Talk:Anime/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

→

Archive 12

"Due to linguistics"

"Due to linguistics, the anime definition is subject to interpretation" is written under the definition. According to Wikiepedia "Linguistics is the scientific study of language". So what the hell does "Due to linguistics, the anime definition is subject to interpretation" mean? — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Familyman69 (talk • contribs) 14:27, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

The next couple of sentences should explain that. Apparently, the meaning of "anime" is dependent on who you talk to. To the Japanese, "anime" means everything animated - which includes things like the Simpsons. The differentiation between "anime" and "cartoon" only exists in the West, particularly the United States.

In short, the language interpretation of the word differs. Furthermore, the meaning even gets more confusing when "cartoons" start mimicking things done in "anime". Several articles already exist addressing that confusion. KyuuA4 19:39, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I understood the point of the paragraph, I was pointing out the use of the phrase "Due to linguistics". It's not "due to linguistics" that the definition is subject to interepretation. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by Familyman69 (talk • contribs) 23:48, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

Broken Link

Number 8 on the list of links is broken. Don't know what to do about it. ^_^ --A Gigantic Panda 04:50, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I've taken care of it. --Gwern (contribs) 16:57 11 December 2006 (GMT)

Licencing

One Piece isn't an anime that was edited heavly because of what year it came to America. It was edited because of 4Kids entertainment intent to use it as a child's show. 4Kids has never used a "light touch". A Gigantic Panda 05:46, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Here's the deal. That was generally the case with distribution companies early on. Particularly in the 1980's and early 1990's. Sailor Moon has been a prime example of that editing. KyuuA4 04:51, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

US-Japanese partnership

How much has that influenced in importing of anime over the years? (if it ever had an effect at all) KyuuA4 17:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Page protection

Do you people think that we could protect this page from people who don't log in? This page is vandalized a LOT, and I almost always by people who don't log in. In light of this, I think it would be good if we protected the page from those who didn't log in. What do you think? Fiction Alchemist 04:51, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

You can request to semi-protect this article on Wikipedia:Requests for page protection to block anonymous edits. Be warned, however, if this article experiences anonymous vandal edits at a rate of only one per day, that is often deemed below whatever arbitrary threshold exists for semi-protection. It depends on which admin reviews the request. =Axlq 06:30, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

IMO, there just isn't enough vandalism taking place to require simi-protection. --TheFarix (Talk) 13:23, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it's now gotten to the point where we can make a successful request. --Farix (Talk) 21:03, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

End of Notable Lists

The Notable lists have been replaced with the Category pages as per discussion. Benjwong 21:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

WHAT are the category pages? (I ask because this is the second time someone has mentioned the location of the notable list as being here.) There is no hyperlink from the main anime page from named "category." If I can't find any such page, then a casual reader, who may be interested in finding anime worth watching (or following up on), will not be aware of the existence of such a page. It should be listed in the "lists" section at the end of the "anime" entry (it is a "list", isn't it?). Of course, such a page should be based on appropriate references (critical acclaim, popularity polls, etc.), but Italic text its lack of objectivity does not necessarily undermine its (potential) usefulness. Bfbbrown 02:36, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Slight change to Second paragraph ok?

I was thinking this sentence "Anime is often influenced by Japanese comics known as manga." Would read better and be more accurate as something more like this. "Anime often draws influence from manga and light novels."

I don't really see the need to explain that manga is the japanese word for comic in the anime article, and this way you can also add in another major print media influence, light novels without the sentence sounding weird. Could probably go even a bit further and say it's not only influenced by, but often directly adapted from those sources. Anybody object to this change or have a comment?Mdgeist747 19:21, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, there's plenty to object to that. I don't know how long you've been following anime, but anime's hardly been influenced by light novels. If anything, light novel authors have grown up watching anime, but there's hardly any anime creator who's grown up reading light novels. At most, light novels have become source material for recent anime shows, and I'll emphasize that this is a very recent trend. And it comes from major light novel publishers like Kadokawa Shoten financing the production of anime shows based on their light novel titles so as to promote the sales of books and related merchandise. You should look at who's putting up the money to get shows made before you start speculating about influences.--68.183.156.42 08:00, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Better lists

I remember seeing a list of notable anime a few months back that had all of the most popular anime arranged by genre. I thought that that was a really good and effective way of presenting it, as well as something I've never seen before on any other anime site. I was thinking that this could be taken a step further for those who are interested:

Why not have a similar list of notable anime per genre, but also have it arranged by release date? Not only that, but let there be an "expand option" that lists not only the most popular anime, but all anime of that genre. I think that would be very very cool. — The preceding unsigned comment was added by 196.205.135.176 (talk) 21:29, 14 January 2007 (UTC).

It was deleted because it was an attempt to recreate the deleted List of anime through the back door. On top of that, an anime wouldn't have an article in the first place if it wasn't notable. And lastly, what genre an anime is in can be a very contentious issue which often leads to original research. For instance, Tokyopop labels Tsukuyomi -Moon Phase- as a fantasy, however, I've seen people label it as horror because the antagonists and the "hero girl" are vampires. --Farix (Talk) 17:20, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

I must say that I also found the page of notable anime useful (in the extreme, actually). Although it is contentious by nature, I think that it should be recreated, albeit under a different title (critically acclaimed anime). Entries included should, of course, provide sources. Just becuase it's contentious by nature, doesn't mean it shouldn't exist. Perhaps it should exist, but with a tag warning of subjectivity at the top of the page. Bfbbrown 02:37, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Is this NPOV?

