats having a dozen or more pages. Category:The Prince of Tennis, OTOH, only has one subcat, and many of the articles look to be prime merging/deletion candidates. In short, Naruto is one of those special cases where it can support both a navbox and a category, while The Prince of Tennis is just in need of some cleanup prior to deleting the category. —Dinoguy1000 22:22, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
BTW, you can see a lot more series-specific cats at Category:Anime and manga series categories (obviously, many of them are, or can be made, wholly redundant to navboxes and are thus unnecessary). —Dinoguy1000 22:24, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
That makes good sense. Thanks for the tips! --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 20:30, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
One last thing I should have mentioned above, when there are only two or three articles covering a given series, it is generally preferred to strongly interlink them instead of creating either a navbox or category. —Dinoguy1000 21:28, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Tables and List of manhwa

Many "long list" articles like List of licensed manga in English and List of DC Comics publications use several tables, broken up alphabetically, to enhance readability. I've come to like sortable tables, as it allows readers to view information in their preferred format -- by title, by author, by country of origin, whatever -- but they create that huge block of text problem again. I recently redid List of manhwa with a sortable table, and I'm working on Chuang Yi's publications that way too. User:Hamuhamu/Sandbox2. I'm torn. Opinions?

List of manhwa also needs to be renamed. "List of manhwa licensed in English?" (although doesn't that actually mean the license is written in English?, but still understandable I think) "List of manhwa licensed for publication in English? (a mouth full) Opinions?

Though I'm not a fan of including extra information in tables just for the heck of it, I included the authors on List of manhwa and the Chuang Yi list because most of the titles don't have articles, to aid readers in looking up more info about the series should they wish to, and to aid editors possibly looking to create an article. Yes? No? I'm torn again. --hamu♥hamu (TALK) 20:44, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

I like the way it looks now; the author and company help fill it in well. The sortable way is useful and neat for Chuang Yi publication and List of manhwa. I think the name should be "List of manhwa licensed in English" because, first of all, we'll get editors who will just add the other unlicensed titles back and, secondly, "List of manhwa licensed for English release", etc, is just too long. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 20:54, 22 July 2008 (UTC)