Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Archive 14

message: Last year the article for the Tomo-Dachi anime convention was proposed for deletion, an argument that we defeated Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tomo-Dachi. Now after huge improvements and advice from you guys here it has AGAIN been proposed for deletion on the grounds that it’s not big enough. 
Conventions in the UK are not large, the biggest being 1,200 because its the one everyone goes to, so Tomo-Dachi's 200 might seem small however this is only the con's third year and we were the first Anime convention to run on the island of Ireland and also the largest to date. I ask that you guys add your 5 cents to the deletion request and weather you believe it should be deleted Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tomo-Dachi (2) Butch-cassidy 11:22, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The article still lacks reliable third-party sources. It is entirely based on press releases, reprints of press releases, or information on AnimeCons.com. If you wish for the article to be kept, work on finding more third-party sources. --Farix (Talk) 14:12, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Butch, please read my comments in the AfD. They're MUCH more constructive than the previous AfD comment. :: Colin Keigher (Talk) 18:20, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tomo-Dachi listed for deletion AGAIN

message: It appears that the WikiFoundation is coming down on fair use images except for a couple of exceptions (see WP:AN#Important notice regarding fair use that all administrators should see). Unfortunately for us, using Fair Use images for "identification" proposes isn't going to be one of the exceptions. While I'm not suggesting for anyone to immediately run and remove FU images from anime and manga articles, we should at least avoid uploading any new FU images until the full report comes out. --Farix (Talk) 14:02, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair Use images 

message: Hi there everyone i just joined the project. anyways i have noticed that Negima article is still just giving information on the old version of Negima. is there any way we can add some information of the new anime if it hasnt been done yet. as far as the characters are concerned they havent changed at all. however in the newer version some have changed drasticly!! even the ghost is present even more. i dont know exactly how to nominate articles to be reviewed and such (as i said im new) but i think we should focus a bit on the Negima article since it has changed since the release of the new anime. Maverick423 17:03, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh, by the "new" anime do you mean Negima!?, its article is seperate from Negima!--SeizureDog 20:50, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Both of the anime's have their own separate article. I don't think you need to mention all the differences between them. --Malevious  Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 16:46, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

text: There is already the Pactio (Negima) article for the Pactio cards. --Squilibob 00:23, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Negima 

message: Should  have  to match ?~ZytheTalk to me! 16:52, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know, but that latter category should be "Manga and anime characters with the power to fly" so that it matches its supercategory. --Masamage 19:16, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

text: It would be better to nominate :Category:Manga and anime characters who can fly for deletion... --Kunzite 23:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can someone tell me why these categories are "Manga and anime" instead of "Anime and manga". I always thought that when you list things, you generally put them in alphabetical order. --Farix (Talk) 00:43, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps because a lot of anime are based on manga, but manga based on anime is rarer...? --`/aksha 04:23, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That doesn't make much sense though. You also have anime exclusive characters and manga exclusive as well. And it doesn't roll off the tongue no where near as easy either. --Farix (Talk) 04:41, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *shrugs* it was just a bit of speculation on my part. I have a feeling there's no particular reason for it - someone made a first "manga and anime" category and people just followed suite. --`/aksha 04:51, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: On closer inspection, it seems like the cats used to be just for "anime characters". If you check the history for :Category:Manga and anime characters who can fly, you'll notice that it was originally named "Anime Charachters who can fly" and then moved by Cydebot per a "category for discussion" (although i can't seem to find the discussion for it). So when the cat was renamed to include manga characters, no one probably really noticed or cared whether the manga bit got added before or after anime. Don't really see the point in changing it now either. --`/aksha 04:55, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's also look at the other times anime and manga is combined. First, the WP is called "Anime and manga" instead of "Manga and anime", mainly because it is the natural order when people speak of the two together. Then stub category uses "Anime and manga" as well, we then have :Category:Anime and manga terminology, :Category:Anime and manga inspired webcomics, List of games based on anime and manga, List of shōjo anime and manga. The only times we use "Manga and anime" are with the character and fictional element categories, all patterned after :Category:Manga and anime characters. There is just no consistency with the cat names and there really should be. --Farix (Talk) 05:00, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How's about making a Category rename proposal? --Kunzite 05:32, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category question 