...Because it sure does not look like it. At all. The whole article is a gaudy praise of japanese animation, with no mention whatsoever of the criticisms that are commonly levied at it on message boards or blogs all over the net. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.33.24.131 (talk • contribs).

Either include that and make it NPOV, or erase the article.

Message boards and blogs are not reliable sources. _dk 15:25, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

And the article does not praise, but explains. --Farix (Talk) 21:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Loveless

Loveless is given as an example of yaoi in the "Anime" article. But in the Loveless article it is called shonen-ai. (which is better) Yaoi is much more sexual in nature, and though Loveless has some gender-bending/boylove themes, I don't think it can be considered yaoi. --Memantiga 19:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I split Yaoi and Shonen-Ai in the genre's list, and put Loveless under Shonen-Ai. Sensitive Pornograph was listed for Yaoi. I think it makes more sense. So done & done. Djfinn 12:33, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipe-tan Image Caption Expansion Request (please)

Wikipe-tan's current image caption simply reads "An example of the anime drawing style". I know we can't put Wikipe-tan's name in there (for self referential reasons), but shouldn't it say something like "A typical anime [character/style/drawing technique/aesthetic] features [list notable stylistic features here]..."? (I'm not sure how to phrase it myself.) This would make the image's presence in the article more relevant, as it would illustrate the notable stylistic features mentioned in the image caption. --Ppk01 22:48, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I think a link to Cosplay would be appropriate. (KaorinGirl 07:23, 24 January 2007 (UTC))

We can link to Wikipe-tan if we use a full URL. WP:SELF is actually more a style guide that gives consideration to down-stream use of our content. -- Ned Scott 07:47, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Under Early anime in the United States

The person who signed as VeriGGlater in this section is actually VeriGGlater (talk · contribs · WHOIS) faking a signature. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:59, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I know for a fact this is false. The person using the VeriGGlater signature is did not use someone else's user name and is not pretending to be someone else. The above comment is simply untrue. Mere observation shows that a user name is not registered to someone else because the name appears in red and not blue. Too bad attempts to register a user name wind up nothing but error on a blank white page with different user name attempts. But I will try again. [[User:VeriGGlater 15:36, 1 March 2007 (UTC)]] 09:34 Central Standard Time 01 March 2007

A user's existence can be checked by looking for the presence of a "user contributions" page on the redlink. If not present, it is a non-existent user. Besides the diffs don't lie. I hope what you mean by "trying again" is registering a real account. — Edward Z. Yang^(Talk) 00:22, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Under this heading I was expecting to find Akira and Ghost in the Shell at least, maybe even Ranma 1/2, Tenchi Muyo, or Vampire Hunter D. (No, I'm not an obsessed bitter fan of all these) The first two specifically, and others released in the States by Manga, Pioneer Video, ADV, etc. are primarily responsible for the recent Anime explosion that has been going on that many mistakenly believe started with Pokemon. It just hit the mainstream with Pokemon. All these had video releases and spread pretty much word of mouth as they had very little if any television airing. Why leave out these out? Surely wiki authors here know that anime in Japan is not "just for kids" or young adults, despite sex and violence being more accepted in kids shows, but another medium. So why are they left out? I'm not asking for every title to be listed: Battle Angel, Patlabor The Movie, Ninja Scroll, Armitage III, etc... Akira & Ghost in the Shell were very fundamental in the growing acceptance of anime in the US and worldwide. GitS has even influenced the creators of The Matrix movies they admit. VeriGGlater 01:04, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Probably because they weren't "early". None of those were released in the States until 1990 or so, and there are many, many series which were released in the States before that: Speed Racer, Astro Boy, Gigantor, Star Blazers, Voltron, and so on. The ones you mention were not even close to the early anime released in the States. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 04:51, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

But the ones mention by the article were on television (in the States anyway) as 'regular' cartoons. It was not until the 90s that anime started to be released as 'cartoons from Japan' AND with options of the original language with subtitles. Thus the realization that these cartoons came from Japan. But my main point is that Akira & GitS were THE two that really got the ball rolling on 'cartoons from Japan' i.e. anime in the States and subsequently hit mainstream with Pokemon. At this point everybody knew it (Pokemon) was from Japan. That may be a result of a more general 'things from Japan are cool' and/or the video game, but the fact of the matter is, the 'early' anime in the US, as listed in the article so far, were viewed as just another cartoon outside of small populations with connections to Japan. Outside Japan, the term most popularly refers to animation originating in Japan. Likewise the use of the term "anime" outside Japan was not used except for relatively small populations with Japan connections. Maybe I have a US centric point of view on this and maybe Speed Racer, Astro Boy, etc. in say, Turkey, were called anime when (if) they were aired around the time they first came out. I understand the term "anime" (in the States) originating around the of Akira, GitS, et al. If we use the term "anime" as it is used outside Japan, Akira & GitS, specifically the former, really made Japanese animation, anime, into a world-wide phenomenon and most definately marking points in the history of the medium. Therefore, I believe, this chunk of "early anime in the US", as I believe I tried to give some further definition to above, is noteworthy. Sailor Moon, Dragonball Z, Pokémon, Yu-Gi-Oh, and Gundam Wing are all listed under the heading in question and these are late 90s, early 2000s past Akira, GitS, et el. Also under the heading is the line A great many anime films and feature-length TV series compilations were also released direct-to-video in the U.S. Perhaps the history making Akira, GitS should be mentioned here. Does that make any sense to anybody other than me? I clicked on the titles listd under direct-to-video and the seem to all be rather obscure titles. I do not understand why Akira and GitS are not mentioned here? They are not any more risque than uncensored versions of other titles mentioned in the article. Not that that would/should be a factor since animation in Japan, anime, is not "just for kids" or young adults, but another medium entirely. VeriGGlater 01:48, 3 Febuary 2007 (UTC)

