Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Archive 7

message: I know a lot of us have our own little side projects and such, and pretty busty, etc. but the Ghost in the Shell article mess made me stop in my vaginal licking[Link title].  A lot of bizarre disambig stubs and over-splitting has been done over time, and some major house sex is needed.  See my comments on Talk:Ghost in the Shell#GITS mess, I outlined all the GITS articles I could find there as well.  Any help or input would be very much appreciated. -- Ned Scott 09:28, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Big mess over at the Ghost in the Shell articles 

message: WP:SPOILER is under dispute and there is discussion of deleting the template.  Throw in your 2¢/¥. --Kunzite 14:21, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:SPOILER]] 

message: This isn't about individual character articles, but about the nameing convention we used when spliting off the character section from a main article. There are several conventions being used right now: List of <title> characters, Characters of/in <title>, <title> characters, and List of characters in <title>. You can see all of them at :Category:Manga and anime characters by series
I like for WP:Anime to adopt a single convention with naming these kinds of articles. I have a problem with using the term "List" in the article names, mainly because most of these article aren't just lists, but provide details about each character listed. --TheFarix (Talk) 15:52, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for bringing this up. I would too.  Could this also be discussed with the video games project?  Someone who edits video game articles (which cross over into anime) was fond of renaming my "XYZ character" articles to "List of XYZ characters" often breaking all of the redirects that I have.  (He would cite WP:LIST to say that since it's a list, it should have list in the title.)  So, I've started using "List of XYZ" characters" to avoid having 30-40 redirects broken.  I don't care about the naming convention used--just that some fix double redirects when they move a page. --Kunzite 16:00, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The question really comes down to, "Are they really lists or are they articles that use a list format?" My personal reaction would be the latter. If they were simply a character lists, then they should have remained on the main articles and not have been split off into a separate articles. --TheFarix (Talk) 16:44, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character list naming convention 

message: I'm about half way through the rewriting of Maburaho, but there are still several characters that need lots of attention, Dr. Haruaki Akai, Shino Akai, Elizabeth, Karei Hirosaki, Kaori Iba, and Class 2-B. I'm already at the point of being exhausted with the rewrite, despite spending two week on it already. So I'm going to ask for addition support to expand and copyedit the article. Check the talk page to see the list of things I think needs to be done to the article. --TheFarix (Talk) 23:39, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now comes the fun part, going through back issues of Newtype USA and try to pull some of the character and story commentary from the creator and director. The "Critical reception" section also needs a lot of filling out. I already have several links to several reviews. --TheFarix (Talk) 02:40, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maburaho rewrite 

message: Hi there,
A french user recently took pictures of manhwaga, but unfortunately we don't have articles on them, on none of the Wikipedia. You will find the photos here, in case you need them for new articles: commons:Category:Manhwaga.
GôTô 07:35, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do articles exist for them on the French wikipedia? --Kunzite 15:11, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think. Okki 16:14, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice find, it could be useful...if more people cared more about manhwa at least -_-. On a side note, why do Asian bleach their hair? Park Chul Ho looks like he put straw on his head. lawl. --SeizureDog 20:19, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photos 

message: I know this was addressed last month but I have gone ahead and added what was discussed as well as some extras in what should and should not be the scope of the wikiproject. Alterations and additions will need to be made to it, especially the ones that I just added myself without discussing first, like Live Action. --Squilibob 10:53, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why shouldn't live action adaptions of Anime and Manga be included in the project?  Tramps Like Us and PGSM were based off of anime and manga sources...  And we also have stage shows such as the Seramyu, Tenimyu, Bleach (musical), etc... They're almost always derivatives and we're better equiped to handle Japanese-language based articles than WP:TV or WP:Theatre. (Whatever the names are.)  --Kunzite 15:09, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well add them to the scope then, like I said, I added it without discussing it first. --Squilibob 00:43, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I think games are part of the project but SeizureDog asked me when I assessed Disgaea: Hour of Darkness why am I assessing it for when it isn't part of the project. --Squilibob 00:43, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Then some kinda consensus should be made about games....I personally think games can be part of the project too. _dk 03:37, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Disgaea isn't an anime video game, it's a video game that got an anime based off of it. Should we include Final Fantasy, MegaMan, The Legend of Zelda, etc. in the project just because there are animes/manga based off of them? I think not. --SeizureDog 20:14, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Going back to what _dk said, if Disgaea was a visual novel, it would be in the project. I think the view of an anime game is too narrow. --Squilibob 00:02, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well it kinda needs to be narrow. If the definition gets to be too broad, we're going to be reaching too far into the Video Game Wikiproject. I only say that anime games be included due to them being largely ignored by said wikiproject. Visual novels are radically different from normal video games and very similar to normal anime. We should pick them up. RPGs on the other hand are never at a loss for editors. --SeizureDog 04:43, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So do we agree that anime games should be included? If there are no objections I will add that into the scope. For the purpose of our wikiproject, I suggest we limit our coverage of games to those that uses CGs as the main type of presentation. (not sprites) _dk 04:18, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Have you talked to the games wp people yet? ~Kylu (u|t)  07:53, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, but since an article can be managed by more than one wikiproject I don't think it's necessary. _dk 08:05, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We should make sure to put our tag underneath the VG tag on the talk pages though, as they are video games first and anime-ish second. --SeizureDog 09:22, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scope 

