Talk:Megatokyo/Archive 4

message: Is it just me, or are the character entries for Dom and Ed completely missing? They don't seem to be on either this page or the minor characters page. I'm pretty sure they used to exist (there's mention of them being moved here from the minor characters page in April), and no-one seems to have discussed moving or deleting them.
The entries are here (Major Characters). But why do we have the major characters listed here when they have a page of their own. -- Psi edit 02:19, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dom and Ed appear to be missing 

message: There's a bit in the 'Reception' section where each paragraph begins with a single word followed by a comma--"professionally," "artistically," "originally," "arguably." Just a tiny nitpick; it's a little jarring if you're only skimming. --Masamage 01:33, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prose 

message: The rate of contributions have slowed down and I can't find anything to change are we ready for FA submision. Vcelloho 02:43, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Excel Saga couldn't external-link to each plot point either. --maru   (talk)  contribs 02:11, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Excel does cite an episode guide published by Newtype USA (see footnote 12). Seems real enough to me. ;) Discussion over at the FAC talk page seems ambiguous on the necessity of plot citations, but I read it to say that they're not really needed. Anyway, I don't think this article is ready yet. I think the article has improved greatly over the past weeks, but I think it has issues with the prose (e.g., the sentence about Dom and Ed in "Plot" is a real pain, and the copy generally could use some sprucing up). Moreover, I'm still unsure about the wisdom of separating plot and character discussions in a character-driven story (especially as so little has really happened in MT that can be described as plot per se as opposed to character development). As it stands now, the distinction is poorly made: there are plot-ish elements in "Characters" and character descriptions in "Plot." As far as "Reception," it seems a little thin, but that could just be me. You've got a NYT article with untapped flattering material: Fred's explanation of obscure things like cosplay and LEET, and how he "offers a unique kind of intimacy with the work, a sense of being part of its creation in some way." I know Fred posts links to reviews and news about MT on the "rant" section, so perhaps you could trawl those for more references. On the subject of the "rants," Fred gives them titles, so I would personally use his titles for them in the citations, giving some explanatory material at the end of the note.--Monocrat 14:53, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, my apologies - I missed your citation, there. In any case, Megatokyo has no notable "plot guide," so it's a good thing it is not needed. I'll get to work on the other things you mentioned. Thanks for the suggestions. JimmyBlackwing 15:45, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

text: If you do, do it during a week where you have enough free time to fix the article in response to objections; FAC is by far the best place to get feedback for "almost there" articles, and fixing problems during the FAC is the best way to get featured. Nifboy 06:27, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I concur with Nifboy: you'll want free time. :) Good luck! (Sorry for the delay: I've been on wikibreak for a while.)--Monocrat 18:34, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Is it ready?

message: I know Fred has said this, but it's currently got a citation-needed sticker on it and I'm having a hard time locating it. The best I can find is the thread where he talks about the girl who inspired Miho's look--can anyone help? --Masamage 15:50, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I did exactly the same thing. Problem is I've been an MT fan for some five years, so it's pretty much impossible to remember where I read that. An interview, maybe? Anyway, I'll change the phrasing to make it match that link and put the reference in. --Masamage 17:55, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I remember in Megatokyo Vol. 1 (the first Darkhorse volume), there are several references to the character-who-would-be-named-Miho as "Perkigoth" (or "Perkygoth"; it's sometimes hard to make out the exact lettering in the sketches) ex. the sketch on pg 154, or the comments on pg 90 ("Perkigoth? Queen of the undead? Or just a girl who likes to mess with Largo's hair?"), FWIW. --maru   (talk)  contribs 20:56, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, good job! There it is! :D I'll use the sketch as a reference. Way to go. --Masamage 23:12, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ) Aww, stop it, you'll make me blush. It's simply lucky that I borrowed it from the library and had happened to see this section before I read it, is all. --maru   (talk)  contribs 02:48, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Miho as Perkigoth 

message: From the to do list:
* Add more info about changes since Rodney Caston left to history section
What were those changes?  The comic continued to move away from an episodic "gag-a-day" style towards a more complex story, but that process was already underway when the split happened (indeed, that was the main cause of the split).  --L33tminion | (talk) 05:49, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This was my comment in peer review, so I may as well address it: At the time I made that comment, I didn't really think of the books/merch as "history", and found it rather odd that the only post-Caston event in that section was of Fred losing his job. It doesn't seem to apply anymore (particularly with the "funding" section), so I'm striking it out. Nifboy 06:37, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In that case, I'm going to submit this to FAC again.  It looks ready.  --L33tminion | (talk) 22:30, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last Item on To Do List 

message: I just realized that the character Yuki is nowhere to be found! Not on the main article, and not in the minor characters list! O_o
She's probably a main character... So edit carefully, bad writing could lose us the nomination! --Masamage 19:49, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ack. Nevermind, I just discovered that Main Characters article. >__>; --Masamage 19:54, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yuki? 