This is only your opinion, and inserting it into the article is completely inappropriate. Wikipedia is about verifiable facts, not someone's opinions or views. --Farix (Talk) 12:53, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Admittedly there are some opinions in my above post on this talk page. But one cannot deny that the word anime did not enter US vernacular until Akira, GitS era, early to mid-90s. This is also the time that anime started to be released in the US with original voices/subtitled making it notably animation from Japan. Lastly, that Akira is primarily responsible for making anime a world-wide phenomena is also not mere opinion. That is widely understood. Read any book published in English on anime and I doubt if this last point would not be mentioned. An interesting book on anime and its historical/sociological impact is the art book put together by Takashi Murakami titled "Little Boy: The Arts of Japan's Exploding Subculture". If one doubts the worldwide impact of Akira, one could read the several essays by multiple artists in this book which is written simultaneously in English and Japanese on the same page. A truly fascinating read even if you do not agree with me on this page. VeriGGlater 11:03, 3 Febuary 2007 (UTC)

From the wiki page History of anime the two quotes The 1990s and 2000s saw an increased acceptance of anime in overseas markets. Akira and Ghost in the Shell (1995) became famous worldwide. and Despite the failure of Akira in Japan, it brought with it a much larger international fan base for anime. When shown overseas the film was a cult hit that would eventually become a symbol of the medium for the West. ...to not do any "real" research on the matter. VeriGGlater 12:12, 3 Febuary 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, perhaps I am a part of this so-called "small populations with connections to Japan" that I speak and used the term "anime" before it hit mainstream at the time of Pokemon, Sailor Moon, etc. The point on Akira & GitS though, is hardly an opinion. They should be mentioned for their historical and cultural significance. VeriGGlater 13:21, 3 Febuary 2007 (UTC)

If I ask you to provide the sources that would pass WP:RS and WP:V and state what you're claiming, would you be able to provide them? --Farix (Talk) 21:14, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I am really surprised that Akira was not mentioned in the article. I'll scour all the books on anime at the public and college libraries in town and get the "Little Boy" book through interlibrary loan (a library in the neighboring county has a copy of it) so it may take a while - give me three weeks, but I am sure every book on the topic would note its significance. Unless you've come into anime in the later 90s, it is difficult for me to understand how this has been passed up. I only own the dvd and two issues of the Akira manga, so I'd hardly call myself a crazed fan. Crazed and a fan perhaps, but not a crazed fan. VeriGGlater 15:34, 3 Febuary 2007 (UTC) I would like to note that I hope this does not sound like I'm saying, "I was here before and therefore you must just not get it." I did not intend to mean this. I am not a proponent of ageism. VeriGGlater 23:02, 5 Febuary 2007 (UTC)

A great many anime films and feature-length TV series compilations were also released direct-to-video in the U.S., and were often available for rental at mainstream video stores. The article notes, and then lists a whole slew of little known titles(in the US at least). (I know that just because I've never heard of any of them doesn't mean they are unknown. Others such as Atom and the White Lion many have heard of, the one's listed, I'm not sure I can find many who have). Listed here should be the Akiras, the Ghost in the Shells, and the Vampire Hunter Ds (which I personally didn't care that much for). Just about every video rental place in town had these, but the ones listed..., maybe they were placed in the children's section because they certainly weren't in the "Japanimation" (as it was more often called than "anime" back then) section of our town's video stores. I'm still waiting on the "Little Boy" book, btw. But have picked up other books and they all seem to note Akira's significance. Just no stats of sales, which would a piss poor way to measure the significance of something. Akira did not do very well in its native Japan, but was huge throughout the rest of the world. VeriGGlater 14:57, 12 Febuary 2007 (UTC)

Give me one more week. The "Little Boy" book just came in. VeriGGlater 11:47, 26 Febuary 2007 (UTC)

This section has way way too many examples of anime listed. KyuuA4 04:52, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

You are probably right. I was just surprised there was such a gap in the history and I truly believe anime would not be as big as it is today (in the States) were it not for the likes of Akira and GitS (and specifically those two). My opinion perhaps, but oh well. I can be one of those cranky old men in a rocking chair someday..."I should know, I lived it". ha! VeriGGlater 10:49, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Yamamoto?!?

