Talk:Scanlation

message: How often is "almost never"? Is there a record of known prosecutions that can be cited? Babybahamut 12:09, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed that part of the sentence - I don't think it was necessary to be there. Highwind888 (talk) 04:57, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "It is almost never prosecuted, however" 

message: I am going to nominate this article for a promotion, as it meets the Good article criterion. If you disagree with me, please discuss why under this section. PLEASE do not just delete my nomination . That is all. Busboy 07:37, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nominate 

message: I have reviewed the article, and do not feel that it meets the good article standards at this time for the following reasons:
#The article lacks an image, which is a requirement for good articles.
#The article is almost completely unreferenced (or, at least, it's impossible to tell what claims can be verified where)
#Several sections such as the censorship section do not have a clear relationship to the subject.
#The legal and ethical issues section seems contradictory, saying that it's hardly ever prosecuted and then noting a bunch of cease-and-desist letters.
Good luck revising the article. I look forward to reading it again. Phil Sandifer 15:56, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA nomination failed

message: With regards to the above, I would like to ask a few questions as I polish this article. 
1) Do we really need the censorship section? I Kind of get its point, but its mostly superfluous. 
B) some sources would be great. I can't find them now due to time constraints, but, some help would be great.
That is all for now. 141.149.123.31 03:09, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  With regards... 

message: I added an unreferenced and clean up tag to the page. The unreferenced tag due to there being no references and the clean up tag due to the amount of irrelevant information within the article. MastaFighta (talk) 02:08, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unreferenced and Clean Up Tag Added 

message: This section, as it was, had NOTHING to do with scanslations - it was strictly about the practice in commerical releases. However, censorship is one reason fans give in support of continued scanslation, so I tossed in some of the other common reasons that get bandied around in scanslation circles. Tweaked the censorship section because my inner anthropologist was annoyed at the suggestion that "the west" has a set of cultural mores... "the west" is a big place, and what'll get you killed in one part of "the west" isn't even worth mentioning on other parts.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.153.44.244 (talk) 12:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  Work needs to be done in this section.  There is a small section in the legal and ethical issues section that has to do with censorship (Third-to-last paragraph), which I believe does not belong there.  It has nothing to do with legality or ethics - but is a reason why some some people scanlate.  I think this paragraph should be moved to the censorship section, and certain parts of the current censorship section removed. Highwind888 (talk) 04:45, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Censorship 

message: "is a term used for manga comics which have been scanned and translated by fans from their original language (usually Japanese or Korean) to another language, commonly English, French or Spanish"
Tell me what is the term for scanning and translating European comics into English or another language, scanning and translating American comics into all kinds of languages? I would also call them scanlations. --Zoli79  —Preceding comment was added at 13:26, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems like reasonable usage. But the term arose in the manga fan community and so far seems limited to it. I haven't seen it applied to comics from any other country (if you can find a citation I'd love to be proven wrong). And fan translations of European comics seem very rare. Fan translations of American comics into other languages may not even be much of a phenomenon. Part of this may be due to different copyright laws in America, Europe, and Japan, and also commercial approaches toward enforcement (Japanese publishers seem much more forgiving when it comes to derivative works, hence the large dojinshi market). — Gwalla | Talk 00:18, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Agreed. A short mention on non-manga translations seems notable. I think I've seen the term "scanlation" used in connection to non-Asian comics, actually. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 21:39, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: only manga?!

message: Apart from shuffling the paragraphs around to better fit the titles (Forgot to log on - changes were done by me), I really wanted to remove certain parts due to irrelevance.  In the censorship section, the example regarding Tenjho Tenge and the dragonball example really don't belong here in the "resons" section.  They are simply examples of censorship that translation companies do, and has nothing to do with scanlations at all.  The first example showed dislike from fans, which may be a reason for scanlation so I believe it should stay.
What do people think?  should the other two examples be removed? 
Also, I think the process section needs to be significantly reduced or entirely removed to avoid the "instructions, advice, or how-to content" tag. There's no need for it to be so lengthy!  What are people's thoughts? Highwind888 (talk) 02:20, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of certain parts 