message: I think that vandal  has re-incarnated as , joining her other sock puppets  and . See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Archive 13#Kagome under attack. JRSpriggs 09:50, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you're sure it's her, try filing a report over at Wikipedia:Suspected sockpuppets. NeoChaosX  (talk, walk) 10:22, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The process seems to be too complex and unreliable. Too much bureaucracy. I would ask an administrator to list all registered users who have used IP 74,103.19.52 and whether any of them have used other IP addresses. But it appears that that would be an invasion of her privacy. JRSpriggs 07:58, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  LucifaelsBride re-incarnated again 

message: (Crossposted to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan)
I currently have content dispute with User:1523 on a writer's plagiarism claim against Case Closed (Case_Closed#Plagiarism_Claim, Picasso-kun no tantei note#Note). His claims to WP:V are all in Japanese, and I don't know any of it. I wanted some help in clearing up this issue, thanks!--Samuel CurtisShinichian-Hirokian-- TALK·CONTRIBS 16:01, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japanese help needed 

message: Hiya. While cleaning up this article I noticed it was also within the scope of WP:Anime and Manga and had previously been rated as a Start-class. Now that it's been nicely revamped, sourced and generally made to look nice, I'd be thrilled if someone would assess it again. Thanks in advance. MalikCarr 08:53, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I've done further cleaning per SeizureDog's statements on that article's talk page. How's it look now? MalikCarr 04:49, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zeong 

message: Does anybody here have Tokyo Mew Mew Manga in Japanese?
Could somebody please take a scan of the page in volume 2 where it introduces all of the characters and recap (it's page 10 in the English translation). It should say what her age is at the top and what her school grade is at the bottom (in the recap of the last episode).
I really need a scan to settle a long running WP:V/WP:OR dispute. I need to see for myself which Kanji/Kana are used and where.
perfectblue 16:49, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Settle an argument 

message: Hey guys does anyone know when the Inuyasha final movie or episodes are ganna come out? im not talking about the ones right now im talking about the final final movie were they kill naraku. i havent heard anymore news on it and i hate to be left on a cliff hanger status. =( Maverick423 18:26, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This isn't the best place to discuss it, but AFAIK right now in Japan Inuyasha is at volume 50 and Naraku is still alive. --Εξαίρετος (msg) 18:47, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 494 chapters, and I don't think anything significant has happened to the cast for at least the last 150. --tjstrf talk 21:47, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question about a anime 

message: Hi all. When looking at the :Category:Anime and manga stubs category, I'm missing a :Category:Mangaka stubs subcategory here. I think most articles on mangakas are stubs anyway, so this could be useful. Maybe I need to talk this over on the stub sorting project first - I'm not sure how to go about this. Can anyone help? Ninja neko 18:45, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Find 60 or so articles in :Category:Manga artists and propose a new stub type with them as examples. I think it's a good idea to subcategorize the anime-stub type. A manga artist or mangaka stub is a good idea as opposed to the failed anime-series-stub which is useless. --Squilibob 04:29, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would recommend  with :Category:Manga artist stubs to be consistent with :Category:Manga artists. --Farix (Talk) 17:31, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Oh, I don't know. Maybe it has something to do with not being used, and it didn't solve the problem with :Category:Anime and manga stubs being to large. Instead, it simply transfered the problem over to a different stub cat. --Farix (Talk) 17:31, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But that's what stub cats are supposed to do: organize the stubs to make them easier to find, especially when there are a lot of them. I wouldn't be surprised if there were at least 60 manga artist stubs. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:39, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was referring to  which is useless and doesn't solve anything.  is an entirely different matter. --Farix (Talk) 17:31, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mangaka stub 

