# Talk:Blood-C

The official site does not translate Furukimono as Elder Bairn. 
Can somebody point to an official source that does? Or is this a fantranslation? -- Fallacies (talk) 23:13, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Stop  deleting the differences section. It's highly relevant considering that this series is a major departure from the previous instalments in both story, mythology and style.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.25.10.36 (talk) 23:43, 28 July 2011 (UTC) 

Per Wikipedia's guidlines for translation, "Because Wikipedia licensing requires attribution, the translation source must be credited to avoid copyright violation." The extremely brief translations in this section are original text provided by myself and other contributors, and have been credited to their source, which is a resource opened to the web free of cost by the original publishers. Being that the source is not in English, text has not been replicated verbatim. In certain instances, text contains content from other Wikipedia entries. Content in this section is provided on Wikipedia for informational purposes, and is not intended to compromise market value of the subject of copyright. Per Wikipedia's guidelines on inclusion of text from other sources, text has not been copy-pasted verbatim; text is provided in original language that did not exist in the source, and is thus not a close paraphrase; the source is both cited and linked. 
This text also appears on: Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems.
-- Fallacies (talk) 15:21, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia's guidlines for translation, "Because Wikipedia licensing requires attribution, the translation source must be credited to avoid copyright violation." The extremely brief translations in this section are original text provided by myself and other contributors, and have been credited to their source, which is a resource opened to the web free of cost by the original publishers. Being that the source is not in English, text has not been replicated verbatim. In certain instances, text contains content from other Wikipedia entries. Content in this section is provided on Wikipedia for informational purposes, and is not intended to compromise market value of the subject of copyright. Per Wikipedia's guidelines on inclusion of text from other sources, text has not been copy-pasted verbatim; text is provided in original language that did not exist in the source, and is thus not a close paraphrase; the source is both cited and linked. 
This text also appears on: Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems and Talk:Blood-C.
-- Fallacies (talk) 15:21, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

