Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:52, 2 September 2008

This is AnmaFinotera's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11Auto-archiving period: 3 days

This is AnmaFinotera's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11Auto-archiving period: 3 days

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 at flame baiting, or that are excessively rude may be deleted without response. Comments from harassing editors or wikistalkers will also be summarily removed 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.

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?
• What do you mean you're "wikibonked"?

Assessment

When you get a chance, would you mind taking a look at The Star of Cottonland and let me know whether you think it has inched its way out of stub and into start class? I'm a little vague, I confess, on where exactly the boundry lies and would like a second opinion. —Quasirandom (talk) 21:21, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Hmm...think with the number of refs and the well formed, if brief, prose, it is above the basic stub and has indeed inched up to Start. :) -- ] (] · ]) 00:01, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Coo. Thanks. —Quasirandom (talk) 00:44, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Following up: any suggestions on what's needed to get The Star of Cottonland in its current state up to C? —Quasirandom (talk) 17:39, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I think to get to C, it would at least have to have a sourced media section with the manga volume info and info on the film. If possible, some production info would also be good, if it can be found. -- ] (] · ]) 18:21, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Right ho. Manga information is exactly what I'm finding hard to get. Time to dig through amazon.jp, and if I can distinguish between the various editions. —Quasirandom (talk) 19:51, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Oy. I'm going to have to resign myself to leaving this job to someone who speaks Japanese. I've been able to confirm the details given in the article, but not with wikireliable sources nor establish publication dates or even ISBNs of all the original tankobon editions. Bunkobon details are easy to establish as they're still in print, but not relevant to original publication. (Gotta say, though, the ceramic figurines of Chibi-neko issued a few years ago are way kawaii.) Main production staff for the film isn't hard to get, but still. Ah, well. —Quasirandom (talk) 19:09, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

We seriously need some project folks who can read Japanese. It would be so helpful! :) -- ] (] · ]) 20:47, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

List of Earthlings in Dragon Ball

There anything which strikes you as strange here? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:49, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

You mean besides the lack of a lead and the right aligned menu which I absolutely hate? -- ] (] · ]) 22:51, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh yeah, what happened to it? Or was there never a lead to begin with? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 22:55, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Once upon a time, it looks like it at least had a sentence. Tracing back to see when it vanished. -- ] (] · ]) 22:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Found it. It was removed April 10th by vandal, but the admin who came behind him to fix didn't undo it. Instead, they just deleted the replaced text. *doh* -- ] (] · ]) 23:02, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Uh, hate it when that happens. Think it's partly because I'm the only person watching these character lists. You don't mind adding them to your watchlist do you? It's understandable if you already have too much on your plate. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:11, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I think I had this one on my list already, but I put it on after that happened. I think I have some of the others on there already. My watchlist has grown back to 1900+ thanks to all the Bleach ones too :P -- ] (] · ]) 23:17, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Heh, that's all you have? There are 2,223 pages on mine, and most of these are disambiguations I like ;) Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:26, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

LOL, its only that low cause every other month or so I go on a mass purging. -- ] (] · ]) 23:39, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Can you take a glance at Samus Aran's reflist? I forgot how many references there have to be in order to change it. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 19:28, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Usually 10 to go from references to reflist, 20 for 2 col. So that one looks fine. -- ] (] · ]) 19:54, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll remember that from now on. How do I know when to use 3 or more? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 20:01, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

From some of the discussions I've seen in the reference areas, it seems to be never. They have even talked about disabling it all together. For me personally, maybe if there are more than 100-200. -- ] (] · ]) 20:20, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Mysterious Cities of Gold

Hi, I think you were the user who had tagged the Mysterious Cities of Gold article with multiple issues. Do you think they have been resolved yet? I was going to remove the "fan site" tag as it seemed like a reasonable[REDACTED] article as it now stands. Alastairward (talk) 11:06, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I did, and no, I do not think they have been resolved at all. It is isn't much better from the last time I looked at it. WP:MOS-TV for ways to fix it. I'd start with that horribly bulleted, overly long plot and cut it down to an appropriate length, and the characters as well. -- ] (] · ]) 13:24, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Abstract

