Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:42, 16 April 2008

Welcome to my talk page. Please adhere to the talk page guidelines and particularly the following: Please post your new topic at the bottom of this page. Please sign and date your entry by inserting "~~~~" at the end. Please specify a descriptive subject or headline for a new topic and separate subtopics by ===heading=== lines, if needed. Please indent your posts with one more ":" than what you are replying to, i.e. begin with ":" if replying to an existing topic and "::" if replying to a reply. I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your Talk page (or the article Talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to watch this page until you are responded to, or specifically let me know where you'd prefer the reply. ⇒ Start a new Talk topic.

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11

This page has archives. Sections older than 3 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

I prefer to reply to comments on the page they were left, so if I left a comment on your page, reply there it is on my watch list. If you leave a comment here, watch this page until the discussion is done as I will only leave replies here. Comments which I find to be uncivil, full of vulgarities, an attempt flame baiting, or that are are excessively rude may be deleted without response. If I choose not to answer, that's my right, don't keep putting it back. I'll just delete and get annoyed at you. I'm something of a neat freak, so this page is automatically archived on a 3 day trigger, hence the archive box over there. ->>

Are you here about an edit I made? You may want to check my user page first to get some general info on some common questions about edits I make. Here are some quick links as well:

• Explain the assessment you made on this TV or film article
• Why did you give X article Y tag(s)?
• Why did you change the reflist tag in an article to the references one, or visa versa?

FMA: Sources for production

I have found some interviews that may help to create a production part in the article. Is that website a reliable source? I also found one here, same question.Tintor2 (talk) 23:59, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Mobuta is a fansite, however the interviews list the original sources, so you can check those sources and use them for the cites. The same for Anime Source, which is also listed at Mobuta. In both cases, the original source is http://books.yahoo.co.jp/interview/detail/08249604/01.html, which is a reliable source and should be the source cited :) Collectonian (talk) 00:10, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I have added the production section. It may require some grammar tweak.Tintor2 (talk) 02:08, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

FMA: Reception

Does the reception section need to be increased? I can find more reviews.Tintor2 (talk) 22:54, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure if it needs increase at the moment so much as clearer organization. It starts good, with sales figures, moving into awards. Then it jumps to a review quote and a long paragraph of X site said X, Y, Z followed by a another quote. Considering the differences between the two, it would be better to have a paragraph on the manga, then a paragraph on the anime, and probably a paragraph on the novels and other stuff. It needs to be clear what was said about what. Also, I'm not sure Anime Boredum and ActiveAnime are considered reliable sources. You can see some of this in action at Wolf's Rain#Reception, which starts with the ratings success of the anime, moves into the reviews about the anime series and soundtrack, and the ends with the manga adaptation (which in this case is the secondary work, and also significantly different). Collectonian (talk) 00:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I have reread the reviews and most of them talk about general parts of the manga and anime (at the start they are the same but later they are very different). Should it be in reception, one paragraph for general? 2nd for manga? and 3rd for anime? (I still need to look for novels)Tintor2 (talk) 13:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, basically, start with the first media, manga, with general sales and awards, then actual critical commentary. Then repeat for the anime, and for the novels (as available). Collectonian (talk) 15:47, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Do you mean like ]? I will still reword some parts.

Yep, about like that. I went ahead and tackled the manga paragraph's rewording for you. :) Collectonian (talk) 16:07, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks^_^Tintor2 (talk) 16:09, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Copyediting, per request.

I'm going to do some editing of the eight detailed sections of the article, but you really need to think about some big picture issues here:

(1) It's not clear to me that it's appropriate to separate List of Marmalade Boy chapters from the main article, Marmalade Boy. Combined, the article would be lengthy, but it wouldn't exceed the length of a lot of FAs.

(2) I don't understand the title at all. To me, a "chapter" would be what appeared in a single issue of Ribon Magazine, just as many of the novels of Charles Dickens were serialized by being printed, one chapter at a time, in English magazines of his time. What you've done is summarize the volumes. So a better title would be List of Marmalade Boy volumes, or even better - because when we talk about "lists", in Misplaced Pages, we normally mean bulleted items or - at its most complicated - wikitables, not sets of narratives - call it simply Marmalade Boy volumes. In short, a book (or volume, or tankōbon) consists of a bunch of chapters. (And, even more confusingly, you use "volume", in the lead section, when describing the six-volume set, but the article is about eight things - volumes, books, whatever). -- John Broughton (♫♫) 22:35, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. For the first, it is appropriate and called for in the Anime and Manga MOS (Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (anime- and manga-related articles)). We generally split out a chapter list for manga with this many volumes with summaries. For the name, I have to admit that I also wonder about that. However List of X chapters is the standard name used by the project, and the article is using the standard format for a chapter list. See List of Naruto chapters (Part I) for our most recent FL of chapters. This particular one is missing the list of chapters in large part because Tokyopop doesn't make it clear in the English editions how many are in each volume. I hope that helps answers your questions some?Collectonian (talk) 00:26, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