message: That ought to grab some attention out of the romanisation stuff. Is there any (good) reason why we're not making any importance ratings? More importantly, has there been a discussion about it? If not, I think we should take a decision asap, and let the good people at WP 1.0 wether we're in or out. If so, was there any good reasons not so? I personally can think about one or two ways to start it, and think it would give the Project more tenure and progression potential. For one thing, it would let us know if the huge amount of stubs is normal as it covers only unimportant stuff, or wether we have to work on some. I'll wait for answers before talking about a grading method. --SidiLemine 13:34, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've retitled the section to reflect the topic. But it was mainly rejected because, well frankly, because only the very main topics would be of any importance. The rest of the articles would be of "Low" importance. But then fans of the a series would also pounce in and demand that the importance of Anime X should be higher because of how Great/Influential/Novel/Old/Iconic/Popular or what have you. Most of us figured it was better to avoid the whole mess. --Farix (Talk) 17:43, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The whole point of the importance system is to determine which articles need to go in Wikipedia 1.0. And in reality, the number of our articles that need to be included there is exactly two...anime and manga.--SeizureDog 19:17, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And maybe History of anime. But WikiProject Japan has them all covered, so there is no need for the redundancy. --Farix (Talk) 19:52, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: When are we going to get around to bringing manga and anime up to at least good status anyways? I plan on ordering some books off of Amazon someday to help, but I need to get a job first...--SeizureDog 20:42, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps submitting it to a peer review may help. --Squilibob 08:14, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Importance assessment 

message: Does anyone know a lot about the United States/Canada child pornography laws? Someone was talking to me about slash fiction the other day, and it occured to me that a lot of the popular sexy-fanfic pairings are actually under age 18. When someone writes a lemon about Sailor Moon or Harry Potter characters, does it count as child porn? --Masamage 03:00, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it doesn't. Because Sailor Moon or Harry Potter characters aren't children - they're not real period. Even if they where, i doubt they're covered by "child pornography" laws. pornography implies visual. I really doubt text stories count. --`/aksha 03:05, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oddly enough, it DOES count in some countries (Canada to name but one that I know of). Not in the US or Japan though. But if you look at it realistically, it's no different than a story where someone gets killed or raped or whatever else. There's even the Dakota_Fanning issue where she's in an actual film as a raped 12 year old, or for a more classic example, Taxi Driver) - though granted neither case glorifies younger people having sex (one's being raped, the other is a prostitude), it's still directly about it. (Once again, I can't see too much what this has to do with WP directly, though, but it's an issue that people really ought to know about.) As is often the case, WP has an article about it: here♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 03:23, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Check with a lawyer if you want to be sure, but I seem to remember hearing that the Supreme Court decided that made-up drawings of children (cartoons like in anime and manga) cannot violate the child pornography laws. Those laws were justified as protecting actual children from being exploited by punishing people who manufacture, sell, buy, or otherwise participate in child pornography. Since a drawing from one's imagination does not exploit a real child, it is not covered (if I remember correctly). Also it might be difficult to say whether a cartoon "person" is a minor or not. JRSpriggs 07:02, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It all depends what the age limit is in Cartoonland.--SidiLemine 12:11, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weird question 

message: I propose that seiyuu pages should follow the same style. I was looking at the Saeko Chiba#Voice_roles and it was very difficult to find her role in specific series since the list is sorted by character name. In comparison, look at Tanaka Rie's page and see how much friendlier it looks. I think we should make all voice roles the same style, probably something in the lines of the list on Rie Tanaka's article. 
Specifically, I would like to see the roles sorted by series, and bolded main roles. As far as Japanese text goes, I'm not sure what we should do with them. Leave them out and put it on the series/character page? --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 06:47, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It definitely makes far more sense to list alphabetically by romanized series title than by character title, especially on seiyū pages with a large number of roles listed (Tesshō Genda and Sumi Shimamoto for example). I recommend the format used on those two pages as it's very logical and easy to read. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:48, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't remember where I saw it, but there was a guideline that specified that filmologies and bibliographies should be arranged in order by date. But I can't remember if that was oldest to recent, or recent to oldest. --Farix (Talk) 21:19, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Oh yes, here it is: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (lists of works) --Farix (Talk) 21:32, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While I prefer listing alphabetically (as it makes it easier to find specific titles, especially in long lists, and if you don't know when a particular title came out), I'm fine with listing by year. However, I also think this causes issue when you have series which span multiple years, or come out one year, skip a bit, come out another year, skip again, and come out another year. This is why I prefer alphabetical. And I believe that if someone wants to know when something came out, they can click the link for the series. Either way, the role should absolutely not be listed before the title of the show in which the role appears. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 22:18, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wholly agree. --Masamage 22:20, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Style proposal 