Got it - no problem. Thanks! UltraExactZZ ~ Evidence 14:14, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I saw three pages, and deleted them; Please ping me if there are any I missed. Thanks, UltraExactZZ ~ Evidence 14:16, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

I think that was all he'd done. He'd done one of his articles too, but then reversed it after I came behind to put on the appropriate CSD tags. -- ] (] · ]) 14:18, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

SCIO

I do understand the problems. The tests themselves are different articles from the one on the company, and not directly promotional, and might make equally valid articles as for other academic tests. As for the company, it needs rewriting, but Im not sure about deletion. I declined the speedies involved. I recognize there are no fixed standards for G11. In view of that, perhaps it would be fairer to remove it from the speedy criteria? There are undoubted cases, tho, but it isn'tt hat easy to specific in words how to select just which they are. DGG (talk) 16:02, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

For some of those tests, he made three copies of the same article. The person who wrote them all, Bohumil Kartous , copied them all from the SCIO website, and appears to either be its webmaster or otherwise employed by the company (as by his own admission). Additionally, the Test of General Academic Prerequisites, appears to be a component of the National Comparative Exams, which shouldn't warrant an entire second article, anymore than we should individual articles for each test of the SAT (though I see, horrifyingly, that some of the SAT tests do have them *doh*). -- ] (] · ]) 16:13, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Shojo Beat

Hey C-onian, I did a very brief CE on Shojo Beat, mostly very minor things, some commas, some new sentence structures, some wikilinking. The article actually flows and reads very well (and I have no idea what the article is actually about, truthfully). I learned some new stuff today! Also, I removed the CE tag, other than checking the refs for accuracy, etc, I don't see much else to do other than expand the circulation/reception section (I added {{expandsection}} there). The circ. numbers/refs look fine, but there is nothing for "reception". Has the mag been reviewed itself? Just a thought as to where it can perhaps be made more thorough. Nice work overall though, kudos. I'll keep my eye on it, let me know when you are thinking GA or whatever, I'll do another run through on it at that time. Kudos -- Keeper ǀ 76 15:17, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Much appreciated. I did remove the expand tag mostly because what is there is about all is there. :( Considering it is the sister pub of Shonen Jump, you'd think it would get some reviews. I'll give another search, though, before I send for GA, just to make sure I haven't missed anything. Meanwhile, I also am looking at putting that SJ article up for GA, if you want to give it a run through as well. :) That one I'll nominate as soon as its CE is done. -- ] (] · ]) 15:22, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

In response to the warning on my talk:

I understand what you are trying to tell me on my talk page and I appreciate you and any other admins of Misplaced Pages that tell me when I do something wrong, so that I may avoid doing it again. However, I don't see how I could have added copyrighted material to the article on Bambi; I went back and checked my contributions, but all I remember doing is changing or correcting spelling on 1 or 2 words. I was just wondering how this could be considered copyright violation, or if you're referring to a different edit I may have made. MarioLOA (talk) 15:19, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh, wow, I'm very sorry. That warning should have gone to Verdatum, who added the section on the copyright info. I was doing so much at once, I must have accidentally hit your name when I went to leave it. I've removed the warning from your page. -- ] (] · ]) 15:26, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Escaflowne Episode Listing

Collectonian, I appreciate the fact that you're trying to keep things properly sourced and referenced here. The problem is that when a source is wrong, or when someone misinterprets what a source says, that can cause statements that are completely inaccurate, and thats whats happening with both of the Escaflowne subjects we are fighting over. Is it better to have a reference for something that is wrong, and hence have a statement on[REDACTED] that is incorrect, or is it better to not have a reference listed but have a statement on[REDACTED] that is correct?

First, Mystic Eyes does not appear in the final episode. 'The Story of Escaflowne' is used as an ending theme. I just put the official Bandai DVD in my DVD player and rewatched the final few minutes of the final episode as confirmation to this. It is a tradition of the show's creators to replace the ending theme in the final episode, which is what they also did in Cowboy Bebop and other shows. Watch it. You'll see that I'm right. Don't act on memory, do what I have done and watch the last few minutes of the final episode again. AnimeNewsNetwork does not say in any form that Mystic Eyes is used for episode 26. It simply lists it as the overall ending theme because thats what it is for every episode but the last. Tell me, why does this encyclopedia article state that the opening theme is not used in the first episode when AnimeNewsNetwork does not state that? The Anime Encyclopedia correctly states that the opening theme is absent in the first episode, but AnimeNewsNetwork contains contradicting information (at least using the basis that you're using to state that Mystic Eyes is used for all 26 episodes) so it doesn't make sense to me that we ignore the actual content of the show based on a very vague and easy to misinterpret line on ANN.