Did Isoroku Yamamoto seriously dabble in animation?? I think it's more likely that some studio or organization is meant and not the admiral. Brutannica 04:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Where did you see this? ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe}

Its in the history section, the first part where it says, "The history of anime begins at the start of the 20th century, when Yamamoto experimented with the animation techniques that were being explored in France, Germany, United States and Russia" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.72.48.105 (talk) 21:54, 11 February 2007 (UTC).

Vandalism see the History. --Squilibob 02:04, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

See Also and Terminology sections

I think it is time that the terminology section be given a though review with terms either being removed, moved to the See Also section, or integrated into the artical text. I have already done some moving around, editing, and removed some of the terms that do appear in the artical text, but some of the other terms do warent discussion:

• Catgirl - Should be worked into the text of the article text or removed, barely relevent
• Lemons and Limes - Irrelevent as it is not even mentioned on the fanfic page
• Japanese television dramas - Relevent, should either be under See Also, or mentioned in text (i.e. 'Some animes are considered to be in the caterogry of Japanese televetion dramas...')
• Eroge - Irrelevent to anime as a whole, move to the hentai page
• EroGuro - Irrelevent to anime as a whole, move to the hentai page
• Lolicon - Irrelevent to anime as a whole, move to the hentai page
• ONA - Relevent, but would make more sense on the OVA page
• Shota - Irrelevent to anime as a whole, move to the hentai page

Let the discussion begin! --Darkstar949 18:59, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

perhaps all terminology could be removed and instead Category:Anime and manga terminology be placed in see also section? --Squilibob 06:14, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

That's actually a good idea, pretty much everything that is left in the terminology is mentioned on that page and it would make sense to have a link to it under See Also. --Darkstar949 15:44, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Gourmet Manga

Please, can someone add the "gourmet" category of manga/anime to the list of genres, and also create a separate article on it? I am told there are many examples of this category, but since I don't speak Japanese I can't find out very much about it. Maybe you can look at this Japanese page to help you: ja:料理・グルメ漫画 24.7.254.33 20:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

What exactly do you mean by the term "gourmet" though? As far as I know I have never heard of it as an actual genera, but usually only in the context of "must see", "classic", or "top shelf" anime. Which isn't so much a genera as it is a review rating. --Darkstar949 20:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Try looking under gurume manga, or googling for "gourmet manga" in quotes. Apparently, it is a recognized subgenre! --Orange Mike 21:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I think it means anime/manga that features food and wine and gourmet subjects like that. One example is Yakitate!! Japan, about a boy who likes to make bread. There's not very much info about this genre on English-language websites; at least I couldn't find much. 24.7.254.33 22:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I actually have one Manga with the title Cooking Papa, which I've not yet been able to delve into yet. But this might fit in this genre. And according to the wiki link it is 90 issues long. If each volume is regular book size like my issue is, it must be a long story. User:VeriGGlater 17:42, 14 Mar 2007

I don't think a gourmet anime article needs to be created or added to this article for the same reason that pirate anime should not be created, or even ninja anime. They are sub-types of general genres. --Squilibob 00:20, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Genres

I think some titles under genres shouldn't be labled as that certain genre. For example, MeruPuri is under hentai....I do not think it's a hentai, and if it where a hentai, why would viz media be advertising it in mangas (or shojo beat magazine) if they are usually rated T for teen or older teen? If MeruPuri was a hentai, then it would probably be rated M, or something, I'v never really seen any hentai mangas distrubuted by any companies I know. Syarasu 02:09, 15 March 2007 (UTC)Syarasu

Maybe we shouldn't have a list of genres on the page at all. We certainly don't need examples of each genre since the pages they are linking to should be giving that sort of information. Perhaps that, in addtition to the above, also needs to be removed and the Category:Anime by genre linked to in the see also section. --Squilibob 10:30, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I disagree, the section with the genres is relevant to the overall introduction to the subject of anime and the genres that are listed should be unique to anime as a style of animation. I have gone ahead and removed MeruPuri (perhaps the original editor was thinking of something else?) and the rest of the titles should be checked at some point to ensure that they are accurate representations of the genre they are associated with on the page. --Darkstar949 12:51, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

The first two paragraphs give a good generalization, it's the list describing each genre that I'm proposing to be removed and linked to in the See also section. --Squilibob 15:01, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps what should be mentioned in the first couple intro paragraphs is the fact that, unlike in the States, animation (anime) is not considered merely a childrens medium. VeriGGlater 0:28, 17 March 2007

Well I once read on the MeruPuri article that it shows shots of a character kind of naked or something like that, I don't think just because of the it is a hentai, (I mean, watch DBZ), But they probably thought 'cuz of that. P.S. I'm syarasu, I forgot to log in....71.106.128.213 01:22, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Even if one were to take into consideration that another culture, in this case Japan, is not as uptight over something like human nudity, i.e. has slightly different standards of what is "ok" to show kids, something like the Patlabor movies are hardly aimed at a child audience.VeriGGlater 9:36, 01 April 2007

Not without a source. --Yuuki Mayuki 08:51, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I suppose, right? How hard could it be to find such a source? Just about every person from Japan that I've ever met has all but acknowledged this in writing (I'm talking from the mid-90s on mostly, but some post Pokemon period as well) and none of them necessarily consider themselves Otaku or big fans. The reason I wish we could get this is in the States it seems some people (actually a lot, too many)(in the US) despise the animation medium as children's stuff. But then again, those people I meet (US people) aren't really the types to be into foreign films either. Also, 60% of all books and magazines sold in Japan are comic books, aka manga, according to Murakami in a book he edited "Little Boy". What are the figures for animated programs, movies, etc...? VeriGGlater 13:47, 21 March 2007