If the content of a translation from a copyrighted source, the translation is still a violation of Wikipeida's copyright policies even if the source is in another language. —Farix (t | c) 16:25, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
Please point out the specific text in the guidelines that demonstrates original translation to be a violation of fair use for non-"close-paraphrase." -- Fallacies (talk) 16:55, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
In this edit, you claimed that the contents was copied and translate from the "official website" as a justification to include the terminology section. Just because the contents was translated does not mean that it is somehow "ok" to included the text into Wikipedia. A translation is still a derived work and copying it is a form of plagiarism and a violation Wikipedia's copyright policies. —Farix (t | c) 12:33, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
A translation of content to Wikipedia involves inclusion of original English text that did not exist in the source verbatim, provided by editors in their own language for informational purposes only. The contents of this section are sourced to the original Japanese content. I have provided my rationale for believing that this falls under fair use, per guidelines on Wikipedia:Translation and Wikipedia:Copy-paste. Please provide evidence of guideline violation; I have found nothing within the guidelines specifically stating that translation in original text provided by a translator for informational purposes -- with citation -- falls outside the area of fair use. Furthermore, note the below, from Wikipedia:Non-free_content:
Policy
There is no automatic entitlement to use non-free content in an article or elsewhere on Wikipedia. Articles and other Wikipedia pages may, in accordance with the guideline, use brief verbatim textual excerpts from copyrighted media, properly attributed or cited to its original source or author, and specifically indicated as direct quotations via quotation marks, blockquote, or a similar method. Other non-free content—including all copyrighted images, audio and video clips, and other media files that lack a free content license—may be used on the English Wikipedia only where all 10 of the following criteria are met.
No free equivalent. Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose. Where possible, non-free content is transformed into free material instead of using a fair-use defense, or replaced with a freer alternative if one of acceptable quality is available; "acceptable quality" means a quality sufficient to serve the encyclopedic purpose. (As a quick test, before adding non-free content requiring a rationale, ask yourself: "Can this non-free content be replaced by a free version that has the same effect?" and "Could the subject be adequately conveyed by properly sourced text without using the non-free content at all?" If the answer to either is yes, the non-free content probably does not meet this criterion.)
Respect for commercial opportunities. Non-free content is not used in a manner that is likely to replace the original market role of the original copyrighted media.
Minimal usage. Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information.
Minimal extent of use. An entire work is not used if a portion will suffice. Low- rather than high-resolution/fidelity/bit rate is used (especially where the original could be used for deliberate copyright infringement). This rule also applies to the copy in the File: namespace.
Previous publication. Non-free content must have been published or publicly displayed outside Wikipedia.
Content. Non-free content meets general Wikipedia content standards and is encyclopedic.
Media-specific policy. The material meets Wikipedia's media-specific policy. For example, images must meet Wikipedia:Image use policy.
One-article minimum. Non-free content is used in at least one article.
Contextual significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.
Restrictions on location. Non-free content is allowed only in articles (not disambiguation pages), and only in article namespace, subject to exemptions. (To prevent an image category from displaying thumbnails, add __NOGALLERY__ to it; images are linked, not inlined, from talk pages when they are a topic of discussion.)
Image description page. The image or media description page contains the following:
The content in this section is not a verbatim copy of any English text, and translation itself qualifies as a transformation. It is used minimally, in a single article only, and is not intended to compromise the market role of the original. The original source that was translated has been previously published. It provides information that increases readers' comprehension of the subject.
Acceptable use of text
Brief quotations of copyrighted text may be used to illustrate a point, establish context, or attribute a point of view or idea. Copyrighted text that is used verbatim must be attributed with quotation marks or other standard notation, such as block quotes. Any alterations must be clearly marked, i.e. [brackets] for added text, an ellipsis (...) for removed text, and emphasis noted after the quotation as "(emphasis added)" or "(emphasis in the original)". Extensive quotation of copyrighted text is prohibited.
The text is not copied verbatim, and provided with attribution to an original source. If you cannot read the context of the acceptable use guideline, understand that it was intended to regulate direct verbatim inclusions of text from an English source. Verbatim implies that all text is exactly the same. Wikipedia:Copy-paste provides guidelines for inclusion of non-free text that is allowed under fair use, with focus upon the idea of transforming the original source into text in the editor's own words. The content here, given in translation, is "in the editors' own words."
Unacceptable use of text
Unattributed pieces of text from a copyrighted source.
Excessively long copyrighted excerpts.
An image of a newspaper article or other publication that contains long legible sections of copyrighted text.  If the text is important as a source or quotation, it should be worked into the article in text form with the article cited as a source.
All copyrighted text poses legal problems when making spoken word audio files from Wikipedia articles, and should be avoided in such files, because the resulting audio file cannot be licensed under the GFDL.
A complete or partial recreation of "Top 100" or similar lists where the list has been selected in a creative manner. Articles on individual elements from such lists can discuss their inclusion in these lists. Complete lists based on factual data, such as List of highest-grossing films, are appropriate to include.
The content provided is not unattributed. It is not excessively long, and involves no media aside from written text. It is not a top-100 list.
-- Fallacies (talk) 16:11, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Just because you translated non-free use content does not mean that the translation suddenly becomes "free use". The translation is still non-free use content. Also, non-free use content should only be included when it is supporting critical cometary of the work. A list of random terminology does not provide critical cometary. —Farix (t | c) 16:23, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
I didn't claim that it was "free use." I stated that I felt it fell under fair use for non-closely paraphrased content.
How critical a given piece of content is to an article is an editorial call. You claim that the terminology content would be better included within the summary itself, but I don't see evidence that you've made an effort to improve the text in this manner. You have merely deleted text. Copyvio allegations aside, it would've been far more constructive if, instead of outright blanking out the section, you commented to Talk that the format of the section as an independent list of terminology was unacceptable, allowing others to improve it accordingly.
Regarding our more recent editing dispute regarding Hyakunin Isshu -- there is other unsourced content in this article. Why not delete those?
-- Fallacies (talk) 16:38, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Any statement that is not be verified by a reliable source can be removed at any time. And any evaluated claim must be supported by a third-party source. When a statement is challenged, the burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores the material. There are also very strict guidelines about the inclusion non-free use material, chief among those is that the content "would significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." The list of terminology would not affect the readers understanding of the topic, nor would its omission be detrimental to that understanding. —Farix (t | c) 16:59, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/interview/2011-09-01/blood-c-tsutomu-mizushima-and-junichi-fujisaku/
Director:

TSUTOMU MIZUSHIMA: I can definitely say that Blood-C is a strongly CLAMP-flavored project in many ways, both story-wise and visually, starting with the character designs. CLAMP's style and sensitivities permeate the entire series in every way.

...At the same time, it feels remarkably different from its predecessors. And it couldn't be any other way, as that was the purpose of having CLAMP join the project.

As for my goal for the TV series, I'd like to create a story that reaches a conclusion, but at the same time establishes a connection with the feature film coming next year.

...I wanted to depict Saya as someone with an utmost gentle nature. In fact, I dare say that her feelings and emotions are more human than any actual human character appearing in the story.

