Wikipedia

Talk:Anime/Archive 1

< Talk:Anime
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3→Archive 5

ABe Yoshitoshi

Are people really unable to see the comment in the source basically yelling at them not to change what they're about to change anyway? :p - Korpios 18:11, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Accent mark on the e in anime

Why do people put an accent mark on anime: animé? Is it because of the claim of the derivation from French? To try to look cool (but end up looking stupid)? The accent in Pokémon? Or to hint that the "e" should be pronounced (technically a diaeresis should be used for that)?

--Furrykef 01:50, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

It's to hint that the "e" should be pronounced. I for one used to think it was pronounced "a-neem" (cringe) before I became a fan. I see this a lot with the word "sake" written as "saké" so people don't pronounce it like the English word "sake". Yes, a diaeresis is the proper accent mark for this purpose in English, but it's fallen out of use and people are more familiar with the French way. I think a pronunciation note in the beginning of the article (like it is now) is far preferable to using an accent in any case. DopefishJustin 00:02, Apr 15, 2004 (UTC)

I've seen an old english (not Old English) translation of a Kobo Abe novel that called him "Kobo Abé". It may be an obsoleted transliteration convention. -℘yrop (talk) 05:58, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)

Doraemon

Just curious... such an old series as Doraemon should deserve some kind of mention in this article. --[[User:AllyUnion|AllyUnion (talk)]] 11:20, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I'm not an anime fan and I really can't speak to this authoritatively, but it seems to me (from the perspective of someone coming to this article looking for information), that there "External links" section is too long to be much use.

I accidentally stumbled onto this link:

Now, as I happen to read French, I found it quite useful, but most English-speakers wouldn't, so I removed it (Manual of Style).

If that was serving some purpose that I missed and it really needs to be there, by all means, add it back. But I looked through the other links and I really can't tell what they all, collectively, accomplish, that couldn't be accomplished by a shorter selection. As it was, I was hard-pressed to find what I was looking for (in this case, images) admidst the deluge. It looks like somebody with a bit more knowledge needs to do a bit of pruning, perhaps? --[[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 00:01, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

It just keeps getting worse as people continue to add new links. Can someone who knows something about the subject look into this? Otherwise I'll try to prune on my own, but I'm sure some people wouldn't like that because I don't know which are really the most popular sites. [[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 01:09, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I've removed:

  • The Anigame Network: Looks very under construction.
  • Anime Lyrics (.com): Only has niche appeal, is easy to find using Google if needed.
  • ADV Films and The Anime Network: We link to the wikipedia article on ADV Films, and The Anime Network is a subcompany of ADV Films.
  • Also, some anonymous editor keeps adding AniKi, a very very undeveloped Anime wiki; i've been removing it when he does.

It could still use some more pruning. I think we should get rid of the review sites, but i want to hear other's opinions. Pyrop 02:06, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)

Removed:

This one is borderline:

I did back this up with some traffic comparisons using Alexa—it seems likely that if a site does not have any information that obviously distinguishes it from similar sites, and yet it's traffic rating is much lower, it should probably not be listed. I probably made some mistakes. Hopefully, however, the current list will be easier to work with. [[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 21:08, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)


Aranel: Did you read my other comment? Anipages daily is far more informative than any of the other pages listed here. The guy who runs it Benjamin Ettinger knows more about film production aspects in anime than really any other english speaker. I find his information invaluable to understanding the production side of anime (in partiuclar artistic and independant work) invaluable. In a world (in refrence to anime subculture) where real knowledge is scarce and fans have many misnomers, this site is a beacon of knowledge. Finally it is a promotion of anime as an artform and not as a pop culture fandom, for that I feel this site should definetly be included in the links.

--Neilworms 16:48, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

History section badly needed.

This page badly needs a "History of anime" section (similarly, the History of anime page (currently a stub with virtually no information) needs to be expanded). There are but a small number of historical facts on this page, and if it's going to be encyclopedic it needs far more. -℘yrop (talk) 01:38, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)

An automated Wikipedia link suggester has some possible wiki link suggestions for the Anime article, and they have been placed on this page for your convenience.
Tip: Some people find it helpful if these suggestions are shown on this talk page, rather than on another page. To do this, just add {{User:LinkBot/suggestions/Anime}} to this page. — LinkBot 10:26, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I've gone through and applied the changes this suggested. -℘yrop (talk) 18:43, Dec 17, 2004 (UTC)

Lists that are too long

The following lists are getting to be rather excessive:

  • Several well-known Japanese animation studios
  • List of non-Japanese anime distributors
  • The list of "some of" the important conventions
  • Notable names in anime

My concern is that the lists are starting to get in the way of the communication of the information in this article. Comprehensive lists in all four cases might be useful, but they should be in separate articles (especially the first two, which I am about ready to move to their own articles as they stand). Can I get some input from someone who actually knows which items on these lists are of sufficient significance? (The lists in this article do not claim to be comprehensive. They are supposed to be short and by definition should leave out many items that are of major secondary importance.) [[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 03:21, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I fully support what you are doing good luck :). I personally am someone who wishes to eliminate any fan oriented misinformation or idolitry (writing statements about how great an author or creator is - something an encyclopedia shouldn't do).

