Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Calathan (talk | contribs) at 06:44, 23 September 2018 (Request for Comment: Is it relevant to list all production companies or just main animation studios in the infobox of film articles?: Only the main animation studio). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconAnime and manga Project‑class
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime, manga, and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/WikiProject used

Larissa Wolcott AFD

Someone might need to check on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larissa Wolcott, it never got posted to our AFD lists and there we're published sources on the page. Big concern for me is, I'm unsure if they are enough weight to save the article. Esw01407 (talk) 23:14, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the page has been deleted. She stars in a handful of ADV titles, mainly Excel Saga and Wedding Peach, but would need more sources to meet WP:ENT and then you can request a WP:REFUND. Are there any newspaper writeups about her? AngusWOOF (barksniff) 19:20, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've tried to dig in here, unfortunately I've only found a few mentions on ANN about her getting the Excel Saga role. Not sure it's enough to push the issue further, so I'm going to move on. Esw01407 (talk) 14:36, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We're probably going to have to update the List of One Piece characters to include latest chapters, rewrite summaries for several characters and even discuss which characters should be kept, mentioned or left out. Thoughts? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:14, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A quick opinion on

For Black Clover, since it will end the first season. Then move to a second season as from ANN would it follow something like this; Black Clover (season 1) and add whatever to season 2? Or keep adding on its episode list instead. I'm asking before prematurely doing so, as I did with My Hero Academia. Tainted-wingsz (talk) 00:35, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pokémon film companies

A few months back, we discussed the situation with the production companies for the Pokémon films. I think it's time to get another revisit.

Pikachu Project is a production committee consisting of eight to nine companies that produced the Pokémon films since 1998 (which currently includes The Pokémon Company, Shogakukan, TV Tokyo, Tomy/Takara Tomy, East Japan Marketing & Communications, Inc., OLM, Inc., Toho and Shogakukan-Shueisha Productions; Media Factory, Creatures and Game Freak were once members of the committee). According to the opening and ending credits of all of these films, OLM and their teams (Team Koitabashi, Team Kamei, and now Team Kato) has an Animation Production (アニメーション制作) credit and Shogakukan-Shueisha Productions has a Production (制作) credit. However, Pikachu Project itself has another Production (製作) credit.

What is the appropriate way to list these? Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 03:48, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I still believe it should go by sources. My source is a published source which lists the proper production company. Animation studios should be discussed, but they are not actual and technical production companies (i.e: where the funding is). Which is what should be placed. Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:54, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Still, I think we might need a proper consensus on this matter. As such, I'm filing a request for comment. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:36, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Comment: Is it relevant to list all production companies or just main animation studios in the infobox of film articles?

Should we list either the main animation studio, all production companies, or the just the main production company in the infobox for film articles?

Standard RfC Disclaimer: This RfC should not be construed as a vote rather than an attempt to measure consensus. As always let's keep the conversations civil. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:38, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Main animation studio as that is what most readers will be looking for in the majority of cases. G S Palmer (talkcontribs) 18:44, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
But that goes against infobox standards for films, which states to only list production companies. When those are sourced in major sources (books, Variety, Hollywood Reporter, and Screen Daily) these are not considered production companies. Its a more complicated matter that doesn't require opinions, but basic facts and industry standards. Not our own personal whims. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:58, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, Wikipedia's purpose is to provide useful, relevant information. The companies that funded an anime's production are nowhere near as notable as the companies that animated it, which can be seen by any simple perusal of news articles/reviews/etc. G S Palmer (talkcontribs) 20:45, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Only list the animation studio that produced the anime. Not companies that financed the film/series. Not the companies that were involved with in-between animation. Not the company that distributes the film/series. —Farix (t | c) 22:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Only list the main animation studio. For anime, usually only the animation studio is prominently listed in reliable sources, and not who actually paid for the work. Also, anime will often list the copyright as belonging to a production committee, which is usually formed just for that work and named in some way after that work. Because the production committee is just something created for one work, listing it is rather pointless. Calathan (talk) 06:43, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]