message: O-hayō gozaimasu! I recently proposed a Bleach WikiProject at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals and thought that some users might be interested in voicing their opinions. A couple of the project's goals are listed on the proposal page and if the project passes the proposal, I will get started on an official to-do list. I'm willing to hear any and all criticism, comments, and ideas to help improve the project. Thank you for your time! // PoeticDecay 15:41, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Bleach 

message: Hi. Just trying to get my head around stubs and wanted to ask a question. When exactly are stubs added? According to the stub page they are only be added to articles that are to be aspired to and those very good ones, however I have found them on many articles including start articles. So when does the stub added? Butch-cassidy 15:54, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure what you mean. Stubs is what very short articles are called. When someone creates a very short article, a stub is born. Then this person, or someone else, adds the "stub" template at the bottom, and voila! You have it. --SidiLemine 11:04, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Stubbing articles

message: Hi guys. I came across a manga stub that was nominated for deletion. One of the reasons was non-notability (WP:N). After reading this guideline, I wondered how to apply this on manga articles. Are all mangas notable? When is a manga not notable? Are all licensed mangas notable? 
Perhaps this issue has been discussed here already - but I think it may be good to come to a consensus on this notability thing, so we'd have some sort of general guideline for this to include on the project page?
I've been creating new stubs lately, some from the requested article pile, some from the red links on the list of shoujo manga. But if they're to be deleted due to non-notability, I'd better stop wasting my time... Ninja neko 19:02, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd argue that anything that went past a couple volumes, anything licensed internationally, and anything by a notable author is notable enough as a book series to qualify for inclusion. (+Anima, for instance, is a pretty minor series as far as manga go, but for a book perspective it's a 4 book internationally published series.) Dojin and one-shots probably not, unless they won an award or something. The real notability issue we deal with is at what level of detail to stop covering things. Specifically, whether detailed coverage of the characters and story and attacks and so on of a 400 chapter series is evil fancruft or us doing our duty of making the plot summary comprehensible. --tjstrf talk 19:11, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I would first see if it would passes WP:BK as it will trump WP:N as a subject specific notability guideline. But we probably do have a number of non-notable manga and anime on the wiki that really should go. That is why I would suggest not creating any more stubs and try to fill out the articles that are their with as much reliable sourced information that you can find. Or at the very least, provide a list of possible references on the article's talk page. --Farix (Talk) 21:33, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: BTW, if you find any anime or manga related AFDs, then transclude them over into Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Anime and manga. --Farix (Talk) 21:34, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Speaking of WP:BK, I forgot one of the most obvious claims to notability: an anime adaptation. ("The book has been made or adapted with attribution into a motion picture that was released into multiple commercial theaters, or was aired on a nationally televised network or cable station in any country.") --tjstrf talk 21:42, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

text: If WP:BK is our notability standard, then we have a lot of deleting (or merging) to do.   The request list has (or had) a lot of minor and one-shot manga titles (i.e. the title had only one tankoubon) and there were a lot of empty stub article created for titles there.  I'd suggest we move these minor articles on titles to the mangaka's wikipedia article.  --Kunzite 23:17, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a good idea given that the mangaka is also notable. And it's better we do the cleanup before the deletionist cabal comes charging in. --Farix (Talk) 00:55, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That project seems to have very weak goals.  Perhaps we should start a manga review/merge taskforce.  --Kunzite 05:43, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

text: A volume isn't necessarily a standard length though, and someone could be verbose and still fail notability. Any notability based on length seems difficult to keep consistent. Leebo86 17:58, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, though I think we do need something for manga series. As I wrote above, I'm not sure where the line should be drawn. The above was just an example, or sample, wording. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:22, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, I know this is not exactly the same, but what if we took this standard and applied it to legnthy fanfiction?  I've known people to write multi-volume novel legnth fanfictions.  Would those be considered any more notable?  I dunno.   I'd rather use the same standard we use at WP:FICT  In the absence of any other evidence of notability, a topic on a minor manga or anime (film, OVA, light novel, etc) should be kept with the parent (mangaka, video game, article) unless an encyclopedic treatment of the subject causes the overstep readability limits.   This allows us to keep relevent information, bolster mangaka articles which might not have much content anyway, discourage cruft, encourage citation, and allow for future expansion if necessary.  --Kunzite 06:05, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds good to me: create subsections on the mangaka page until such time as the subsection becomes unwieldy and large enough to stand solidly on it's own as a separate article. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:50, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Manga Notability 

