Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Digimon/Archive 9

message: Do we really need a section in some Digimon articles that say "Last Words" that are well, the last words of a Digimon before it is killed? Is that really needed? I'd like an answer asap just to make sure.--Tohru Honda13Sign here! 20:01, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems pretty needless to me. I think we should minimize quotes and plot summaries as much as possible, since technically speaking, they are copyrighted material, and it would make the articles less 'crufty. -- Ned Scott 03:58, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, because I've been attacked for reverting a user's contribution (which were last words). I'll start searching for last words in articles to remove them. Thanks again. --Tohru HondaSign here! 04:14, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think they are iconic or symbolic enough - unless one quote becomes a world-wide fad, I don't think they should be there.  But that's nothing - I got harassed on AIM (or was it MSN?) because I reverted a vandal's edit.  :P  x42bn6 Talk 16:18, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Could someone go around checking some of the Digimon articles? I've gone through a few to make sure that the last words sections are gone but I'm pretty sure some of them are still out there. Gdo01 22:35, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think we'll have to worry about that for a while now. The main contributor, User:Sceptile, was the person who constantly put back his "last words" after someone else removed it. He constantly broke 3RR, too. He has recently been blocked indef, so we won't have to worry about new additions like last words (unless new users start doing it too). But still, we'll be on the lookout. Thanks, ♥Tohru Honda13♥ 22:40, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dear friends, I apologise on behalf of the user known as Sceptile. His intentions have only been to help brighten up and add an extra bit of detail to the Digimon character articles. He has been blocked and will probably not repeat his actions after the month is up. I do hope we can all come to an understanding and get along. Unfortunately, he will probably break my legs off if he finds out about this reply, so you might not hear from me again. Thanks for your time. Evilgidgit 18:51, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last Words 

message: Pinkbamon <<<is this redirect meant to be a joke? (i was about to nominate it to RFD, but just wanted to make sure first) --Saintmagician 08:49, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fake (4 Google hits, anyone?).  Speedying.  x42bn6 Talk 19:43, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Pinkbamon

message: On our Lalamon and Gaomon articles, we have Botamon listed as the fresh form. 
Is this actually cannon. 
The note on it says "Based on data from Digimon Savers v-pet, Digivice iC", which seems a bit suspicious to me. Do these two digimon actually have a fresh form in the anime? --Saintmagician 08:50, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As of now its the only Fresh form they have, the Digivice iC also confirmed their Ultimate and Mega forms before the anime did. Nightmare SE 12:25, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What i meant is whether they have an anime cannon version. I don't think the digimon pet games really count as 'anime cannon' any more than the digimon trading card games. Unless of course, this one explicitly says it's related to the Digimon Savers anime. --Saintmagician 12:14, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It a Digivice game, there's one for each anime series, although I don't believe any mode changes are in the Digivice iC. Nightmare SE 19:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Botamon as Lalamon/Gaomon's fresh form 

message: The fresh forms for the tamers digimon (e.g reremon) never actually appear in the anime. And the TCG doesn' have cards for fresh digimon. 
Anyone know where the information for things like reremon and jyarimon actually come from?
The picture for reremon says it's official bandai art. So i don't suppose Reremon appears in anything official as renamon's fresh form? Otherwise, i really don't know what to do with it. There's nothing to say other than "it's renamon's fresh form". So it's not like we have anywhere else to put it other than on the renamon page. --`/aksha 06:38, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I put the one for Impmon in a trivia section, but I guess we could just get rid of them all together since they're so minor and not really apart of those characters. -- Ned Scott 07:08, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess so, don't mind ditching them altogether. But I'd still like to know where they come from though. The pictures for the fresh digimon all say they're official Bandai pictures, used under fair-use. And...*official* pictures have to come from some *official* source/media right? --`/aksha 07:31, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Reremon is in the Digimon Encyclopedia. This image appears to be an extraction of the image in that book. Source for the data is stated as the D-Arks and one of the Wonderswan games. Shiroi Hane 02:50, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fresh forms of the tamers digimon 