Second, not all of Yoko Kanno's themes were removed from the Fox version so it is incorrect to state or imply that all of them were removed which is what the article does. Certain songs remained, while others were shifted around and used frequently, like Dance of Curse. I can say this because I went through each episode in extreme detail years ago when I ran my Escaflowne site and documented the numerous instances where Kanno music was used, which is still kept on my hard drive and can be found through the Web Archive (for example here: http://web.archive.org/web/20041215110540/www.escaflowneonline.com/edited/edited6.shtml). Check out this site for another discussion of Kanno songs being used in the fox version: http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/Taping/6785/esca.html. Anime Encyclopedia, one of your sources states that Kanno's music was "torn out", but sorry, that's an inaccurate statement. Just like the statement in that book that 10 episodes aired, it was 9. Or the statement that Van was disinherited, he was not, he was king of Fanelia in the second episode! Or that "on the Mystic Moon Earth girls are respected and feared for their sorcerous powers" which makes no sense to me as Hitomi was pretty much the only Earth girl there (aside from her Grandmother who appeared in two episodes and only to one person). That book contains numerous errors and at times should not be completely relied upon as a source. That's not to say that it can't at times be used as one, but its clear that because the authors have watched so much stuff their memory isn't at the top of their game for everything, resulting in many inaccurate statements, which is not exclusive to Escaflowne, but is the case for many animes covered in that book. I don't own the other book used as the reference so I can't argue against what it says at this time.

I have no desire to get into a big fight with you, or post inaccurate non-sourced material on Misplaced Pages. The problem is that the items used as sources on Misplaced Pages are not always correct and sometimes can be misinterpreted. My priority on Misplaced Pages is to make sure that statements are accurate first, and sourced second. Quiddity99 (talk) 17:00, 30 August 2008 (UTC)Quiddity99

Fansites are NOT reliable sources. And whether you like it or not, your priority isn't important. Misplaced Pages's priority IS sourced statements, not personal beliefs. It is better to have sourced statements from reliable sources. Again read WP:V and WP:RS. There are other things on Misplaced Pages I "know" are wrong, but without a reliable source, you don't go changing it. I do appreciate that you have not reverted again. I will go find my box set (I just moved so all my DVDs are still packed), and will double check the final episode. However, as I have not found a single source mentioning a second ending theme, I suspect I will find what I already believe is correct, that the same ending is used for all the episodes. I will appreciate it if you continue to avoid reverting again, and hopefully you'll appreciate my checking the song.-- ] (] · ]) 20:06, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

And what if the source isn't reliable? Thats going to be a problem if you're going to rely so much on a source like the Anime Encyclopedia that has blatant mistakes in it. As far as I'm concerned, if a source has incorrect information in it, then it is not a reliable source and hence should not be used to post incorrect information on wikipedia. My issue with using ANN as a reliable source to state that Mystic Eyes is used in ep 26 is discussed by me already above. Out of respect for you I will not make the revert and will give you time to do what I have already done, rewatch the last part of the final episode. In addition, there is no need for me to make the revert now because I'm sure you will be doing it yourself once you watch the final episode and realize that you were wrong. Enjoy the rest of your weekend. Quiddity99 (talk) 23:42, 30 August 2008 (UTC)Quiddity99