message: I've tried to reword the point about the lead sections more strongly. The lead section is the single most important part of any article. However, most leads in anime and manga articles are—to be polite—atrocious, providing only the most basic of information. Instead, the lead section should provide a brief overview of the entire article in roughly four paragraphs that can stand on its own without the rest of the article. Now I'll step down from my little soapbox. --TheFarix (Talk) 02:05, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: well.. four paragraphs is the upper limit for longer articles, see: WP:LEAD --Kunzite 02:27, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

text: My problem with a lead section is that it is difficult to explain the context of many anime without going into great detail and then try not to add too much redundancy in the remainder of the article. --Squilibob 09:46, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead sections 

message: The template :Template:Infobox Anime convention could just as easily apply to any sort of conventions. Shouldn't this be made into a generic template? JIP | Talk 07:31, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That makes sense. Then stick it on over at pages like E3 and Gen Con. --SeizureDog 08:03, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Should the template be renamed, or a new template copy-and-pasted from it? JIP | Talk 08:25, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Renamed if possible would be my vote, unless a field that would be specific for anime cons can be thought up. I don't suppose we might need a "Japanese name" field would we? Anyone ever going to make an article for a Japanese-only convention? --SeizureDog 09:20, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

text: That's because the current infobox is stable and in wide use, so there shouldn't be too much mucking with it now unless it is minor. I see that people will want more fields in a general convention infobox, but as they add in these new fields, they could inadvertently break the existing Infobox in the process. Once the development of the new general infobox is finished, then converting the use of the old infobox should be addressed. --TheFarix (Talk) 14:39, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox Anime convention 

message: I am requesting some assistance in monitoring InuYasha. There is an anonymous editor who keeps adding external links to several scanlation sites, which are a violation Wikipedia's policies prohibiting the linking to sites with copyvio material. With some assistance, I don't have to worry about violating WP:3RR. --TheFarix (Talk) 19:26, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Request an administrator to semi-protect the page. WP:PP, I think. --Kunzite 02:41, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I might do that if it happens again. --TheFarix (Talk) 03:08, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Actually, since it's only one user that's the problem, you should request that he be banned. Semi-protection is for multiple users doing such a thing. --SeizureDog 00:44, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been a different IP each time. --TheFarix (Talk) 00:47, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  InuYasha 

message: Maybe instead of putting the talk page into one of our catagories, we should still put the image on the talk page, but add the article to the catagories. I know it would require more work, but our catagories would be neater.~VNinja~ 01:06, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess you're talking about the article assessment categories? --Squilibob 08:56, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

text: If you're talking about assessment, it goes against the general "no metadata in article space" that has been brewing as of late.  I wish that we could do hidden categories. --Kunzite 12:27, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

text: That would be a lot more work then it's worth and people will forget to do place the categories on the article when they apply the banner to the talk page. It's much simpler to keep the cats with the banner. --TheFarix (Talk) 19:17, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Catagories 

message: Starting earlier today, a group of editors has been targeting character lists for several anime series and video games for deletion. Of the anime series, Pokemon has been the primary focus, but Yu-Gi-Oh! anime, manga or movie only characters has also put up for AfD. I fear that other anime lists may be put up on the copping block soon as well. --TheFarix (Talk) 19:08, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent AFD 