message: To ask, who prefered the way the Digimon pages were originally? Some think this new version is more confusing and pointless. You know who you are. User:Fractyl
:I disagree with a perceive neccessariness of implementing an artificial separation between the forms, but the merged pages are otherwise just fine by me.Circeus 17:49, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure if I agree or disagree, but the merger had/has to be done as most Digimon articles don't meet WP:FICT. Personally I think the Misc Section should be Species Section (unless that's already what its supposed to be...). So for example Gallantmon would be in a total of 3 articles, Gallantmon from Tamers would be in the Guilmon Character article, Gallantmon the Royal Knight would be in the Royal Knights article and Gallantmon the species from cards, games, Frontier, etc. would be in the Misc section.Nightmare SE 18:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's the basic idea. -- Ned Scott 02:03, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah. Although i think the "Misc section" is still in the "to do" pile. --`/aksha 09:30, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

text: When I saw it first I thought it was going to be really messy, but I think it's actually turned out pretty neat and clear... so I'd have to say the new way is better =) Peanutland 12:11, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Poll

message: This sounds like a good project. I watched much of the dubbed Digimon cartoon series on TV. Now that I'm back I'm wanting to watch the original fansubs so that I can get familiar with the original content. For example, I'm just now finding out that the original was called 'Adventure' and it's a good way to distinguish things. So far I found Wolfpack Productions who've done almost 10 of Adventure and Adventure 02. So that doesn't free up the original 50, are there other fansubbers who've done the whole series? Tyciol 20:27, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Discussing fansubs on Wikipedia is a bit in a gray area, but.. Yeah, WPP so far has translated the farthest on Adventure, Adventure 02, and Tamers. They've completed Frontier. They have not started Savers yet, but other groups have and are up to around episode 30 or 40 ish. -- Ned Scott 15:34, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Hi there

message: Since we are now in the process of merging all the individual mon articles, I propose making a list of all the major Digimon which appear in the V-Tamer manga. This would allow us to merge several existing mon articles into this one. My current idea for this article looks like this:
*Taichi' allies
**Veedramon (although I think he should keep his own article and instead we merge AeroVeedramon and UlforceVeedramon (+ Future Mode) into the Veedramon article)
**Gabo
**Ninjamon
*LordHolyAngemon's army
**LordHolyAngemon
**Seraphimon
**Dominimon (merge into this article)
**Leo the Leomon
**IceLeomon
**Regulumon (merge into this article)
**Gekovich
*Demon's army
**Demon (+ Super Mega)
**NeoDevimon (merge into this article)
**Callismon (merge into this article)
*Allias 3 Digimon
**Piedmon
**Rosemon
**Omnimon
*Characters from Specials
**Parallelmon (merge into this article)
**Metamormon (merge into this article)
This list is far from perfect but it would allow us to merge several articles and informations into this one. I haven't included all the major V-Tamer Digimon into the list already since I wrote it down in a short time so if you think some Digimon are missing please add them. Diabound00 07:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: An article for V-Tamer characters is defintely something that we need. With Veedramon - if its a main character, then a seperate article for it sounds reasonable. I've never read V-Tamer, so i really can't help you much. Since you're obviously familiar with it, i say just go ahead and fire away. This list certainly does look like it's in the right direction. --`/aksha 09:35, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Article started at List of digimon characters in V-Tamer --`/aksha 03:40, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for doing so. I didn't have time to write anything as planned but I will help to expand this article.Diabound00 14:51, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of V-Tamer Digimon characters 