message: The only thing WP:BK doesn't address is how long a series of books has to be in order to be notable. Lenghty series, I believe, are notable because they are lengthy, though I'm not sure at what point they become notable. I think something like, "A series of books is considered notable if it is published by a major publisher and is at least 3 volumes long." That avoids self-published works from qualifying unless they meet another criteria. Thoughts? ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 17:54, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A volume isn't necessarily a standard length though, and someone could be verbose and still fail notability. Any notability based on length seems difficult to keep consistent. Leebo86 17:58, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, though I think we do need something for manga series. As I wrote above, I'm not sure where the line should be drawn. The above was just an example, or sample, wording. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:22, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, I know this is not exactly the same, but what if we took this standard and applied it to legnthy fanfiction?  I've known people to write multi-volume novel legnth fanfictions.  Would those be considered any more notable?  I dunno.   I'd rather use the same standard we use at WP:FICT  In the absence of any other evidence of notability, a topic on a minor manga or anime (film, OVA, light novel, etc) should be kept with the parent (mangaka, video game, article) unless an encyclopedic treatment of the subject causes the overstep readability limits.   This allows us to keep relevent information, bolster mangaka articles which might not have much content anyway, discourage cruft, encourage citation, and allow for future expansion if necessary.  --Kunzite 06:05, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds good to me: create subsections on the mangaka page until such time as the subsection becomes unwieldy and large enough to stand solidly on it's own as a separate article. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:50, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible addition to WP:BK

message: I suggest that we merge Wikipedia:Anime and Manga Collaboration of the Week into Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Collaboration of the Week.  Cocoaguy ここがいい contribstalkTodays Pick 23:49, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's fine just where it is. --Farix (Talk) 00:46, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move page [[Wikipedia:Anime and Manga Collaboration of the Week]] 

message: Does one exist currently? If not, is it customary to discuss the creation of a new category before implementing it? I've never created a new one. I can think of 10 or so that I could put in the category, but I'm sure there are more. Any thoughts? Leebo86 15:28, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it would be a good thing to add but I'm still new at Wiki so I dont know all the ins and outs of Category creation either ^^ Butch-cassidy 20:38, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Category:Television programs based on novels could be an option. --Squilibob 22:36, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting, though it's not quite what I had in mind. I thought of this because it would keep the anime separate from the other types of shows or movie adaptations, and because I wanted to group anime film, TV, and OVA adaptations together. Some of them might fall under that other category, but this category would be a bit different. Leebo86 23:12, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you created this category then there would be a precedent to create similar categories. Anime based on live action television, Anime based on video games, Anime based on visual novels, Anime based on manga!? If they would be useful then I don't see a problem with creating them, but a lot of anime is adapted from something. --Squilibob 00:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a good thing to keep in mind. I think that it would be useful, but I'll probably do more research before starting. Thanks for the comments. Leebo86 01:06, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Category for anime adaptations of novels

message: What about a list of categories related to the project that we could be adding to articles? It would be nice to have an easy reference page, like the infobox one... Doceirias 01:05, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I did a quick mock list and added it to the Portal:Anime and manga/Categories page. What sort of layout would be useful as a checklist? I think that most of us just add categories from memory. --Squilibob 05:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's basically what I was looking for -- new to categories and having trouble figuring out which ones to use. That list is great for anime, but for manga and light novels? Doceirias 05:08, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I'll add manga to that list. As for light novels, there is just the :Category:Light novels as far as I can tell. Be aware that the anime series, anime ova, anime film and manga series categories get added to articles automatically with the infobox, so don't add them twice. --Squilibob 05:55, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good to know. Thanks Doceirias 06:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Categories