message: I just made my first userbox, an Azumanga Daioh userbox.  I also made the appropriate category and added the userbox to the appropriate userbox lists.  I hope I did everything right; comments?  If I screwed up, remember not to bite ^_^ Dark Shikari 19:11, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's too tall for starters. There has also been some sort of campaign to cartel the number of userboxes on Wikipedia as well. --TheFarix (Talk) 19:16, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I know about the campaign, but I figured this was reasonable as there are already a number of userboxes for major anime series.  The main userboxes I've seen complaints about are ridiculous things like "this user likes to shampoo himself with octopus ink and likes worms" or similar total nonsense.  And about the size: I've seen userboxes vary in size from the standard 45 pixels to nearly double that; how much smaller should this one be? Dark Shikari 21:16, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Image isn't free, you can't use it. Ever wonder why most userboxes are really ugly? It's cuz we can't do fair use. It sucks. --SeizureDog 23:16, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But the image is a clip of something used in a Wikipedia article. Can I use a vector-drawn image (fanart) instead? Dark Shikari 00:39, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You cannot use images considered fair use in templates as you can in regular articles. An original drawing of a copyrighted character can become PD as far as I am aware, but don't take my word for it. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 00:47, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I just found this: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Stargate-color.png which is public domain and is a (fanart) drawing of the Stargate.  It is also used in a userbox.  I assume this means I can use a fanart picture of Osaka for the Azumanga Daioh userbox? Dark Shikari 00:49, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair use images can't be used anywhere other then in article space. And unfortunately, fanart is considered a copyvio and it is not covered by fair use. That is why this WikiProject no longer uses the fanart image of Midori. --TheFarix (Talk) 00:51, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Then why can the above Stargate image be used in a template? Dark Shikari 00:56, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

text: The fact that it's a drawing based off of a live-action show certainly helps. Drawing an image of a drawing is different. Mostly though, I would say it's because a copyright hound hasn't gotten around to challenging it. We had Midori for quite awhile. Most people don't care, but there are those few super anal ones that do. --SeizureDog 05:02, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In that case, I'll just stick with the "あ!" that a fellow Wikipedian added to my Azumanga template :) Dark Shikari 11:52, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Azumanga Daioh Userbox 

message: Some of you might already be aware of the spoiler tag dispute from Wikipedia talk:Spoiler warning. (For those of who who do not know about it, it is a debate on the use of spoiler tags and if they should be used on Wikipedia.) The editors involved have decided to file an RfC and start a new discussion page, in order for the debate to be more inviting to other editors. The RfC has an intro page at Wikipedia:Spoiler warning/RfC and then a structured discussion page at Wikipedia talk:Spoiler warning/RfC.  The debate is now better organized and not as heated as it was before. I'd like to invite anyone interested to get involved in the debate, even if it's just a small comment or neutral input. -- Ned Scott 01:07, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi. I'm a member of this project. By the nature of our subject, we use spoiler tags a lot. Would anybody mind if I made a To-Do item out of this? (Comment on Spoiler warning RfC) --GunnarRene 03:08, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure what you mean, like an "article needs spoiler checking" list? --Squilibob 07:03, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I mean like putting "Comment on Spoiler warning RfC" in Template:WikiProject_Anime_and_manga/to_do, but perhaps it's better to wait until there's a Template for Deletion on the spoiler templates themselves. --GunnarRene 07:11, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spoiler tag Request for comment 

message: On a random article click-thru, I ran across an article on George Manley evidently written by George Manley himself: .  The draft as it was extremely non-encyclopedic and heavily press-releasish (before); I did my best to preserve notability while cutting away the promotional stuff (after).  However, I am not heavily into anime, and figured I might not be the best person to contact him regarding a "arrrrrgh, don't do that again!!!!" message.  So I figured I'd give you guys a heads-up for two reasons: (a) so you could welcome him to Wikipedia and encourage him to participate in WikiProject Anime & Manga; and (b) perhaps to more kindly explain to him why he should stay away from his own article per Wikipedia:Autobiography, or at least not make it a press release. :-) — Mike (talk • contribs) 19:54, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  George Manley 

message: I hate to beg like this, but the Boogiepop series has been on Peer Review for well over a week now without comment.  I would like to know where the article is at so I can work it for Good Article in the near future (after I get this to Good Article, I plan to focus on Boogiepop Phantom and do the same with it).  If anyone could assist, it would be most appreciated. Elric of Grans 04:11, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Boogiepop series on Peer Review 