MeruPuri is not a hentai! A hentai is Hardcore Anime Pornography! Not i have never seen this anime but from what i can tell it is not even a ecchi! so who told you that MeruPuri was a hentai?--Tatshro Satou 16:13, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

If you actually read halfway through my sentance, I NEVER SAID IT WAS A HENTAI. *Sorreh for yellin'*:P Syarasu 04:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)Syarasu

I cleaned up the genre section. I didn't delete anything (well, only one thing), but did a major overhaul. I cleaned up language and grammar. I removed the overly complicated explanation of Ecchi and instead pointed the reader to the main article for more information. I added links to examples that didn’t have links, for example, Ranma ½ now has a link, and Wicked City now directs you to the correct page. I organized genres by type so that it doesn't look like a complete mess. I cleaned up the style of definitions, so that they now all start with capitalization, end with punctuation, have uniform spacing, and refer to examples in a similar manner. I also added post-apocalyptic genre and split Yaoi from Shounen-Ai. Yuri and Shoujo-Ai are not different enough to warrant separate categories (they don’t even have different wikipedia pages).Djfinn 14:10, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

This line at the very end of the Genre section mentions a trivial fact true of any medium and should be erased: "Some anime titles are written for a very specific audience, even narrower than those described above. For example, Initial D and éX-Driver concern street racing and car tuning. Ashita No Joe and Hajime no Ippo were about boxing. Hanaukyo Maid Team is based on the French maid fantasy." Any medium contains lots of very narrowly constructed genre, I could break out all sorts of things. For example, mythology-based Anime is a narrow cross-genre whether its straight fantasy like Inuyasha or SF post-apocalyptic like Gilgamesh but there is no need to mention this as a fact. Also, its not the case that the examples mentioned were written for a very specific audience (only hard-core boxing-lovers for example); they just fit into very narrowly constructed genre. It would be interesting if there were lots of anime catering to a very, very, niche audience, but I don't think thats the case. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jaydubayubee (talk • contribs).

Demashita! Powerpuff Girls Z

However, some anime are co-productions with non-Japanese companies like the Cartoon Network. Thus, anime is no longer specific to the Japanese market.

This passage is pretty much referring to "Demashita! Powerpuff Girls Z", and I would like to link it to the relevant article. I tried to do it myself but I could not get the coding to work correctly, what with the spaces in the article title and all. --Ihmhi 04:50, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

They also did it with The Big O. -- Ned Scott 05:33, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

But that was after the Japanese had created the series, not explicitly funding it for creation. They asked them to end the series.--Hitsuji Kinno 02:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

The point being? It's still a co-production between a Japanese company and a non-Japanese company. -- Ned Scott 03:19, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

And the Bubblegum Crisis TV series. --Farix (Talk) 10:52, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

And Immortal Grand Prix, the non-"microseries" of the two produced. But "anime" is a Japanese word borrowed from English and then shortened as is common in the language, and means all "animation" anyway. So it always never meant only "cartoons or animation from Japan". Well, until people in the US re-borrowed the word. VeriGGlater 18:14, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

South Korean Anime

South Korea makes anime, like Bastof Syndrom. But do they CALL it anime? They make manga but call it Manhwa, so anime might have a different name too. But since there's scrace to no difference between manhwa & manga & language-daft people can't tell Bastof isn't Japanese, it's safe to say that Kouth Korean animation is anime too, but like not ALL animation made in Japan is anime, not ALL Korean animation would be either.

Please sign your posts. South Koreans don't call Korean animation Anime. A New Type Magazine had a Korean editor object to the usage of the term "anime" toward Korean animation. Rather there is a Korean word for it. While Japanese animation is often shipped to Korea to make it move, it doesn't make it "more Korean" and "less Japanese" because by that logic then American animation should look exactly the same as the Japanese and then when they move to China, it should look exactly the same. Thus it's where the animation is produced, the story lines are made, and who controls the project that makes it of that country. Doggy Poo is a Korean Animation...--Hitsuji Kinno 08:32, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

History Section

The first sentence :The history of anime begins at the start of the 20th century, when Japanese filmmakers experimented with the animation techniques that were being explored in France, Germany, the United States, and Russia.[citation needed] As well as other statements attesting to the origin and development of certain types of anime appear to have been copied verbatim from [1]. catalexis of AZ 02:29, 15 June 2007 (UTC) Unless, I am mistaken and the linked article lifted the sentence from here without attribution, in which case -- I apologize and wag my finger at the other guys.