message: Should the article be updated to note the new form of scanslation distribution: uploading as YouTube videos and the like? AnmaFinotera (talk) 08:29, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If there are sufficient amounts, I don't see why not. If there's references, it'd be even better! Highwind888 (talk) 02:56, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, looking into it further, it looks like most of the YouTube distro is actually people scanning in English licensed volumes page by page, then setting to music.  Some people have way too much time on their hands *insert eye roll*.  So guess it would be more fitting for bootleg, if any companies make official announcements about the issue (so far its been industry folks noting it in discussion forums, but nothing official, so not totally sourceable). AnmaFinotera (talk) 03:06, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok then.  It's not really scanlations then if it's licenced volumes.  *Sigh* what a waste of time and bandwidth.  I'm guessing the music is probably ripped off of some artist as well -_- . If anything does pop up (e.g. official announcements, etc) be sure to put it up ^_^. Highwind888 (talk) 03:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  YouTube Distro 

message: I'm about to go through this article and change things around, adding references and expanding and condensing sections. So far, I'm planning on doing this:
*Seriously condensing the 'Process' bit so that it isn't a 'How to...' article
*Changing strange sentences and wording, along with preferences
*Getting references
*Adding more usable information
Along with a few more minor things, that's the main list. But because this article does need lots of work, I also wanted some word on things in the article that are really irking others. Anything anybody would like me to change as I go through it?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by WhiteArcticWolf (talk • contribs) 22:14, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we can add some examples in "Reason for scanlating", i.e. costs. --deerstop (talk) 12:00, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That'd make sense. I was actually going to add an example for censorship (Tenjho Tengeto be specific), but forgot about it. The sections will also need refs. The best thing about this page is that the official sources can be the scanlation websites, so that might not be that hard to find.WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 00:10, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The only problem is the websites themselves. Are we allowed to link to the resources with pirate content?--deerstop (talk) 13:06, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That is one problem and I can't say for certain. For all other articles, it's prohibited. But scanlation websites are what the official sources would be, as there aren't that many news articles and official websites about them. Still, I'll try to find some interviews and stuff to see what can be dug up.WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 21:11, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. You're probably right. --deerstop (talk) 11:03, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Additions

message: Cleaned up this article a lot, both from a grammatical perspective and a heirarchical one.  It still needs work, however.  the NPOV should probably stay where it is for now, and there definitely need to be more citations.  I tried to remove most of the non-neutral comments, and inflammatory terms such as "scanlation pirate groups" for more neutral equivalents. I restructured the article a bit and made sure the content of each section was in fact what the heading said it should be.  I've tried to keep out notably pro- or anti- scanslation biases, though since I am a filthy hippy who is all for free access, there may still be a slight pro- bias.  I am in the USA, so if someone outside the US can take a look at it and see if it still sounds "USA ONLY" or not, that would be good.  TheStripèdOne (talk) 21:00, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you did great! The article looks a lot better. After some citations, I'm sure it'll be ready to move up to B-class. Unfortunately, citations are pretty hard to come by with this topic. I'll go onto German wiki; I think I'm at the level where I can communicate decently enough. I have a picture that would work pretty well with the page, too (I came across it awhile ago). It has a comical editor's note and the manga has yet to be released in the US, so once I'm confident enough to upload pictures, I'll deffinately add it here.WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 00:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup

message: I have some issues with the article. Firstly, it seems too manga- and English-centric. Additionally, I don't think we'd need both a "reason for scanlating" and a "reason for downloading scanlations" section. One section should suffice for both viewpoints. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 21:41, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Some issues

message: An ongoing discussion about scanlation and read online websites:
:Katherine Dacey's blog (Pop Culture Shock manga recon)
:Johanna Draper Carlson (Manga Worth Reading)
:Jason Thompson (Comixology, Otaku USA)
:David Welsh's blog (Flipped column on Tom Spurgeon's Comics Reporter)
:Simon Jones (Icarus Publishing)
:Jake Forbes on Brigid Alverson (Publishers Weekly) mangablog
All mentioned persons can assert their expertise in the Manga/Comics field. --KrebMarkt 18:18, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scanlation and read online websites 