You've clarified somewhat, except that the example you gave - List of Naruto chapters (Part I) - actually does list the chapters, making the title appropriate both because the article is much more of a list, and because there are (how can I say, this?) chapters listed. If your article in fact listed chapters, then I'd have no problem with the title. But I don't see how you can follow the standard naming convention when you're not following the standard format for the contents of the article (list). If the contents are non-standard, then why not use a (non-standard) title that actually matches the content. Or (and I know this is difficult), why not use the chapter information from either the original magazine publication or the Japanese eight-volume set to figure out the chapters that are in each of the eight parts. We are talking about comics here, yes? So it's quite possible to figure out, looking just at pictures, what is included in what volume, yes? -- John Broughton (♫♫)

I'm actually working on that now :) Looking at the original to determined what chapters are in which volume. :) I'm glad Tokyopop has mostly stopped ignoring those breaks though! LOL Collectonian (talk) 01:58, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Update: Chapter list added. Collectonian (talk) 02:10, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Much better. I withdraw my suggestions for a change of name to the article. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 15:27, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks :) I'm glad I was finally able to find the list (though after finding it, I relooked at the volumes and could then clearly see the chapter divisions though they were unnumbered) :P Collectonian (talk) 17:28, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Editing Trinity Blood Characters

I don't know if you remember me from before, but I was the guy who was helping you complete the Trinity Blood Character Article. I just think that Antonio should be re-added to the characters section because his suggestion launched many of the problems during the Ibilis story in the novel. (Having the Inquisition go to Carthage made a big difference in the mess in Carthage) He also appears in some of Thores Shibamoto's original illustrations for the novels, implying a more involved role in the future of the novels.

In case you have a difference of opinion, I also wanted to mention that Susan von Scorzeny does not appear to have any relavancy at this point, and it might be a good idea to incorporate her information into Sister Kate's character description. She can still be mentioned, just not as a major plot character. Just a suggestion.

I'm not an expert on citing, but that fact about the Inquisitorial Department concerning the way that they are raised should be cited as Volume 2: The Iblis. It is mentioned in passing during Caterina's conversation with Francesco and Antonio.

--AndrewD4R5 (talk) 00:44, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I haven't read any of the second set of novels, not wanting to jump ahead, so I'll take your word on it and put back for now. Agreed on Susan. Collectonian (talk) 00:58, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Please remember to provide sources for your additions. You made a very big addition to the main Trinity Blood article that has no sourcing at all. Please provide a source, including page numbers and chapter name if it is from a book. Ditto for the addition to Radu's section in the character list, as the information added is not in the current source for that section. Thanks. Collectonian (talk) 21:22, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I added something from Trinity Blood: Reborn on Mars: Volume 2: The Iblis. Like I mentioned before, I'm not particularly good at citing. I just felt compelled to mention it because it is a general fact about the Methuselah mentioned by Abel in the original novels. (Even though it is not particularly explored in the other adaptations of the story) The author is quite good at explaning things like that.

--AndrewD4R5 (talk) 02:38, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

If it isn't very explored, and something only specific to one or two vampires in the story, its better to just leave it to their character sections. Collectonian (talk) 02:47, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Fine, I already mentioned it in Radu's section recently, so that's basically covered.

--AndrewD4R5 (talk) 02:59, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep. It still needs a citation though. :P If you give me the page number(s) its mentioned on, and the name of that chapter, I can add it for you. Though you really should work on learning how to do them as it is an important part of editing. :) Collectonian (talk) 03:11, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay... I believe that I already gave you the novel title. Chapter name: Visitor's Evening, pg. 38.

--AndrewD4R5 (talk) 22:05, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

BTW, any particular reason you changed to a new account? Collectonian (talk) 00:02, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Don't know where that came from, but I've always had this account while editing this website. --AndrewD4R5 (talk) 03:02, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

When we last talked, you were using User:AndrewR5D4. :P Collectonian (talk) 03:16, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

It might have been awhile ago that I made 2 accounts, so I guess you're right. According to the website, there doesn't appear to be a page for the other profile. Well... whatever then. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.

--AndrewD4R5 (talk) 00:08, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

FLC

Hi there. I replied to your comments at Misplaced Pages:Featured list candidates/List of Los Angeles Police Department officers killed in the line of duty. I explained there why the city marshals are included, and answered about Ian Campbell. I'll get to work on making the edits tomorrow, as I'm about to go to bed, but you might want to reply before I do. Regards, and good night! -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 06:47, 13 April 2008 (UTC)