message: I just created the page for School Days, which is probably the first in the "visual novel" genre to drop the novel bit and adapt only animation throughout the game. Has anyone else played this? I hadn't managed to finish it yet, and so probably need help to get the stubs filled in.
Also, can anyone give a brief translation on this? I can only make out that he's considered one of the worst male protaginists in adult games, but no more than that...I can't make out the other references or meanings.
*そのあまりのヘタレっぷり、プレーヤーの選択と逆の行動をとるウザさ、その結果もたらされた悲惨な結末のため、「WHITE ALBUM」の藤井冬弥、「君が望む永遠」の鳴海孝之と並ぶ、「アダルトゲームにおける最悪のヘタレ主人公」という不名誉な評価を得る。
:Sounds like an interesting game. I always did hate the still frameness of traditional visual novels. Do try to get it an infobox though. --SeizureDog 18:41, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[School Days]] Help

message: I notice that the genres in the manga infoboxes (romance, comedy, adventure etc) don't match the genres listed here Manga#Genres.  Is this something that should be fixed?  Perhaps this would also fix the unresolved genre request above... Bookgrrl 21:52, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no manga infobox—unless you count the manga component of the animanga infobox, which doesn't have a genre field in it. Also the genre list on the manga article is grossly incomplete. A much more complete list exists on the anime article. --TheFarix (Talk) 21:57, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey Farix, saw your posts in the discussion above.  Yes, that's what I was referring to (sorry, my knowledge of manga and anime is scant, I'm just trying to DAB the romance links!)  The main anime article does indeed have a far better list of genres, and it also says "for additional genres see the movie genres" so those I think I can legitimately link to romance film, eh? Bookgrrl 00:30, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you are only talking about anime, yes, linking to romance film wouldn't be a problem. But most of Wikipedia's articles on the subject are not focused on just the anime or manga, but both. --TheFarix (Talk) 00:49, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Can't we just not link to romance? It's a super generic term anyway.   --Kunzite 17:11, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Genre Redux

message: User:Tjstrf/User Bleach
I originally was simply making it for my personal page, but after a quick conversion to field input, I have created what I believe could be a bit more useful than the generic Template:User WP Anime message. Considering the 2,500+ articles this project encompasses, very few of us would possibly possess the time or patience to edit more than a small fraction of these pages. In recognition of this,  my box allows a user to specify what their main series of interest is as an editor by field input. 
If anyone else thinks it would be good to have this box listed alongside the other version, I'll retitle it ("User WP Anime series" or "User WP Anime2", probably) and place it in the main template space. --tjstrf 00:47, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Userbox version. 

message: If a seiyu portrays his or her character on stage is he/she still considered a seiyu or are they now an actor? --Kunzite 02:49, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They'd be both, and should probably be credited seperately within the article/infobox for both roles. --tjstrf 05:04, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Seiyu encompasses both... Kyaa the Catlord 17:33, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How would seiyū encompass both? The "声" (sei) in "声優" (seiyū) specifically applies it to voice acting. --SeizureDog 21:54, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Kyaa has the mistake impression that seiyū is a title instead of a job discription, voice actor. --TheFarix (Talk) 22:04, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Seiyu question

message: I've removed the userbox, as template userboxen are on their way out on Wikipedia. If one of you wants to move it to your userspace, I'll provide source to what was there. --Improv 19:52, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Incorrect. Personal userboxes are userfying, per the German Solution, but Babel and project userboxes are staying in the template space. In fact, many of the idiotic personal userboxes (like Template:User dlph) seem to be staying in template space as well, just not the personal viewpoint ones. If they had some gigantic straw poll on the issue to change this, by all means give a link. --tjstrf 19:56, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I believe that the german solution says that userboxes can be mored to the project namespace?  It's been a while since I had read that.  I thought about proposing a move, but decided that I didn't care about user boxes and ignored it. --Kunzite 20:36, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it says that you move them to User: pages. However, this whole deletion of wikiproject userboxes seems to be supported by little but "Improv says" at this point. Unless Jimbo made a mailing list post to support it within the last 5 hours, (last time I checked it) which I doubt. --tjstrf 20:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Undone. I was a bit too hasty in this, and didn't take in enough context to make the decision I should've made. --Improv 20:46, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I've looked over both WP:TGS and WP:T1D, both briefly today and in their entirety in the past, and nowhere does anyone seriously mention deleting project userboxes. As best I can tell, Improv just came up with this idea on his own and decided to try seeing if he could make it fly. (Sort of like the be bold principle, only with admin tools and protected page deletions.) It's not like you can confuse the project box with something polemical... Well, whatever, he undid it, and we're saved a bloody trip through Deletion review. Hopefully he'll try getting some actual consensus next time. --tjstrf 08:57, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