message: I was considering amending the article with "scanalation" as alternate spelling to go with "scanlation" and "scanslation". Googling "scanalation" does reveal I'm not the only one thinking this is the spelling. But I'll just propose it and if someone else agrees make the addition or note your agreement and I'll make the addition. ToyNN (talk) 17:37, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alternate spelling proposal 

message: -- deerstop. 07:48, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible source 

message: I'm calling in to discussion whether InsideScanlation.com would be considered a reliable source over here. AngelFire3423 (talk) 06:53, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Well it's been a while. But here's some more reasoning as it's cited in the paper Understanding scanlation: how to read one million fan-translated manga pages which is published in a peer reviewed journal associated with the [Open Humanities Press]. Nothing is specifically cited inline though. Interstingly, this paper identifies Gum as Shawn Doria. A second source is a senor's honors thesis that relies on it heavily for the history parts of it; though it is an undergraduate thesis. And a graduate thesis also references it. AngelFire3423 (talk) 03:46, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  So some tweets person interviewed in InsideScanlations, , . Maybe they'll amount to something. AngelFire3423 (talk) 13:28, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion of InsideScanlation as a Source 

message: A columnist for The Japan Times wrote in 2006 here that "The United States has been a fruitful field for amateur subtitling, perhaps because U.S. copyright laws, unlike those in most developed countries, specifically excluded films never before released there. Initially, online retailers took advantage of this fact to copy and release imported, subtitled DVDs, often from Hong Kong."  Now this seems to be at odds with what many people say so some kind of check on this would be good. Could be that laws have changed since then. AngelFire3423 (talk) 10:43, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some verification needed on US laws 

message: *2010 Comics Worth Reading post on scanlation legality
*A forward to manga fans as to how to avoid resorting to scanlations Perhaps as further reading
*AstroNerdBoy series of posts on Piracy Wars -- AstroNerdBoy seems to be a reliable source and this could be helpful for the legal section and reception sections
*News post about some comics being taken down in France
*San Diego 2010 Comic-Con Panel on Piracy by Deb Aoki Draws parallels to the music and free-to-play gaming industry.
Perhaps some can be used towards a steps moving forwards type section. AngelFire3423 (talk) 05:19, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stuff that will make it on here somehow 

message: Here are some ideas for images as an article on scanlation could benefit greatly from them and it was one of the reasons cited for it failing the GA nomination.
For the infobox we could have an image of a scanner about to scan a manga. Ideally we don't want to show the cover of the manga being scanned at all since it will likely be copyrighted. For the process section, we can show the before and after of a page being cleaned. Another option is to show an english text-box being entered in GIMP or another common process like leveling. Screenshots of popular open source software used might also be helpful. (I've use ScanTailor, but don't know how popular that is).
As for which manga to use for the examples, I feel we should stay far away from using copyrighted manga under fair use considering the context of the article. Commons has a few manga pages we can use. (I was also going to suggest using Ubunchu!, but unfortunately it's non-commercial licensed) Let me know your thoughts. Opencooper (talk) 11:56, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: The line "Most, if not all, manga is not released in a digital format that is compatible with e-book readers, so downloading scanlations is the only way to do this." really bothers me. At the date of writing this a lot of manga is released digitally along with the print versions, sometimes by different publishers. Most publishers offer these digital mangas for sale on their own website, but it is also easy to purchase them using a website like Amazon. To name a few English publishers releasing digital manga: Viz Media, Kodansha Comics, Digital Manga Platinum and Yen Press (there are likely more).
With this in mind, I think the final paragraph needs to be changed considerably. But the whole section about "Motivations and ethics" is outdated in my opinion.Donkey-er (talk) 14:39, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Licensed digital released manga 

message: About 8 months ago, a bunch of scanlation discords were banned. However, the only source seems to be a Reddit post  and some tweets by affected groups . RPI2026F1 (talk) 23:32, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Allowed to use Reddit as a source about the Discord bans?