Talk:Manga/Archive 6

message: I made this a new section.Timothy Perper (talk) 23:08, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Still fixing mistakes in the references. Most of them are in citations done with the citation template. Length is down to 95,061kb from the 96,262kb (at 06:32, 31 December 2007) mentioned above = -1.2 kilobytes. Not much, maybe, but I'm only up to reference #38. Timothy Perper (talk) 17:39, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Down to 94,879 kB and I've reached reference 108. = -1.4 kB. Timothy Perper (talk) 20:48, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  My favorite error so far. Reference 195 is to an article in Business Week by Jennifer Fishbein on their website. The web cite template has a place to put "work" -- not sure I know what that means, but there's a place for it. Well, whoever fixed this reference before I got there today decided that the "work" in question was Jennifer Fishbein. I fixed it, but what were they thinking? Timothy Perper (talk) 23:08, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've gone through them all once. I fixed quite a number, and the bibliography has far fewer errors now. Is it 100% correct? Of course not. I don't guarantee that! But it's a lot better. OK, see "Phasing Out" below. Timothy Perper (talk) 22:09, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fixing references 

message: One of the peer review comments mentioned that there were some serious problems with the dojinshi material currently in the entry. We've just started a new draft section to insert instead of what's there. It's at User:Timothy Perper/SandboxDojinshi and although as of this moment, there's nothing on it, there will be. there are now some references. As always, everyone is invited over to comment and make suggestions. Thanks. Timothy Perper (talk) 15:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As I say below, I'm not going to work on the manga article in any detail any longer. So folks other than I will have to do dojinshi. Timothy Perper (talk) 06:48, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Starting New Section on Dojinshi 

message: Why cutted all images about "pre"history of manga? (These on History of manga.) Is the Museum photo the very important and most meaningful? Can these be here or there is some problem with it? --Beyond silence (talk) 02:25, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't remember any images about the "pre" history of manga, so I don't know what you mean when you ask why they were cut. "Can these be here..." Can what be here? Timothy Perper (talk) 14:01, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As History of manga...:
 --Beyond silence 17:47, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Those three images are in the History of manga entry, which is cross-referenced from the manga article. I don't think we need to duplicate them in the manga entry if they're already in the cross-referenced article. Timothy Perper (talk) 20:31, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Why problem is that? The manga article is more poor without these. I don't think everybody see the History of manga too. --Beyond silence 00:55, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Huh, whats your problem? Why don't place a Wikipe-tan picture to the introductory as other language featured manga article and take the :Image:Manga in Jp.jpeg to the Etymology headline, :Image:Hokusai-MangaBathingPeople.jpg and :Image:Japan-woodblock.jpg to the Overview of ideas? --Beyond silence 00:21, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  See below, at "Images: She goes, she comes." Do you have any idea how many times Wikipetan has been put into this article and taken out? This is genuinely funny. Timothy Perper (talk) 00:34, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: An anonymous person just added this to the end of the publications section.
:"There has been an increase in the amount of publications of original webmanga. It is internationally drawn by enthusiasts of all levels of experience, and is intended for online viewing. It can be ordered in graphic novel form if available in print."
I put a "citation needed" tag on it and will leave it for a few days, then remove it unless citations are added. BTW, webmanga is a redirect. Timothy Perper (talk) 14:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anonymous addition 

message: The time has come for me to phase out my major involvement with the manga article. Back in September or so, when Peregrine Fisher and I began a major upgrade of the article, we set ourselves a list of topics and subheadings we wanted to improve. With the addition of the new shonen section, we have reached the end of that list.
I think we succeeded in moving the article closer to GA status, though it may not be there quite yet. We have also addressed some – not all! – of the peer reviewers’ comments, and in the next few days, I’ll complete my check of the references. That will end to my major work on the article.
:: From TP: I just finished my check of the references (see above). Timothy Perper (talk) 22:18, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  And I just finished the checking. So, if you want to edit what I've done, move stuff, delete it, change reference formatting, summarize sections, move things to other articles -- by all means do so. Anyone can edit Wikipedia! Timothy Perper (talk) 22:18, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phasing out, from Tim Perper 

message: *http://ast.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manga
* http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manga: 
*http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manga: 
--Beyond silence 17:24, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikipe-tan and a similar lady in the featured manga articles of international Wikipedia

message: I just removed the B&W image of ghosts and other supernatural beings from the Overviews section, where it had been added recently by User:Beyond silence. The image is a detail of a larger woodblock print by the 19th century artist Kuniyoshi that shows a haunted house with its inhabitants scaring the hell out of several hapless people. It's one of Kuniyoshi's masterpieces (IMO) but has nothing whatsoever to do with manga at all, I mean, none. Second, the image was only a detail in B&W, and was not, IMO, a very good quality image (for one thing, it was too dark to show very much). Kuniyoshi has an entire entry of his own, which he deserves, but this image is not related to overviews of the history of manga, which is where the image was located. So I removed it. Timothy Perper (talk) 15:21, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: So then fuck! Remove all picture! Strange, but makers of documentum film in Animatrix thinked this is related with the manga. "Manga (漫画, Manga?) listen (help·info) is the Japanese word for comics (sometimes called komikku コミック) and print cartoons.[1][2][3] In their modern form, manga date from shortly after World War II[4] but have a long, complex history in earlier Japanese art.[5][6][7]" This picture showing about earlier Japanese art, the root of manga... stupid. English manga article is suck!  --Beyond silence 17:16, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Be careful, Beyond silence. You're pushing the envelope. Timothy Perper (talk) 18:00, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please remain civil in your interactions. It's obvious by your comments that English is not your first language, but you can still be polite when interacting with others. If you have ideas for improving the article, please post them here, but please do it in a calm and polite manner. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 01:22, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: My ideas declared as shit. --Beyond silence 15:30, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed poor quality image from Overviews section 