Find other reliable sources that completely discredit it, or other reliable sources that disagree with it. I've found the occasional minor mistaken in the Encyclopedia, but where that was discovered and supported by other reliable sources. However, that text is not soley sourced by Anime Encyclopedia, but also Anime Explosion, which is also a reliable source. And thank you, regarding the revert. I need to run some errands before the stores close, but I will check it tonight. -- ] (] · ]) 23:45, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately I do not own Anime Explosion so I cannot discuss the contents of that book. ^_^ Let me ask you this. Kyle Pope is (or at least was) a columnist for Anime News Network, which you use as a source to support your side of the argument. Should I be able to find a reference from him discussing Kanno music appearing in the Fox version, would you accept that as a reliable source? I seem to remember him covering the edits of Escaflowne as well, but I'll have to do some digging to see if that really was the case. Quiddity99 (talk) 00:02, 31 August 2008 (UTC)Quiddity99

As long as it is a reliable source. I checked the Escaflowne Compendium, but it doesn't break down the differences in the edited version. -- ] (] · ]) 00:04, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

As promised, I checked the final episode and it does indeed use a different ending theme, so I have corrected the list. In the future, though, it would have been much less stressful and more pleasant all around if you'd followed BRD and then left the note on the talk page and given me time to check the episode as well to verify it, instead of having continued to revert over and over again. -- ] (] · ]) 02:11, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I am happy to see that at the very least, half of our argument is now resolved ;) Quiddity99 (talk) 02:41, 31 August 2008 (UTC)Quiddity99

Hello (2)

Hi, I'm just dropping by to say hi. I appreciate your work on the List of Meerkat Manor Meerkats article, but I would like to make a suggestion. I think that "List of Meerkats from Meerkat Manor" may sound a little better from a grammatical standpoint than "List of Meerkat Manor Meerkats." I don't know about you, though. I think we should try to use the best sounding grammar that we can, so I think the title should be changed, but it's pretty much up to you since there's about all of about five users who edit the page and you're the one with all the power. So what do you think?The Pink Panther (talk) 21:38, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. The title is fine and it is in keeping with the current naming conventions of most character lists, which is List of Show Name characters or something similar. See Category:Lists of television characters. As this is fully inline with Misplaced Pages guidelines, and the focus of the list does not support changing it to reflect something like Characters of Lost, I see no reason to change it. I also disagree that List of meerkats from Meerkat Manor would be more grammatically correct. -- ] (] · ]) 23:41, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

All right, that's fine. I just want this grand encyclopedia to be as grammatically correct as possible. Me being a teenager and all, I sometimes have kooky ideas about which phrases are grammatically correct. Thanks for your time and opinion and everything. I would like to ask, though- why do so few people edit that page? I mean, it's just you and a few IP addresses. Even I never edit, but that's mostly because I always suggest edits before doing them and they always seem to get voted down. Is it lack of interest or what? Thanks!The Pink Panther (talk) 04:08, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Its probably a mix of things. Most people don't like to edit featured items, I think, because it can be intimidating knowing that their edits will be extra closely monitored, as such items must be kept in top form to maintain their status. Part of it is probably a lack of interest, though I think for the Meerkat Manor articles it may be more of a lack of interest in the encyclopedic side. Someone set up a Meerkat Manor wikia awhile back to cater more towards fans, which is where I think the few other editors that sometimes worked on stuff spend more time. Also, in general, lists like that tend to be edited less than the main articles, except during the start of new seasons and for some really popular on-going works. While Meerkat Manor is the top show in Animal Planet, it is still fairly "niche" as a whole. I also suspect that while many adults enjoy the series, the primary folks who might be online searching for into that end up at Misplaced Pages are likely to be minors, who usually tend otbe more hesitant about editing as well.-- ] (] · ]) 04:18, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I see. Thanks. By the way, how old ARE you, anyway?The Pink Panther (talk) 04:55, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I am 31. :) -- ] (] · ]) 05:14, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I see, an Oldie Mcolderton :) hehe just joking. :) The Pink Panther (talk) 06:31, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Flower (Bambi)

As I just noted in a reply on my talk page, I acknowledged my mistake and gave the valid criteria on the Talk:Flower (Bambi) page. Dravecky (talk) 01:59, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

P. M. Pu

Hi,

Please elaborate on your concerns with regard to the page. Katzmik (talk) 13:20, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Not sure what you'd like elaborated on. The article was copied from some personal website. So the entire thing is written in a way that is completely unsuitable for Misplaced Pages, using vary to casual a tone and it is blatantly obvious it is just your's personal essay. It is completely unsourced and likely to contain original research considering that it is just your writing, and it is nothing more than a mirror to your site which is also against Misplaced Pages guidelines. We are not here to host your personal research nor to act as a mirror to your website. 16:07, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