Wag your finger at the other guys. According to the whois that page has only been in existence since March 2007. Plenty of sites lift content from wikipedia. --Squilibob 06:16, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I started to figure that out after hunting down other things for citation sources. Live and learn I guess. I'll get better at this.catalexis of AZ 13:33, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Anime Etymology

"Manga! Manga!" by Fredrick Schodt states that anime comes from the french word L'animé, and is *not* a shortened version of the English word Animation. Rather it comes from the french, which has the same latin root word "anima" meaning to move. Fredrick Schodt got this information from Tezuka, who created anime... so I think that's more creditable. It's also notable that "anime" in Japanese sounds a lot like the french word "l'animé" In addition many of the camera angles used in anime are replications or inspired by French films as Tezuka said himself. He said Terazuka, French Film, and German Film had heavy influence on camera work in anime. Also Disney films had a heavy influence on the initial character designs of animation, and less influence on camera angles. I'll correct this if there are no objections with reference. (I'll give til this coming Sunday.) --Hitsuji Kinno 02:06, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Without any debate, I've changed it and added the reference. I'll clean the reference tag as soon as I find that pesky book ref tag...--Hitsuji Kinno 04:07, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Uhm, Tezuka did not create anime. Even ignoring the fact that many other people worked on the productions he also worked on, his first comic strip ever was in 1946, Diary of Ma-chan. http://www.awn.com/mag/issue3.5/3.5pages/3.5leger.html According to The Anime Encyclopedia by Clements & McCarthy, anime goes back to 1917. You can see a quote from it on this page: http://www.popmatters.com/books/reviews/a/anime-encyclopedia.shtml Tezuka was not even born until the 20's (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osamu_Tezuka).

Furthermore, Tezuka's style was indeed influenced by Disney, but perhaps even more so by Max Fleishcer (http://ww.tqnyc.org/NYC040984/Hanime.html), which you can easily see by watching such Fleischer cartoons such as Betty Boop and Somewhere in Dreamland (http://einsiders.com/reviews/dvd/somewhereindreamland.php http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betty_Boop Even a number of videos are here: http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=max%20fleischer%20AND%20mediatype%3Amovies, even http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osamu_Tezuka mentions Max Fleischer) which contain the big eyes and small mouths that Tezuka popularized in Japanese manga and anime.

Your reference betrays you, since it says that shorts were the first thing produced at that time... what Tezuka did create was the sense of camera angles. He admired the feature-length animation. Where does American animation and Anime deviate to define these types of animation? Besides, the main issue was etymology... since the reference I dug up was printed by Kodansha I think it's better reference than none and some American's assumption about the Etymology because they are American-centric. Whereas anime had many influences besides America. Sign your posts please. --Hitsuji Kinno 08:42, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I find this to be rather dubious. The French "animé" just means "animated" (dessins animé "animated drawings" is what cartoons are called, for example.) "animer" is the verb "to animate". "l'animé" doesn't make sense. Why would you put an article before the participle? Also, you'd better start editing ja as the word アニメーション is rife in their articles on the subject. Bnynms 23:28, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

アニメ might come from the French "l'animé" (dubious, but possible) or be an abbreviation of the English word "animation" (more probable, as nearly all Japanese loan words are abbreviations of English words.) But the longer word アニメーション (which is an actual Japanese word, although less used than アニメ) is clearly the translitteration of English "animation", so the current phrasing of the article is wrong: «The Japanese term for animation is アニメーション […] It is borrowed from the French word for animation, "l'animé."» --Etatoby 10:20, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

The Anime Network

{{editprotected}} I request that The Anime Network be added to 'External Pages' section. In addition, I request that the wiki page for the Anime Network (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anime_Network) be added to the 'See Also' links. I ask these things because, being such a large, popular network as it is, I cannot see why a 24/7 anime channel, being the first of its kind, shouldn't be linked and accessible on this page. I've been watching it, and it's been active for 5 years. It's existence alone, is a huge step in the U.S's current state of the reception of anime. So I ask that you please also include a mentioning of Anime Network's 24/7 channel in the 'Current reception in the United States' section. I came to this page looking for a network just for anime, and I was surprised when I had to look elsewhere to find the Anime Network. These few small changes could greatly help those searching around like I did. Thank you. Shadowdog2244 22:06, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

If we link to Anime Network, we have to link to every other anime channel. So in the interest of avoiding systemic bias, we don't link to any of them. --Farix (Talk) 22:39, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Along with Anime Network, the only other channel network is Funimation. Wouldn't it be possible to link to these 2, since they are the only anime channels? Especially since Anime network was the first in the US ever? Shouldn't that, at least, be accessible information? Especially under something like Current US Reception? Thanks. Shadowdog2244 23:05, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

And a half dozen Japanese anime channels, Animax, or any other anime channel all around the world, hence why I made the comment about systemic bias. If we included all of the links, other editors will invoke WP:NOT#DIRECTORY and delete the list. --Farix (Talk) 23:46, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I understand. Forget the links for 'see also' and 'external links.' It just wouldn't be fair, and I see why... What about Current US reception? Just considering a US viewpoint, those are still the only channels...And Anime Network was the first 24/7 anime channel in the US. That was a huge step alone, especially for the US, isn't it? 2 channels, 2 links...for just the US. Shouldn't there be a mention in that section for just those two channels? Isn't that fair since it is valid information, stating a fact, and not just stating examples even if there are only 2 current 24/7 US channels for examples? I mean, 2 channels cannot possibly be considered a US anime channel directory, can they? I apologize for taking up your time like this, and restating things. Heh, thank you, again. Shadowdog2244 17:25, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Editprotected request not done per comments by Farix. Resurgent insurgent 18:11, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Also, this article is not fully protected, so editprotected requests are not appropriate here. Any username more than 4 days old can edit the article. — Carl (CBM · talk) 18:20, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Stylistic exceptions

Anime is not only made up of big eyes... there are plenty of anime which are defined by smaller eyes, such as the body of Miyazaki's work, many Josei anime (Harikari Man, Suppli, Kimi wa Petto etc), and many anime aimed at an older market. In fact the anime with the largest eyes tend to be shoujo aimed at small kids. This would be exemplary of shows such as Mary Bell. Shouldn't that also be defined as well instead of making a blanket statement?