message: I'm going to be adding info on several light novels, and light novel authors, but it looks like, other than the infobox, policies on these haven't become standardized yet. Particularly with the author pages. There isn't a category for light novels author yet, but before I start making one, what should it be? Light novel authors? Light novel writers? Something else? Doceirias 01:05, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, there is the poorly-filled :Category:Graphic novelists and a lot of other :Category:Novelists (mostly by nationality).  :Category:Authors redirects to :Category:Writers, so that eliminates using the former.  --Kunzite 05:54, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought we should make a new one. Obviously, they would be in a subjection under novelists, and probably under the anime or manga general headers as well, to make it easy to find...but what should the Category name be? Category:Light Novelists? Category:Light novel writers? Ishin Nishio briefly had the non-existant Category:Light novel authors on it (and he's not even a light novelist, really...borderline.) Maybe I should be asking on the novels project forum...just don't want to make it and have to move it later! Doceirias 06:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd lean toward Light Novelists, but ask at other project -- and moving isn't hard, it's automated by bots. --Kunzite 06:30, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Light Novels, and Light Novel Writers

message: I thought this may be of interest to people who have added information on voice actors or seiyū, so I'm making note here. Justin Cook has been put up for deletion on notability guidelines. I'm not really sure what to think here. I've always thought that as long as the particular voice actor has an important role to note, then it is OK to create an article. I understand the need for notability, but I hope there is some clarification on what exactly is needed here. Justin Cook in particular has voiced numerous voice roles (some I would take as pretty notable, like Yusuke Urameshi ) and he has been the subject of DVD extras, online interviews, and the Bang Zoom! documentary Adventures in Voice Acting. Do these kind of things count as reliable sources for notability or am I wrong? (maybe some published anime sources have him featured somewhere, but I don't have access to them, so I wouldn't know) If this one is deleted, I could see it as precedent for many other articles on voice actors to be deleted, and I don't want to contributing to them if it is determined to be something that is not supposed to be on Wikipedia. --EmperorBrandon 05:11, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you sure that this article is up for deletion? As far as I can tell the tagger is just asking for references. If you add a couple of references to the page I think that you'll satisfy the tagger and notablity policy. As for precedent, I think a lot of people don't believe in precedent when it comes to Afds, see Wikipedia:Pokémon test for example. --Squilibob 05:55, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Eh, I'm no fan of the Pokemon test.. I'd say just look at the guy's voice credits. It seems fine to me. -- Ned Scott 06:21, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Sorry, I may have been a bit confused on the whole deletion thing. "More likely to be considered for deletion"... which I guess is not as harsh as it first appeared to me. I do agree with Ned Scott though in my thought that the significant voice credits (for prominent, commercially released series) would be enough. The links to online databases provide in the external links provide enough reference to that in my opinion. --EmperorBrandon 08:09, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I think you can cite the documentary, online interviews (be careful, no fansites) and the DVD interviews and if he has a fairly large number of google hits, that's additional evidence of notability.  I think the article can be made to demonstrate notability.  Seiyu usuallly meet WP:BIO because of "Multiple features in popular culture publications such as Vogue, GQ, Elle, FHM or national newspapers" -- voice actors have a higher status in Japan than they do in the US.  (But, unfortunately, we don't use it to source articles because they require too much translation.)  We push it with some of the minor ones.  Too bad that there is not a good anime wiki set up elsewhere.    --Kunzite 06:20, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

text: WP:BIO is the notability guideline used for people. --Farix (Talk) 21:25, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability of voice actors in anime 

message: ok guys i got a quick question. as you all know im making a manga (or whatever its called in the US) and well basicly i want to know what is the process of it comming out here on wikipedia? do i have to ship it all over the US and stuff and have lots of people reading it and stuff or something like that?
if it ever does make it though can i personally edit it or do i have to sit back and watch only? Maverick423 18:29, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So... you're making an OEL manga? Well, if it does get released and distributed by a major publisher, someone will probably create the article. You shouldn't, because that would a be conflict of interest. Leebo86 18:36, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

text: If someone makes the article, I would strongly discourage you from editing it. If you feel that you must participate, you could always leave a note on the talk page and another editor could look over the info and add it. It's best for a third party individual to add the information. Leebo86 18:50, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

text: If you would like to publish the actual manga/doujin/OELmanga/etc.. on wikipedia: you can't. Try Wikibooks.  You'd have to release the content under the GFDL or similar and play with all of that fun licensing stuff.  If you're inquiring about a Wikipedia article about yet-to-be published manga/doujin/whatever then there are several general criteria that the work has to meet the book notability guidelines. (Which is more than just being picked up by a major distributor.) --Kunzite 23:18, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  question