Good luck, and thank you for your contributions to this topic. As for more detailed information it probably should be linked outside this article. Yes I had the little issue with anipages daily, but in general I am fully supportive of your goal.

--Neilworms 16:55, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Long vowels

Most anime-related topics in Wikipedia seem to use kana spelling for long vowels (shoujo, doujinshi, bishounen, etc) instead of following the Wikipedia:Manual of Style for Japan-related articles, which recommends short vowels in titles and macrons in content (shōjo, dōjinshi, bishōnen, etc). I know that otaku circles like pretending they know Japanese, but this is an encyclopedia for the general public we're dealing with here and some consistency would be nice. How loudly would y'all object to shifting all articles to their short-vowel titles, and adding redirects for the long forms? --Jpatokal 14:36, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Opposed because of search engines. Incorrect or not, shoujo is a more widely-recognized Anglicization than shojo, doujinshi more than dojinshi and bishounen...well, those two are about equal, but bishounen has a slight edge on search results. Yes, we can have redirects to the "preferred" spelling, but that harms the Google rankings (whatever they may be). Beyond one spelling's popularity over the other (we're also charged with making the article titles whatever is most likely to be searched for), I don't really have a preference, although when I do write those three, I still naturally write the "ou" transliteration. RADICALBENDER★ 16:33, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)
The Google ranking argument seems to be a bit of a red herring, since Wikipedia doesn't show up in the top 100 for either form of shōjo... and can you decide if you're opposed or don't have a preference? 8) Any other opinions on the subject? Jpatokal 06:41, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I thought the whole point of having article names without long vowels is because English readers are much more familiar with them that way in most cases (people look for Tokyo, not Tōkyō). Since anime terms are more familiar with long vowels indicated, there doesn't seem to be any point in moving them for that reason. Long vowels are quite important in Japanese so I would object to not indicating them when there's no compelling reason for it. Consistent romanization is a concern, though. I personally prefer the "ou" style more than proper Hepburn "ō" because it's closer to the Japanese spelling and people won't turn around and ignore an extra letter when they use the term like they often do with accents. This kind of discussion probably belongs more on Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_for_Japan-related_articles though. DopefishJustin 00:02, Apr 15, 2004 (UTC)
The problem with "ou" is that, while it matches the kana, it doesn't make sense in English: most anime fans probably read "doujinshi" phonetically as dough-jin-she (or even dough-u-jin-she?), when it should be doh-jin-she. Most English-speakers aren't capable of making the distinction between short and long vowels anyway, so ignoring the macron is IMHO the lesser of two evils.
As for the Manual of Style, it's already been decided that Hepburn is the One True Standard and macrons are the One True Long Vowel Indicator, and I'm trying to standardize this in the otaku domains as well... Jpatokal 02:36, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I'm fine with that. I just don't like the idea of moving articles to titles with short vowels. shōjo means "young girl", but shojo is "virgin"! DopefishJustin 20:49, Apr 15, 2004 (UTC)

After thinking about this more I've changed my mind, I think it's better that we follow a consistent standard. If people search with "ou" they'll get redirected anyway. I'll start changing minor stuff as I find it and if no one objects, the "big stuff" like shoujo should move too. DopefishJustin 15:59, May 10, 2004 (UTC)

Manga Artists under notable Names in Anime??

Personally I think there should be a seprate entry for manga artist who had influence on anime so that artists such as Go Nagai, Rumiko Takahashi and Masamune Shirow (who people seem to constantly confuse with Mamoru Oshii) should be moved to a seprate category to reduce the common confusion that these artists have amongst anime fandom.

The artists that should be under anime that were also manga artists are Leiji Matsumoto for his large contributions to anime such as Starblazers etc., Osamu Tezuka, Katsuhiro Otomo, and Hayao Miyazaki. All others did little to no anime work with Shirow only co-directing one OVA series

I deleted a comment that was basically unobjective shirow worshiping that didn't get any facts straight siting him as the creator of the Ghost in the Shell film, a film that he had very little to do with, and is much more a product of Mamoru Oshii's philsophies on storytelling than Shirows.

I was just curious what people thought of this idea??

Neilworms 11:53 pm July 27, 2004

Just link it to "Notable names" in the Manga article. --AllyUnion 13:29, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Manga sentence

Currently: Anime is influenced by the drawing style of manga, or Japanese comics.

I don't know, I don't like the wording of this particularly. I always thought, and was under the impression both anime and manga art styles influence each other, and also depends on the style of the artist as well. It is not always the case, I think, that mangaka are Japanese animators animating for an anime. In some cases, the character design is reflected upon the art style of the original mangaka... isn't it? Well, thing I have a problem with is that some anime is produce before the manga, and some manga is produced before the anime. Whatever the character design and art style is selected for whichever is produced first, it seems that becomes the basis for what influences the production of the next anime or manga series, or anime based on the manga, or manga based on the anime. -- AllyUnion (talk) 12:46, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Other comments

implying that most criticizes low framerates and lack of "animation" is the critic's fault for not recognizing different animation styles is pov and apologetic.