What does define anime is the way that it conserves and uses framework. (However this is a bit animation technical). This can be the use of detailed backgrounds, serialized stories, the use of stock animation, the use of static shots (back of head shots, quiet moments, a shot of a background with no characters in it.), conservation of in between shots with keys (called tweening, but I'm not sure how to put that into layman's terms). Anime employs tricks to fool the eye into thinking there is movement. It also likes to use more camera shot work, such as upshots, panning shots, etc that American animation tends to purposefully avoid. Other things of note are the creator-centric nature of it and the use of pop bands to do opening and closing music, which American animation does not--many of these tricks I've listed are used in very cheap production anime and are looked down upon by American animators as not "proper". (In fact many animation executives I've seen press conferences from call it a fad and not real animation.) Much of the shotwork is borrowed from French and German films as well (though disney had some influence as well). The conventions of storytelling are often borrowed from traditional theater such as Terazuka and Noh.

Anime is actually a double sub set- Animation-->Limited Animation-->Anime. Even high-class productions of anime still use the rules of limited animation to make the work flow. If you look up limited animation you'll see a lot of the same tricks employed, but Anime taking them further.

--;; I'm sure some of this can be found through references... I got some of this information from an animator I know... alot of it can be found in the book references listed which should be incorporated into the article anyway. --Hitsuji Kinno 20:28, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

There's no reason that you can't put this in the article. If you have references then even better. --Squilibob 01:10, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

This entire article should be deleted.

Why do I want this article to be removed? Because this is NOT a foreign dictionary, it's an encyclopedia. Anime is just the japanese word for animation, it's not a genre and "anime-style" is not an adjective. Sure, I understand that foreign words commonly develope into slang, which later on can be found in most dictionaries, but this is ridiculous. If we use anime as a word for japanese animated film, then why not use animação as a word for portuguese animated film? You get my point, hopefully.

I would also like to have the manga article to be removed, for the same apparent reason, although I know you won't remove either the manga article or this one.

213.113.118.17 03:25, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Anime is a class of artistic/literary work. It is a medium for expression, and I believe it certainly deserves its own encyclopedic article. RJaguar3 | u | t 04:51, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes. The anon's arguments would apply equally well for deleting the articles on, say, Impressionisms or the Renaissance. After all, they're just some foreign dictionary words for some French and Italian paintings and statues. --Gwern (contribs) 05:55 7 July 2007 (GMT)

Animation or cartoons from Japan are actually a world wide phenomena. They are not unique to the US or English speaking world. Visit some Japan oriented online forums sometime and you will find this to be true even if you have been aware of anime for years but still doubt this. While I agree to some extent with Anon's argument, because "anime" really does simply mean animation, I am against the removal of the article. Instead I just make sure I tell people what the word "anime" really means, but at the same time let people know that from my point of view, animation in Japan is merely another medium and does not have the same connotation as being "merely" a "kids medium" as it does in the United States. VeriGGlater 10:41, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

This begs the immediate question- why did you ask for this if you know it won't work? That's called wasting space. HunterBlackLuna 04:19, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Anime Styles and Graphics

First i think that it should be mentioned that anime is a style of 2D animation not 3D.At least that is how i know it.

2.at the styles section: Isn't there a style that has all competition based animes included? I mean animation productions like: Yu Gi Oh!(all of the versions), duelmasters, Oban star racers and many others. They all have this one common characteristic: they have one character that participates in some kind of nonviolent(no fighting at least) competition.And they almost never loose.

Please sign your posts. There are exceptions to Anime being 2D, such as Zoids, and also many games have anime. For example there was a 3D Sailor Moon game for dreamcast. Computer 3D has also been used in the rendering of 2D productions such as Heat Guy J. (In the US it's used for South Park.)

As for competition-based anime (which is really not a recognized genre of anime since it encompasses things like Japan! which is a cooking anime, which has it's own genre.) And I wouldn't call Yugioh non-violent. Competitions happened in Dragonball Z as well. Competitions have happened in Martial Arts anime, Role Playing Anime, and sometimes Episode of the Week in various anime. (Like the classic have-to-insert Sport competition.) Or even Sports Anime, like Touch, which while is technically baseball anime, it doesn't really have much competition.