message: Since this is being suggested on the page I made for him, I'd like to talk about the Yggdrasil page I made's suggested merging with "List of Digimon Savers Minor Characters." I feel that this would be a mistake - he exists in two (three, allegedly) iterations of the franchise, and unlike the various Digimon who appear as a species, this is a variation on the same character idea.  Savers Yggdrasil is to X-Evolution Yggdrasil like the Green Goblin is to his alternate portryals - they're the same essential character.  Restricting him to just being talked about on the Savers page would be limiting and create a disconnect for readers. - --204.184.63.212 02:04, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Digimon Savers and X-Evolution exist in different alternate universes. The Savers folk probably did copy Yggdrasil from Digimon X-Evolution, but the two (the anime and the movie) don't exist in the same continuity. I'm personally not planning to touch the yggdrasil article any time soon - but if someone did merge Yggdrasil into the savers minor characters list, then i'd imagine it would only be the part about Yggdrasil in digimon savers. Information about the Yggdrasil in digimon x-evolution would probably be put into a "list of digimon x-evolution characters" type article. --`/aksha 02:15, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But... They're the same CHARACTER. just.  Movie Green Goblin and the comic Green Goblin don't exist in the same continuity, but no one can make a valid case for splitting those two into seperate ones.  This isn't like using another digimon species, it's the same general idea being repeated throughout the various incarnations of the mythos.  They're just portrayed differently as characters who repeat across seperate fictions often are. ---204.184.63.212 03:03, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

text: ... so are we just going to pretend this is already resolved again?--204.184.63.212 03:36, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Yggdrasil Article

message: I recall Wikimon being around a while, and just found out about the less active Digimon Wikia, and it got me thinking.. It would be interesting to do some sort of cross-site collaboration and make the most of all our efforts. I'm not sure what Wikimon's licensing status is, but the Digimon Wikia and here on Wikipedia are under GFDL, meaning we can copy things both ways, etc. Thoughts? -- Ned Scott 02:54, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was under the impression that all the wikis hosted by wikia are under the GFDL license. The Digimon Wikia looks sort of...inactive. Exactly what kind of cross collaboration are you hoping for?  --`/aksha 03:44, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, lets say someone wants to go into some speculation about Ryo or something, they could copy from our articles on Wikipedia (giving them a jump start) and then be able to do those speculations that we can't do here. Less likely, but if it happens that something turns out to be verifiable and not just speculation, we can add it to Wikipedia's side. We can do this already with the way things are now, but not a lot of people know it's an option. -- Ned Scott 04:04, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The digimon wikia i *very* inactive. In fact, i'd say it's dead. this is their active users list. The guy who runs it hasn't made an edit since august last year. It's probably better off just to contact that people at Wikimon and ask if they're covered by GFDL, or if it's okay to release their content to GFDL. --`/aksha 06:36, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I actually left them a note about that, but forgot to check for the license. Is content that is no longer on Wikipedia still subject to the actual license? Like pre-merge versions of Agumon or Veemon?Circeus 12:35, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, any content was written under the GFDL stays under the GFDL. it's like, the people who contributed to those articles where under the impression that they're contributing under the GFDL, so we can't just change that now that wikipedia isn't using those particular bits of content anymore. --`/aksha 13:23, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Digimon and the Wiki's 

message: Since they're all fresh, in-training, it's fair to say they have only appeared on D-Pets. Unless someone has seen them in the anime (KoDokugumon definitely appears with Dokugumon in Adventure 01, but is not named), then that's where they came from. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.211.254.142 (talk) 16:20, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you happen to know which specific D-pets any of them were in? Indiawilliams 17:30, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced Digimon (Puffmon, etc.) 