Regarding the quality of animation to budget, see this link:[1]. There was also a more detailed article in AWN magazine that's about anime budgets, but the article is locked now and open to subscription only. Usually anime budget is a lot lower than american animation. Even some inconspicuous western series such as Sherlock Holmes in 22nd Century costs approximately a couple million US dollars per episode to produce, a lot higher than Japan production costs. But Sony specifically said they spent much more money to revive Astro Boy, and the animaton shows. Remember Miyazaki said in an interview that he quit TV animation in the early 80s because he couldn't muster enough budget to produce the quality animation he wanted. Hope this clarifies stuff up. Wareware 22:09, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)


I think there is some confusion in what I was getting at in my statments. I was refering to radical animators who used completely different shortcuts to achieve different effects than most anime. I think that while Astroboy and SAC are a lot more fluid in animation than most anime due to higher budgets, they still use many techniques that are common to anime (though far less than a standard tv show like Naruto). I wanted to show examples that deviated from the norm to illustrate that anime isn't entirely unified in its style (which is a very common misconception). I'm not so sure about the level of deviation from the norm in regards to Astroboy and SAC.

I need an expert to help me out on this, I based the information I recieved on comments from a friend who is an animator, as well as Benjamin Ettinger's excellent anime blog (anipages daily). I need to ask Ettinger to retool this entire article, he'd provide much more solid information than any of us could in regards to production and history of anime, not so much on "fandom." I think a big problem with anime is that knowledge is extremely scarce, and misinformation combined with fan oriented glorification and exaggeration seems to rule the day.

Neilworms01:54 29, September (EST)

People who pay a lot of attention to pages like these...

...should consider joining Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and Manga. -Pyrop 00:36, Nov 27, 2004 (UTC)

Pokémon info

I edited and then removed this: " Several video games, a manga series, McDonalds toys, soundtracks, five theatrical release movies, a couple of direct-to-video releases, and a trading card game (with some cards valued enough to be sold at $100 each) are only the most prominent of the money-making goods. With more than 300 "monsters" on the show, and the show’s slogan "Gotta catch em all" plastered on every package, there's no end to the market for action figures and character collectibles. There is even a store in New York City run by the owners of the Pokemon trademark dedicated to selling Pokemon-based goods."

If anything, it belongs in the Pokémon article. This article is already a bit detail-heavy. [[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 00:39, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

By the way, I am currently mid-copyedit. My goal is to cut down on some of the excess detail that tends to be generated by excessive enthusiasm. I know from my experience with Tolkien articles that when you are very close to the subject matter, it is very difficult to keep track of how much of the information present may be extraneous. This article, at the moment, is so long and complicated, with so many detailed notes and references, that it is not as effective as it could be at communicating the information it contains. If I cut out something that actually was crucially important, please let me know! [[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 00:52, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Pronounciation of "anime" in the UK

"The word anime appears in written form in three katakana characters a, ni, me (アニメ). Japanese pronunciation is /ɑnimɛ/, but in the United States speakers typically pronounce the word as /ˈænɪˌmei/ and in England it is generally pronounced /ænɪmi/." -

As a resident of the UK, I have never heard anime pronounced the way described in the last sentence. We pronounce it the same as in the US. I corrected this, but it was deemed a "random deletion" and changed back. -ObsessiveTougaFan

  • Well, I fixed it. Hopefully, no one will change it back again. Josh 01:36, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)
  • Sorry; you should have said something in the edit summary beforehand. -℘yrop (talk) 04:38, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)
    • Oh no, you misunderstand. I did not make the first comment. That was by ObsessiveTougaFan. I didn't notice that he or she forgot to sign it. Josh 04:56, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)

Sub-category for anime series or terms

On Category:Anime, anime series are intermingled with anime terms, like chibi and shoujo. I think that one or the other (or both) should be split of into a sub-category of anime. The easiest route would be to re-categorize non-series articles as Category:Anime Terms, since there are far fewer of these than anime series. -- Khym Chanur 01:56, Nov 6, 2004 (UTC)

It would need to be Category:Anime terms, of course, but is that the best catch-all for such articles? Don't many of them apply equally to manga? [[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 22:37, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Vandalizm

  • How did yourevert the page back so quickly? Is there a revert button? I've been here almost a year, and I've never found it. -Litefantastic 15:34, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Administrators actually do have what basically amounts to a "revert button". For everyone else, the simplest way to do it is to pull up the last good version from the history page (like this, for example: [2]), edit that page (the old one), and save it, which has the effect of saving over the vandalism. See Wikipedia:How to revert a page to an earlier version. -[[User:Aranel|Aranel ("Sarah")]] 15:49, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

ænɪˌmei?

Somewhere in the main article, it said that in the UK and US, it is pronounced like ænɪˌmei sometimes. So is that pronounce eh-nee-mey? -User:Dara

That's written in the International Phonetic Alphabet. æ is like the a in "accent". -℘yrop (talk) 04:52, Dec 30, 2004 (UTC)
In australia, where I am, it's pronounced /ˈænəˌmei/, but that is entirely regular and does not need to be noted
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Anime/Archive_1&oldid=1145856097"