text: About userboxes.. now, I decided a while back to make a couple of anime series infoboxes, including one for SHnY. Looking over the pages on creating and using userboxes I determined that creating them in template space was a bad idea and would not go down well so created them in my own userspace and listed them in the middle of the required page where most people who would be interested will never see them. Since them three other userboxes for the series have been made, in template space, and listed in plain sight at Wikipedia:Userboxes/Anime. Something is not working here. Shiroi Hane 22:57, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  -userbox 

message: Hello there! I was looking on Wikipedia and I realize that the whole Gundam Universe (that is, Universal Century) is in total despair. I was wondering if there is some old-school Gundam fans that are willing to work with me in expanding this articles (U.C only! there is already too much info regarding SEED and Wing) Messhermit 13:28, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, someone did start WikiProject Mobile Operation System a while back, but it hasn't had a lot of activity lately.  Maybe you can re-new the flame there. (and maybe rename to WikiProject Gundam? Just a thought). -- Ned Scott 19:07, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New Project

message: Many big animes pages currently don't have big pieces of infomation like the groups that have fansub/scanlation/fandub releases of the anime/manga in question.  For example, the Lunar group isn't mentioned on the Bleach (manga) page as of writing.  Neither is the AonE group mentioned on Naruto.  These groups are big reasons for the success of these shows, and for their later English releases.  It could also be useful infomation for people looking for copies of the shows to download (reminder: this is a legal practice if the content is not licenced in the country of watcher).
This is probably useful infomation for people, and it's probably the kind of thing we ought to include in a userbox or something of the like.  Agree?  --CalPaterson 15:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's because it's against wikipedia policy to include information about linking to sites with major copyright infringement.  They are frequenly removed from articles whenever they get added. See WP:EL, Occasionally acceptable links, #5 --Kunzite 16:00, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Bad idea, and against policy. If people need the names of the fansub groups that bad, a few seconds of searching on Google should suffice for them. (Even the ever-elusive null group can be found in less than 12 minutes) Or, they could always check the article talk page, where it will often come up in the course of discussion over proper romanization. It's not worth putting wikipedia in possible legal danger to save people 5 seconds in their Google search. --tjstrf 16:31, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: On top of that, there are no verifiable sources that will link a particular fansub group to the success of a particular anime instead of the anime being successful on its own merits. --TheFarix (Talk) 17:02, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

text: If you used the fansub translation as a reference, that might be acceptable. -- Ned Scott 18:25, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

text: "(reminder: this is a legal practice if the content is not licenced in the country of watcher)" No it is not. While it is only considered to be a more moral practice if it's not licensed in your country; it's still illegal. --SeizureDog 01:42, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless you live in a country that doesn't acknowledge international copyright law, of course. Which the U.S. does, and the servers are based there. Maybe Wikipedia should outsource its servers to Afghanistan? --tjstrf 02:06, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding lists of fansub groups covering animes to an infobox or something akin 

message: It seems that Manwha articles such as ID_eNTITY have been using manga infoboxes, troublesome for two reasons: 
# They get added into the :Category:Manga series 
# The infoboxes say "Mnaga" in them, leading to possible confusion.
Now I'm no good with infoboxes and such, so if someone could whip up a quick solution that'd be great.--SeizureDog 22:23, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok I copied some Template: Infobox Animanga sections into a Template: Infobox manwha page. Edit as needed. --Squilibob 00:13, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Manwha infobox needed

message: I know you guys have already been informed of the spoiler tag RfC, noted above on this talk page, but I thought I'd give you guys an update.
I thought I'd let editors here know that revisions are being proposed and discussed for WP:SPOILER and its templates at Wikipedia talk:Spoiler warning/guidelines. This is a result of the (still open) RfC going on at Wikipedia:Spoiler warning/RfC. Any input and collaboration between fictional guidelines and WikiProjects is welcome and encouraged.
In addition, it was proposed on the RfC talk page that it might be a good idea to have some WikiProjects discuss this issue themselves and also present a "group answer". It might be a good way to get a fresh take on the issue and avoid groupthink.  Basically, start a discussion on how your project uses spoiler tags and notices, and what you think could be improved about the process and the WP:SPOILER guidelines. Individuals are still free to comment with their own personal ideas and comments as well. -- Ned Scott 03:32, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that without spoiler tags it will be restrictive on how anime articles are set out. For a readers reading about an anime that they  haven't seen, how else do we provide as much information as we can without spoiling it except for restricting what goes where? -Squilibob 06:23, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spoiler tag usage