message: Just noticing that the TV section on Digimon and Digimon: Digital Monsters is a bit redundant. Looks like someone went and synced them up so they're the same thing, which is fine, I guess, but it got me thinking.. maybe we should only have it in one article. Or maybe some level of merging with Digimon and Digimon: Digital Monsters is needed? Not really sure about it myself, but I thought I'd mention it. -- Ned Scott 23:48, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think just merge completely. I've always wondered why those two articles existed, it's like...when is Digimon ever not "Digital Monsters"? The second article is meant to be specifically on the Digimon anime, but since each anime season has its own article, there's really not much to say on Digimon: Digital Monsters that would be out of place on Digimon. --`/aksha 02:20, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it's pretty much just left over from the time when all the series / seasons shared one article. -- Ned Scott 08:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redundant TV section 

message: i noticed that information like this is being text dumped onto talk pages. 
Nothing wrong with it. But just wanted to let people know that i've also been preserving any information from pre-merge articles that haven't yet been included into new articles in my userspace. --`/aksha 03:24, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's the only reason I bothered creating the Rookies list tonight; I was gonna add Punimon to the Fresh list but saw he hadn't been merged to Gabumon, but then I couldn't merge him there because Gabumon was using the old template, so my only choice was to text dump Gabumon's other appearances in an appropriate place. ^_^ (BTW, you can scratch Agumon from your list, I added your info too.) Indiawilliams 05:40, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: These lists should be "(A-F)", "(F-L)" and so on, not "(part 1)", "(part 2)". Circeus 22:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information 'lost' in the merge

message: The user 84.81.129.59 repeatedly adds the digivolution lines to pages that have them and some that don't, which ones do we delete? I think I have only deleted the ones that already had their digivolution lines on that page.trainra 10:05, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Our old digimon layout listed the digivolution lines in the infobox and in the article prose. The new post-merge articles (e.g. Veemon) don't have the digivolution lines in the article prose, and i think it's better that way. Listing digivolution lines in prose would only be repeating exactly what the infobox already has, not to mention...the digivolution forms are very visible in the TOC and every form is described in the article. Therefore, i've been removing them, and i've also left the anon a talk page note (which seems to have been ignored). --`/aksha 10:41, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I've been reverting all his edits, that user keeps adding random digivolutions lines that have no source that he's most liking branching off of the card game, like Biyomon -> Saberdramon -> Parrotmon -> Eaglemon. A long time ago Digimon articles were filled with these false digivolution lines, I wouldn't be surpised if this was the user who made them in the first place. Nightmare SE 12:24, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Ok. Just wanted to make sure before I do something stupid. Trainra 08:04, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Actually, I have no problem with repeating the levels in the article and in the infobox. I've always thought of the infobox as an at-a-glance summary more than article content itself. Although, if we do, then there's probably a cleaner way of doing it. -- Ned Scott 08:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Me again and also about Digivolutions. 

message: Can someone more knowledgeable than I am about tamer (Japanese and dub) look at talk:Rika Nonaka? There seems to be substancial evidence that her father is not dead. Circeus 22:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Jigga what? Wasn't the assumption always that he and Rika's mom got divorced and she has that vision in the movie because she misses him or whatever? Indiawilliams 01:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ruki's father 

message: I nominated A Million Points of Light for deletion, per previous discussion to not create Digimon episode articles.Circeus 13:32, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Episode article: Deletioon nomination 

message: What is meant by this comment in the List of Digimon Savers episodes?:
"As it currently stands, Digimon Savers will be the shortest series in the franchise to date, and will be ending with 48 episodes. Originally, it was supposed to have 54 broadcast weeks, but due to overriding broadcasts, 6 weeks were missed."
'Overriding broadcasts?' What exactly happened for Savers' time-slot to get taken away? And '6 weeks were missed' sounds like they're just not gonna air the last 6 episodes. Savers WILL end with a proper conclusion, right? Indiawilliams 23:11, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Savers only gets 48 episodes?!

message: I've merged Digimon: Digital Monsters with Digimon, see Talk:Digimon#Main article and anime article merged for more info. -- Ned Scott 09:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Digimon merged with Digimon: Digital Monsters 

message: Digital Monster Ver. WonderSwan
I can't because I know nothing about the WonderSwan games. Would someone please add some encyclopedic info to it because right now it's breaking every Wikipedia rule ever. *twitch* Indiawilliams 04:52, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since it was pretty small and said it was just a WonderSwan version of the Digimon virtual pet, I merged it to that article (Digimon virtual pet#WonderSwan). I took some stuff out, and a quick google search seems to indicate that finding some sources shouldn't be too hard. -- Ned Scott 05:55, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Please Edit This.