...The theme of this series as I'm trying to convey it is “never stop believing in yourself.” But this is limited to the TV series. The movie... might be rather different, but I can't say much at this stage.
http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/interview/2011-09-01/blood-c-tsutomu-mizushima-and-junichi-fujisaku/2 Screenwriter:

The movie gave some hints about the world setting, but ended without any real explanation of what it was all about. In the Blood+ series I had the opportunity to expand the Blood world throughout the span of a 50-episode long story. The story focused on Saya but also on Diva and the Chevaliers, who by manipulating the economy and wars - two major driving powers of our society- were trying to find their place in this world. For Blood-C I asked myself what everyday life would look like in a world where you can have a monster-slaying girl like Saya. Then we incorporated ideas from CLAMP and the director, Tsutomu Mizushima. And we came up with this story depicting how an apparently eventless everyday life slowly crumbles to unveil horror beyond imagination.

I change Saya's character setting in each of her incarnations, which is always an enjoyable process for me. Saya singing songs, being a meganekko (glasses-wearing girl) and her hairstyle are all features coming from CLAMP. I think all these elements are very CLAMP-like and I always appreciate it when the character designer is free to express his or her creativity in full. Freedom of creative expression like that is always the best thing for any project. At the same time, I was aware of the great number of differences between this Saya and the previous ones, so I intentionally did not use her surname, Otonashi, as I wanted to make clear with the audience we were dealing with two different characters. The continuity in the “Blood” world doesn't include the character being the same person; it's in the essence of the character itself.

...So far all the chapters in the “Blood” saga have been somehow connected to the past, so I'd like to create a story about Saya in the future. This is also the difficult part as I'm confident I can write anything set back in history, but I need to imagine the future from scratch. It would also be fun to expand the previous “Blood” projects with side stories, as there is tremendous potential sleeping there.
--Gwern  (contribs) 16:42 1 September 2011 (GMT)

This article should clearly state the relation. Is this a prequel, sequel, or some form of an alternative universe retelling? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 21:19, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

unfortunately its none of those. Its a separate series that us part of the Blood series.Lucia Black (talk) 04:17, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Well, it has to be one of the above. If there is continuity, it's a sequel, prequel, or possibly a spin off. If it is an alternative universe retelling, like in Gundams, then this should be stated as well. It has to be "something". There's a category for everything, and I think the readers would benefit from being informed about that both here and in the Blood+ article. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:21, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
this isnt directly related to blood+ but part of the blood series. The very first is Blood: The Last Vampire. It is not exactly a retelllunng and neither is gundam. For the most part its an error to say yhis relates to Blood+ directly unless sourced and even then we still cant properly label it. It so unds like original eesearch i if we tried to label it.Lucia Black (talk) 22:07, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

There should be a separate page about The Last Dark made. This article provides nothing about the movie other than its release date. Rkwa (talk) 11:17, 1 April 2013

This review is transcluded from Talk:Blood-C/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contribs) 04:10, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
There are a few minor errors here and there (mangaka should not be capitalized, Nana Mizuki isn't wikilinked on the first mention in the production section), but these are relatively minor issues and don't greatly affect the overall quality of the article.
I've addressed the issues you pointed out.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism): 
All statements are sourced (which isn't actually necessary since this isn't a BLP, but good work nonetheless), no plagiarism.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
Quite comprehensive. However, there's a glaring concern here: do you have any information about Japanese reception for the series? How was the series received in Japan? Did it win any awards or citations? How were the disk sales, as well as sales for the print adaptations?
I did my best here, but there's no Japanese commentary on the series. I've looked. Judging by the sales of the first DVD volume and lack of findable sales for the following five, I think it wasn't that popular in its home country.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

@ProtoDrake: This is almost ready to be passed, just add information about Japanese reception and this should be good to go.

@Narutolovehinata5: I've addressed all the issues you mentioned that I could. As to JP reception, I've seriously looked and can't find anything. --ProtoDrake (talk) 09:22, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
@ProtoDrake: Sorry for the late reply, real-life stuff caught up with me. In any case, if there's little coverage that can be found about Japanese reception, for reasons beyond your control, then so be it. Given the circumstances, and the fact that the article is well-written otherwise and meets the GA criteria, I'm happy to announce that this GAN has  passed. The article is well-written and is full of interesting facts, so I suggest that you nominate the article for a DYK hook; you can read more information at WP:DYK. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:39, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

@ProtoDrake: A note from Template:Infobox animanga#Header: "Use and cite reliable sources to identify genre/s, not personal interpretation. Please don't include more than three genres (per MOS:A&M)".--IDVtalk 09:57, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the headsup, IDV. It was a hangover from the article's previous state. --ProtoDrake (talk) 10:08, 18 February 2017 (UTC)