# Talk:Belldandy

http://mangavolume.com/index.php?serie=ah-my-goddess&chapter=ah-my-goddess-69&page_nr=23
http://mangavolume.com/index.php?serie=ah-my-goddess&chapter=ah-my-goddess-69&page_nr=24
Doesn't this pretty much disprove the whole idea of Belldandy being a sexual/porn goddess when she herself says she isn't ready for sex, also do actual pages from the manga count as a source in Wikipedia, because if so I think this should be added into the section.74.207.208.6 (talk) 03:06, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think she is - the issue, though, is that she was described as one, which caused significant problems at the time. - Bilby (talk) 03:32, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Problem is, the reference is wrong, as the linked manga pages show 98.231.242.193 (talk) 20:58, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
However that description is proven wrong as shown in the manga pages I linked.  Just calling someone a sexual/porn goddess because you find them sexually attractive, would mean that nearly any female character and person in the world ever could be referred to as a sexual/porn person ,I mean rule 34 exists because there is porn of nearly every character ever created, but I don't see references in other articles to characters being refferred to as sexual/porn characters just because someone considers them sexually attractive.  The fact that the manga itself shows that she is not sexually inclined and that there are sources for that, disprove the idea that she is a sexual/porn goddess 74.207.208.6 (talk) 04:22, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
True enough, but the article doesn't say she's a soft porn goddess, only that she was described as one. Then it uses Poitras and Newitz to point out why she isn't. :) Part of the character's history was this mischaracterisation, but, as you point out, we also need to show why it was wrong. - Bilby (talk) 04:36, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Exactly, I mean, the first line of the paragraph in question refers to the sexual nature of the character, well first off the pages I linked show that the character has little or no sexual nature, and if they're referring to how other people view her, why no section for Skuld or Urd or Peorth discussing how often they are viewed sexually by fans, especially considering Urd and Peorth go out of their way to express their sexuality far more than Belldandy ever does.  The entire section on discussing Belldandy as being sexual seems very poorly worded and described, since it paints an image off the character which is far removed from reality, and I can link to many pages from the manga that show this.74.207.208.6 (talk) 04:46, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Further, to add to others comments above, we all have opinions on what Belldandy represents. However, we can't write all the different opinions on here whether printed or not due to the nature of the cite and the quantity of the opinions. Therefore, we must endeavour to cite useful sites with well thought out statements that have been proven influencetial one way or the other. I personally believe Belldandy to be a reflection of what men want in women ultimately. The beauty of body, mind, and soul is reflected by the male author Kosuke as he speaks for us to the world. That being said, I haven't exactly released a quality publication on the subject or multiple quality sources so I don't add my opinion or search for others who are similar and can be sourced by an internet cite alone. That is why I have continued to delete the Village People's statement, not due to disagreement(though I disagree) but due to the lack of the full article available and too much trust in the website page(which isn't even signed). What is as close to absolute as possible is the words of Fujishima Kosuke, and I am certain we can find more about what he has said on the subject in the last 21 years! Thank you for your time.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiggalama (talk • contribs) 00:06, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Poitras commented on the Village Voice description in two sources - his book and the associated website. I referenced the website on the grounds that it provided a source, so I could reference where Poitras claimed the quote was from, as given that I hadn't seen the source myself it was not possible to reference the Village Voice article directly. That said, I've now seen the Village Voice article and been able to reference it, and I have quoted the relevant line for ease of verification. This means that we don't need Poitras's site, so I've changed that reference to the book, which is necessarily more reliable.  - Bilby (talk) 00:54, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Except, neither we, nor the author of some book are the final arbiter on what Belldandy is or isn't, the only one who is, is the actual series creator and his depiction of her, everything else is just unsubstantiated speculations and interpretations.  In fact, I could post links to the manga, posted online, which contradict the comments made by the author of the book this article references98.231.242.193 (talk) 20:55, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Excellent :)^ Yaeger, Lynn (September 3, 1996). "Pacific overtures". The Village Voice (New York): p. 34.  "...a paintit-yourself model of a soft-plastic, soft-core porn babe named Belldandy" ... I can't visit the cite where the article is and The Village Voice isn't the most remarkable sort for advice, however you have a good source and they are well cendicated so good job and I guess I will trust you. Now if we can just stop people from assuming the Almighty is her father and find Kosuke's words on it or in the manga to show this to people...perhaps there should be more on the slight debate as to who Belldandy and the rest of the core goddesses' father is. It is also of note that we have a good balance of positive and negative male and female reactions to Belldandy. We also may need more on the Keichi page to show what the general reaction to him is and also more recent information for both.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiggalama (talk • contribs) 06:29, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

About this edit, The source said Kikuko, but since the name appearing right before the sentence states Akemi instead, the English sentence in the article became very vague.  Is there any way to fix it other than reverting? —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearchertalk  08:19, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Basically, the cite was unsigned and poor quality; commerical, not academic. Further, just because its a seinen that focuses on a love story and is highly appealing to women does not mean it has any shojo influences. The cite(and Nuwitz) should try looking at Tenjho Tenge, multiple love stories surronded by great "fan service" and martial arts=its seinen and also has romantic comedy elements. Another example would be Video Girl AI among others. This is a further sign of the ignorance that the publishers showed in the early days here in America when they thought the target audience was women because of the romantic comedy nature which is more of a female audience in America, but is neutral more or less statistically in Japan among others. Finally, shojo ultimately as we know it today sprang out of the increase in population and technology for women and while not nearly as large as that for men in Japan has still gained a following with the majority even today have more apprenticeships under males of manga in general than females of shojo. This why I removed the small sentence and reference to the supposide "shojo" and "art noveau" influences. The main reason above all is that Fujishima Kosuke never claimed to have been influenced by them, nor are there any references to him doing so. If you can provide that solidly, then it should be restored. If not, let it rot in the wide womb of uncreated night in the "deleted subjective truth" pile. :D Wiggalama (talk) 19:43, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Belldandy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050413010530/http://www.animeondvd.com/reviews2/disc_reviews/29.php to http://www.animeondvd.com/reviews2/disc_reviews/29.php
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081006013742/http://www.dvdtown.com/review/Oh_My_Goddess%21_1/11105/1729/ to http://www.dvdtown.com/review/Oh_My_Goddess%21_1/11105/1729/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:03, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

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

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070629103407/http://manbow.ponycanyon.co.jp/profile/index.html to http://manbow.ponycanyon.co.jp/profile/index.html
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.animeondvd.com/reviews2/manga/manga.php?manga_view=2171
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:43, 17 July 2017 (UTC)