message: Does anyone know which of these attack's Matt's WereGarurumon used?:
* Wolf Claw (Kaiser Nail): Slashes with his powerful claws and knuckle weapons.
* Garuru Kick: Throws a powerful kick at his opponent.
* Baldy Blow: Punches his enemy fiercely.
* Circle Moon Kick: A spinning variant on Garuru Kick.
And for that matter, did his MetalGarurumon really use all those attacks? Indiawilliams 00:13, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been a very long time since i saw Digimon Adventure, but the first two attacks defintely sound familiar, while the last two doesn't. Don't know if that really helps... --`/aksha 09:58, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It apparently appears in the cards: .  x42bn6 Talk 13:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But we still need to know which ones appear in the anime for the Gabumon article. --`/aksha 13:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't forget to hook me up with MetalGarurumon, yo. Indiawilliams 19:37, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree with the first respondent 'user:Yakasha', as on all the tv series, Weregarurumon only used Wolf Claw,and Garuru Kick,which was also verified by my book 'Digital Digital Monsters,The Offical character guide,written by A.Ryan Nerz',and just to be an ultimate sad loser, I went through my digimon card collection (very old, i dont play with them anymore), and on Weregarurumon's card,there was only,yet again,Garuru Kick and Wolf Claw. Wongdai 11:36, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: WereGarurumon

message: Where do they (Matt's Drama, Michi-blah blah and Natsu e no Tobira) fit in the Digimon timeline? Specifically I want to know if they should be listed before or after Revenge of Diaboromon in the Digidestined articles. Indiawilliams 19:37, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can give you the dates (in reality) only:
*Michi he no Armor Shinka: Dated on 2001 Feb 7 (Amazon).
*Ishida Yamato Tegami -Letter-: Dated on 2001 Mar 7 (Amazon).
*Natsu e no Tobira: The CD cover has Wallace and Gummymon XD. It was dated on 2001 Oct 3 (Amazon).
*The Revenge of Diaboromon is 2001 SPRING... Dated on 2001 Mar 3. Kennethayes 08:59, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 02 CD Dramas

message: As you know, Argomon have Ultimate and Mega forms. The Japanese translation are "Argomon" and "Argomon(Mega)".
I only have the image of his Mega form (from the card), and I believe that his Ultimate form looks different? I also have the other details on their cards (JT, Vi, Mutant, attacks). So shall I start the page Argomon (Mega) to seperate them? (just like Burgermon? orz||) Kennethayes 08:55, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess seperate them. Honestly, i don't know what to do with the weird digimon who have more than one level. But there're really only a few of them, so let's just seperate them (it seems like the more simple solution). --`/aksha 05:21, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Argomon

message: Something to note on the main project page :D
Digimon Savers has been "licensed" (not really licensed, since Bandai and Toei Animation have American branches/whatever) and will have an english dub under the title "Digimon Data Squad". As Amigobro2 has noted on Talk:Digimon Savers: "http://www.toei-anim.com/ Then go to the bottom left, click on shows, and then Digimon Data Squad.".
I would hold off on major changes for the time being, like renaming articles and such, as this is so newly announced. For the time being the original names will still be more commonly recognized, and it's not unlikely for names to be changed before the actual show premiere. Then again, it's likely they will go with the "Data Squad", Touma being changed to Thomas, and other possible changes, so it does seem a bit inevitable. The one thing we don't know is if the TV networks will refer to this as a "season 5" or a stand alone show. If people want to make changes then I guess they can go ahead and do so, but personally I would wait before investing my time in updating links and such. -- Ned Scott 01:39, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Savers not licensed after all? See here. -- Ned Scott 19:37, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Digimon Savers english Dub