What Anime is and does is use the rules of limited animation. That is cheats to make things appear they are moving more than they are. Even high tech anime such as Miyazaki productions still use principles of limited animation (Back of heads shots when talking... for example.). However, what classes anime from other limited productions, such a APA, is to how the limitation was adapted and taken to the next level as well as the purposeful integration of Japanese cinematic techniques, such as Kurozawa films (you can see this with Samurai fights and any fight sequence... including Yugioh), Terazuka theater (gay and lesbian characters who cross dress), Noh Theater (the hollow sounds and BG music used in Tenchi are prime example.), movie film shots (such as up shots far away shots, building shots, panning shots, etc. adapted from French and German Film) and other more subtleties like treatment of line. The stylistic differences between American film that are consistent are the use of color (which is viewed differently in Japanese art) and the use of line. (which tends to vary more in thickness than western versions of animation.). The various cheats that Japanese use and how they use them is actually what defines the medium. You can see this extended to even 3D games, and animation that uses 3D.

I should also note that production sizes of Japanese studios are greatly smaller. While an American Studio can have 3 teams per productions, 3 directors, Anime usually only has one director for the entire series, and one character designer. (an American team can have 3 or more. ^^;; I don't know how to reference that since it's first hand knowledge. A Japanese studio also works on a tighter budget. To a Japanese studio (when I was in between an animator and a Japanese studio) the amount of money an American production spends they only dream of.. and this is a high-end studio (deleting name om me if you are dying to know.), who makes clean and high-end productions. 100 people on a crew to Japanese is unheard of and highly wasteful. Many people multi-task. (Directors will draw, whereas an American director will not.) That's what defines anime as a medium of expression. Not big eyes, or high voices, but how it's produced and the end result.--Hitsuji Kinno 03:42, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

I learnt more about anime from your reply than from the whole article (or from any essay I've ever read about anime!) Thank you. It would be good to integrate it into the main article for the benefit of everybody, although I understand most of it is first-hand experience. --Etatoby 10:55, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

References

<ref name="Encyclopedia">{{cite book |last=Clements |first=Jonathan |coauthors=Helen McCarthy | title=The Anime Encyclopedia |publisher=Stone Bridge Press |date=2001 | location=Berkeley, California |isbn=ISBN 1-880656-64-7 }}</ref>

<ref name="Napier">{{cite book |last=Napier |first=Susan J. | title=Anime: From Akira to Princess Mononoke. |publisher=Palgrave |date=2001 |location =New York |isbn= ISBN 0-312-23862-2}}</ref>

<ref name="companion">{{cite book |last=Poitras |first=Gilles | title=Anime Companion |publisher=Stone Bridge Press |date=1998 |location =Berkeley, California |isbn=ISBN 1-880656-32-9 }}</ref>

<ref name="">{{cite book |last=Poitras |first=Gilles | title=Anime Essentials |publisher=Stone Bridge Press |date=2000 |location =Berkeley, California |isbn=ISBN 1-880656-53-1 }}</ref>

<ref name="guide">{{cite book |last=Baricordi |first=Andrea |coauthors=Claude Pelletier |title=Anime: A Guide to Japanese Animation |publisher= Protoculture |date=2000, 1958–1988|location =Montreal, Canada |isbn=ISBN 2-9805759-0-9 }}</ref>

<ref name="Dreamland">{{cite book |last=Schodt |first=Frederik L. | title=Dreamland Japan: Writings on Modern Manga |publisher=Stone Bridge Press |date=1996 |location=Berkeley, California |isbn=1-8806562-3-X }}</ref>

<ref name="">{{cite book |last=Schodt |first=Frederik L. | title=Manga! Manga!: The World of Japanese Comics |publisher=[[Kodansha]] International |date=Reprint edition (August 18, 1997) |location =ToKyo, Japan |isbn=ISBN 0-87011-752-1 }}</ref>

To make it easier for article inclusion... to include it thereafter just do <ref name="NAME HERE" /> This should get the article up to code. I'll play with an overhaul wherein I add references... Then we can delete the references section, and then the notes section can become references... and then add a See Also, like [[Limited Animation][] which already lists this article. Then we can try to renominate this article for GA listing.--Hitsuji Kinno 17:05, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Stylisitc before Genre?

If there are no objections, I'll move it next week.--Hitsuji Kinno 17:43, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Etymology

"Both the words "animation" and "l'animé" come from the Latin word "anima" which means to move." There's a source for it, so I can only presume the source didn't know what it was talking about. The Latin anima means soul or spirit, as both the Latin and English wiktionaries will confirm. Changing it makes the sentence a little irrelevant, so I'm removing it. Anyone with any objections can feel free to find a way of phrasing it :) JulianDalloway 15:39, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

animate (v.) Look up animate at Dictionary.com

1538, "to fill with boldness or courage,"from L. animatus pp. of animare "give breath to," from anima "life, breath" (see animus). The adj. meaning "alive" is from 1605. Animated "full of activity" is from 1585. In ref. to "moving pictures" it dates from 1895; animation in the cinematographic sense is from 1912. from: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=animation&searchmode=none

and Etymology: Animation \An`i*ma"tion\, noun. [Latin expression animatio, from animare.]. (Websters 1913)http://www.websters-online-dictionary.org/definition/animation

So the Etymology is right, the definition in the etymology is wrong or rather is a misrepresentation of it.--Hitsuji Kinno 17:48, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I wasn't saying that our word "animate" doesn't derive from "anima", but that it does in a far more obtuse way than is actually necessary to talk about. But I can live with the way it is at the moment :P Except that anima isn't a Latin verb, so I'll change to animare JulianDalloway 16:36, 5 August 2007 (UTC)