message: User:Beyond silence has put Wikipetan back against prior consensus, and without discussion restored an image I removed as poor quality and irrelevant to the text and to the article. My sense is that with these changes the article is heading away from GA. I also sense that User:Beyond silence is not willing to listen to consensus nor listen to the preferences and ideas of editors who have worked on this article for quite some time. He is, in my opinion, acting without consensus. He has also violated, I think, norms of courteous and civil discourse on Wiki, not only by using four-letter words but also by openly expressing his contempt for the editors here. Perhaps he feels that he can outwait us, and, by cursing and sneering, frighten us into accepting his bad manners.
I think this situation might have to be brought to  WP:ANI.
Timothy Perper (talk) 15:03, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Added  later. But on the other hand, I have better things to do with my time and life than try to deal with bad manners and people who vandalize my user talk page (I warned him not to do that again). So maybe I'll just let User:Beyond silence scrawl all the obscenities he wants over this page. Over to everybody else. Timothy Perper (talk) 16:26, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with SeizureDog's removal of Wikipetan. Consensus is against adding the image and she is not a shojo image. Timothy Perper (talk) 02:06, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You aren't thinking right! There isn't unconsensus here, because it's an other case! One problem say Wikipetan isn't illustrating the whole manga, ok - I think it's illustrating the "for girl" manga, so I paste to there - there wasn't speaking or unconsensus about it! I only want to use a compromissive option, but looks like the "bosses" don't want any picture in the article. So be happy, "I have better things to do with my time" than working to do better an articel which continuetly reverted by others. Be happy, won't anybody se e some picture about manga! But I think if anybody haven't seen every manga can be very important some good illustarting - for those not "the biggest" problem is Wikipetan not a real character. She is free. You don't honor it. Be it, you win, article loss. --Beyond silence 02:19, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipetan and non-consensual editing 

message: It's been a couple days since the last comment. Are there any others who wish to make comments before we take this to FAC? ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 01:55, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Any further comments?

message: I removed a wikilink to odenbo added 08:38, 24 January 2008 by Georgiacatcrimson (see History). The odenbo entry is merely a list of unsourced opinions without any citations and is therefore unreliable original research. Timothy Perper (talk) 13:32, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed See Also Wikilink 

message: According to the check-external-links program on the FAC discussion page, there were a couple of dubious URLs. I checked them, and fixed one, which now works right. The others were OK. Timothy Perper (talk) 14:59, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fixed a error in a reference 

message: I was reverted because of no discussion, but I don't really see why they would need to be discussed.
# "The Kyoto International Manga Museum maintains a very large website listing manga published in Japanese." Complete segue thrown in the lead that reads more like an external link than anything.
# The entire "International Manga Award": short, trivial section that doesn't even focus on the subject of the article (manga=Japanese comics), but manhua, original English-language manga, and others of the such.
Any justification for keeping them?--SeizureDog (talk) 20:07, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to agree with #1 since the lead section is suppose to summarize the article. Maybe make an external link section for it? I also think "otaku" should be removed from the "See Also" section. Rezumop (talk) 19:07, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I moved the Koyoto bit to a more appropriate location (Publications), and I expanded the award section into a more general award section. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 21:02, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Things to remove 

message: Okay...it looks like someone just sent this up for GA before we were ready :( AnmaFinotera (talk) 03:02, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It was a user named . Well AnmaFinotera, can you comment on the above discussion? I wanna hear some of your ideas because I'm not sure what we should do. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:52, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I just put a comment (not a vote) on the GA Nominations Page saying I don't think this article has reached GA status. No one else has commented or voted. Timothy Perper (talk) 15:27, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA 

message: I see that the kobolds or something are at it again, putting mistakes into the manga article. Well, as I've said before, I'm not doing any more work on this article. For the newbies and kobolds, if you look at the history of this article, you'll find that I wrote and referenced much of it. But no more. If you want it to reach GA status, then you'll have to find the mistakes yourselves. Hint: pull up the complete article and search for "newd." It's going downhill fast, guys. Timothy Perper (talk) 15:00, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You're aware of the revert function, aren't you? But yeah, it's a popular article with a fanatic, yet largely ignorant fanbase; it's going to need constant keeping up with.--SeizureDog (talk) 15:06, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  HI SeizureDog. Yes, I know about the "undo" button -- but I left it to you or someone else to fix. There are other new problems too. But I'm not going to fix them. Over to everyone else -- I'll keep an eye on it, but nothing else. Timothy Perper (talk) 15:20, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Mk. It's just Wikipedia, don't worry too much about it.--SeizureDog (talk) 15:44, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  More Mistakes Being Put In