The tone may be a bit too informal. You are welcome to ameliorate the article. His '52 article is an important article though and not just to me personally. Katzmik (talk) 08:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films roll call and coordinator elections

It's that time of year again – we're wiping everyone's name off of the active members list and doing a project roll call. Your username is listed on the WikiProject Films participants list, but we are unsure as to which editors are still active on the project. If you still consider yourself an active WP:FILM editor, please add your name back to the Active Members list. You can also add your name to any of our many task forces!

Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 03:53, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Like Talking to a Brick Wall

Noticed your attempt to communicate with JoFerg. Good luck. Take a look at her contribution list: 1482 mainspace edits, and 25 User Talk. Of those 25, 20 are clearing her own talk page of warnings, three were to irrationally scream at Thedeadlypython, and two were to document reuploading an image that she felt had been unjustly deleted. Are we getting near RFC material on this editor? I've had to nominate an article for deletion where she misrepresented nearly every source: Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Undefeated (album).Kww (talk) 16:16, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I wondered why she was continuing to ignore her edits continuing to be reverted. Blech. It seems like someone needs to take a stronger tone with her, but not sure RfC will help. From my experiences with it, its a fairly useless process 99% of the time. :( Maybe poke an admin to see if they will leave her a note reminding her about things like civility, using valid sources, and edit warring. She also seems to be doing this extremely weird thing of replacing "As of X" with "As of ], ]"...don't think that is correct at all. I see what you mean on the sources...she actually used another Misplaced Pages article as a source on the David Arquette article!. *head smack*-- ] (] · ]) 16:26, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Mother and Child Reunion (Degrassi: The Next Generation)

Hi Collectonian. I have replied to your comment at the FLC, and require a little more feedback from you. With regards to the plot section, it may be possible that I can't see the forest for the trees, so would you mind taking another look for me and removing parts you think are unnecessary? Regards, Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 02:20, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, not sure how much help I could be as I tend to suck at cutting down plots. It was a struggle for me on several ep lists and chapter lists I've done. Usually I open it in word then try to evaluate each sentence and just ask myself "do I have to use this many words to say this?". A few quick things I noted, though, is too much detail on some stuff. Like the bar scene. Is it necessary to note the various conversations/updates on the adults when it has no impact on the story? Or the details on Caitlin's actions in the limo? And are three sentences needed to note Joey didn't want to go to the reunion and Lucy tries to convince him he should because his late wife wouldn't want him hiding away from his friends? That kinda thing. I can try to take a look at more in-depth if you want, but it probably won't be tonight as I'm uber tired. -- ] (] · ]) 02:56, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

flip or flop

Do you have any Viz garaphic novels? If so, please read the last page of it. I've got Dragon Ball vol.1 here. I'm quoting the message.

Woops! Guess what? You're starting at the wrong end of the comic!

...It's true! In keeping with the original Japanese format, Akira Toriyama's world-famous Dragon Ball series is meant to be read from right to left, starting in the upper-right corner.

Manga or Japanese comics published in the U.S. in English traditionally been published "flopped"--that is, printed in exact reverse order, as though seen from the other side of a mirror.

By flopping pages, U.S. publishers can avoid confusing readers,but the compromise is not without its downside.

In recognition of the importance and popularity of Dragon Ball, we are pround to bring it to you in the original unflopped format.

And here's another piece of evidence, Dictionary.com. The dictionary explains that to flop means "to invert (the negative of a photograph) so that the right and left sides are transposed."

Do you get it? It is not "flipped" but "flopped." Please do not revert the article again.--Michael Friedrich (talk) 06:26, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I have dozens upon dozens of Viz manga volumes, and other manga volumes. I do see "flopped" in Bleach, however the industry term is flipped. That is what more readers will recognize so it is the more appropriate term to use. Now please stop reverting. You were bold, it was reverted, now you're supposed to discuss, not just keep reverting. -- ] (] · ]) 06:52, 2 September 2008 (UTC)