message: Guys, don't mess with the naming order here - MOS:JA doesn't apply, because:
* Megatokyo is an American-made work of fiction
* All versions of the actual Megatokyo comic use Japanese order (there is a beginning extra, a "Dead Piro Day" picture, that uses Western order - but the actual comic uses Japanese order)
* MOS-JA does not govern fictional character naming order - only naming orders of people
WhisperToMe 00:54, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm dubious! A great many other articles use Western order--I looked up every anime I've seen and they were all written this way. The fact that it was made in America would seem to make it more likely that we should use Western order. The Japan-guidelines don't actually say anything about how to list fictional characters' names, so I think it's inappropriate to use that as evidence in either direction. --Masamage 04:01, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  But this is Megatokyo. "The Japan-guidelines don't actually say anything about how to list fictional characters' names, so I think it's inappropriate to use that as evidence in either direction." - That was precisely why the name order was switched around in the first place - I say that is why the order should not be switched around. Anyway, the reason why many Japanese anime and manga series have name switcheroos is because the English-language publishers switch the names around. Megatokyo is a different animal. WhisperToMe 00:02, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am pro-writing-to-a-general-audience here; names should be in Western order, almost regardless of any other consideration, because that is the order with which English readers are most familiar. Also, it's what WP:ANIME suggests ("Characters' names should be given in western order."), even if it's technically not in its scope. Nifboy 00:14, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm...both views makes sense. But this is definately more like anime/manga than it is like an American comic book. I didn't even know about that WP group, but since it exists, I have to say I think we should go with it. --Masamage 04:21, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

text: "I am pro-writing-to-a-general-audience here" - It's not that difficult to explain the naming order. Switching the naming order, in a Megatokyo context, is getting it all wrong. It's very easy to say "In Megatokyo, Japanese names are written in this order" - I do not like the said order. But I know that if I switch the order, I am outright lying to people. " Also, it's what WP:ANIME suggests ("Characters' names should be given in western order.")" - WP:Anime is not policy. And it doesn't apply to Megatokyo; this is an American work. Also, to Masamage - "But this is definately more like anime/manga than it is like an American comic book." - But this isn't written by a Japanese author. The style doesn't matter - in fact, the statement isn't necessairly true because the comic originated in a more American format (four panel comic) and later switched to a more Japanese format. WhisperToMe 17:18, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Right, we understand that's your opinion. But since the rest of us have opinions too, this needs to be a much more two-way conversation. Which it doesn't feel like, to me. If I give in to you, it'll be because I'm tired of getting preached to, not because I agree. Which is pretty lame. --Masamage 17:58, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not like that "that's your opinion" phrase - Obviously it's my opinion. Maddox ranted about the phrase in his website: see http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=boiling_blood - Yes, it's Maddox's post, but I agree with him. Besides, on Wikipedia, this is a matter of right and wrong. It is wrong, in a Megatokyo context, to westernize the names. Also, part of that post was intended for another user. The part addressed to you started with your name. WhisperToMe 21:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry that I pressed one of your buttons; I didn't know it was there, and certainly wouldn't have made your blood boil on purpose. My statement was not meant to belittle your point, and I'm sorry that it seemed to. I only meant to show the perspective I was coming from. I respond to official guidelines immediately and as closely as I can; I respond to opinions by listening, and then expressing my own, and trying to have a conversation. But since you continue to insist that you are right and we are wrong, it's not a dicussion of opinion, and I'm consistantly on the defensive. It's frustrating, and it's a ridiculous way to approach the concept of consensus. We'll never succeed. --Masamage 21:51, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Be civil, please. Masamage was asking for additional input to help form a concensus.  Wikipedia is also certainly not about "right and wrong". --Kunzite 07:44, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

text: The explanation you put in the article of exactly why the characters' names are in Japanese order is confusing at best, in both prose and presentation. If putting the names in Japanese order is correct, great, but let the readers know in a way that does not make them say, "Huh?".
******Bottom line: find a way to do it that is as seamless as simply putting them in Western order, instead of just letting any reader who comes into the article be confused while you argue your point on the talk page. JimmyBlackwing 01:13, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Your link is wrong, Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles)#Naming order in relation to works of Western origin. You seem to imply that the discussion is over, please don't make such misleading comments.  It is pretty clear that this is not the consensus. A lot of editors don't like being forced to change the naming order from how the original has it, and somehow some think this article is excused because it's not Japanese. How does that make any sense at all? If someone had a rule, such as "no wearing shoes on the clean floor" and posted it in Room A, Room A then follows that rule. Room B comes along and wears their shoes on the floor, because they said "well, they only put the note in on Room A, and we're Room B."  That's just childish, man. -- Ned Scott 13:25, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: When I linked to it, no debate had started, nor did I expect one to. JimmyBlackwing 19:58, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Naming order

message: Jimmy Blackwing - Remember my last edit before L33t minion replaced the naming order? Why not have that, but, if needed, bold the note that Japanese names in Megatokyo are in the traditional order - We can also add a "See Japanese name" to show the controversy - People will see the footnotes, know something is up, and follow the rabbit holes :) WhisperToMe 17:09, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propose solution

message: See Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Naming order in relation to works of Western origin. The name order for Megatokyo characters of Japanese origin stays in the Surname—Given name order. Hereafter, their names should not be modified from this form. JimmyBlackwing 07:14, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your link is wrong, Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles)#Naming order in relation to works of Western origin. You seem to imply that the discussion is over, please don't make such misleading comments.  It is pretty clear that this is not the consensus. A lot of editors don't like being forced to change the naming order from how the original has it, and somehow some think this article is excused because it's not Japanese. How does that make any sense at all? If someone had a rule, such as "no wearing shoes on the clean floor" and posted it in Room A, Room A then follows that rule. Room B comes along and wears their shoes on the floor, because they said "well, they only put the note in on Room A, and we're Room B."  That's just childish, man. -- Ned Scott 13:25, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: When I linked to it, no debate had started, nor did I expect one to. JimmyBlackwing 19:58, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: End of debate

message: This conversation is very hard to decipher.  The formatting seem to be broken in several places.  Can someone who knows who was talking to who, correct it?  --Kunzite 07:44, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Conversation formatting

message: At 13:20, User:CyberSkull replaced the manga cover images that were removed per FAC consensus with an edit summary of merely "book covers;" I waited a reasonable amount of time for him to provide a reason for this change, but now an hour has passed with no word on either the talk page or the FAC page. As such, I have reverted the edit pending further explanation of why the images were replaced. Hargle 14:36, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Replacement of cover images 

message: Monocrat suggests merging the "Plot" and "Character" sections into one synopsis section, and has drawn up a draft of such a merge here.  I greatly appreciate Monocrat's work on this issue.  However, I think that having separate character and plot sections makes the article less confusing and makes it easier for readers to find specific information.  It also makes it easier for readers who are trying to avoid spoilers to do so.  Thus, I'd like to find out what the rest of you think on the subject.  Thus, I'm setting up a quick straw poll on the issue.  Please share your opinions (and preferably the reasoning behind your opinions as well).  --L33tminion (talk) 07:18, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separate vs. Merged Plot and Character Sections 

message: * Monocrat 09:22, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge the Sections

message: * L33tminion (talk) 07:18, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Leave them Separate

message: I'm working on the plot section now (slowly, as I'm having a really hard time with it (although that will be a little easier once I have some time to sit down with the books)).  I don't think the plot summary is nearly complete enough.  A few other comments:
* Largo is also briefly hired by the "Tokyo Police Cataclysm Division."
** Why was he hired, and how did he lose that job?  (As I recall, the TPCD is now sending ninjas after him...)
*As the series progresses, Piro and Largo begin shaky relationships with women they meet and grow as individuals, becoming deeper and more serious characters than the stereotypes they first represented.
**This is way too hand-wavey, even for a summary.
*Another plot thread includes the character Kimiko Nanasawa's sudden rise to idol status, fueled by her outburst on a radio talk show...
**This transition is awful.  It needs to be more clear how this ties into the rest of the story.  How do the protagonists meet Kimiko in the first place, etc.?
--L33tminion (talk) 21:45, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot Section 

message: I find that, though L33tminion's recent revisions of the Plot section were, for the most part, of high quality, the extreme amount of added detail has compromised the necessity of the Main characters section. However, I still heavily disagree with Monocrat's proposed complete merge of the Main characters and Plot sections.
In light of this, I am proposing this change in layout and writing. I believe this is an adequate compromise between the two viewpoints, eliminating the redundancy of the previous system, while at the same time keeping the detailed analysis of the characters. The style of introducing characters and then discussing plot elements is seen in such featured articles as Final Fantasy VIII, Final Fantasy X and Chrono Trigger, so I do not believe it is a huge jump in logic to change the layout like this. Apologies to L33tminion, but the change proposes yet another heavy rewrite of the Plot section, largely due to my belief that the current version is far too detailed for a summary.
Thoughts on this? JimmyBlackwing 03:56, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm too dazed by everything to respond in general, but I have one comment: please don't mention "blurred". Talk about unnecessary details. Ugh. --Masamage 04:21, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, referring to "blurred" as "pornographic" is (at best) misleading.  --L33tminion (talk) 07:17, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Very well, I've removed the sentence. Aside from that, are there any objections to this change, before I stick it in the article? JimmyBlackwing 07:20, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewrite and format change

message: Why do Main characters of Megatokyo and Minor characters of Megatokyo merit separate pages?  Wouldn't it make sense to merge them to Characters of Megatokyo?  Also, the useful changes to the "Main characters" section should be merged to the relevant sections in Main characters of Megatokyo.  --L33tminion (talk) 21:58, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge character pages? 

message: I don't know a lot about Tobari Saeko  - All I know is that she is one of the characters that had kanji chosen for her...
WhisperToMe 00:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Tobari Saeko