Talk:Marvel Disk Wars: The Avengers

Sources for every piece of information

I've noticed alot of Spshu's edits and removals, and frankly it's getting abit annoying. Apparently for every tiny piece of information that's added, it requires an outside second source. I mean check out the history of the page, Spshu originally edited out the main kids out on justification that they were not sourced, even though they are as much as the main characters as the Avengers, and that they were already sourced in links already provided.

I understand that sources are a requirement and help verify information, but at what point must they be needed for every single piece of new information. I'm not saying don't provide sources for information, I'm saying following this ruling to a knight templar level is really detrimental.

I mean take for example, the show casts Doctor Nozumu Akatsuki as a major character, being the creator of the DISK system and all. Is a simple entry of him in the character list too much to ask? Is he to be constantly be removed on the basis that no second outside sources have yet to provide information on him specifically? It's abit stupid. It's also bordering on being too stupid that simple information like Akira having the red disk or Edward Grant, the smallest kid, being the youngest, have to be omitted because they don't have second sources even though promotional artwork clearly shows such simple things. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.198.193.107 (talk) 01:26, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Info that can be found via actually visiting the External Links already listed.

• Info gotten from character page given by the official Tv Tokyo website even without English translation. Link
  • Color of disks.
  • Confirmation of kids.
• Info gotten from episode page given by the official Tv Tokyo website even without English translation. Link
  • Several characters such as Nick Fury confirmed.
• Info gotten from character page given by the official Walt Disney Japan website even without English translation. Link
  • Color of disks.
  • Confirmation of Kids.
  • In the villain section, Loki and several supervillains confirmed.
• Info gotten from Anime News Network page on the show. Link
  • Pepper Potts and other marvel characters confirmed via voice cast.

Conclusion: Several pieces of info were already sourced. Somebody apparently didn't bothering even checking the sources already provided before citing the existing info is unsourced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.28.247.226 (talk) 14:53, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

No it isn't determine, it is the rule don't added if it isn't sourced. Those are the rules of WP. That is they way it works, other wise it is original research or makes the article too reliant on primary sources. For Akira, boy was use because that is what is listed and would indicate he is the youngest. If you just want to put what ever you want start your own website about Disk Wars. Adding information without sources is what has gotten out of hand. Reference shows what information is sourced or unsourced. It is up to the editor that adds it to indicate the source, not the remover. The remover should not have to guess or read minds as to what is the source of the information. --Spshu (talk) 17:49, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

And by the way the External links are all primary sources and should not be used. And the Anime News Network page on the show is editable by anyone like a wiki. Outside wikis are not consider reliable sources what so ever. Spshu (talk) 18:00, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Read the policy and the interpretation getting from it is that primary sources could be used.

"Policy: Unless restricted by another policy, primary sources that have been reliably published may be used in Wikipedia; but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them."

I'm pretty sure info given by the very creators of the show itself is considered reliable. Anime News Network I believe is, from what can be gathered, reliable. Also I don't think the policy requires word for word when adding stuff. Something like the color of the Disks which are seen on multiple promotional artwork does not need extensive sourcing word for word.

As much as the wikipedia rules should be followed, it's really stupid to go so far that every tiny detail such as color or a main character shown on promotional artwork, requires to be sourced extensively. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.191.252.217 (talk) 00:22, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

per WP:PRIMARY: "Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources and, to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources and primary sources." So, primary source should not be used if it can be helped and can be removed. Re:Anime News Network (ANN), it has to do with only a part of ANN the Encyclopedia (page you indicated) which any page may be edited by the readers: "You can contribute information to this page, but first you must login or register", therefor is not usable. Nor are any of the blogs you added. Spshu (talk) 13:21, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

It also states at the top of the edit box: :Encyclopedic content must be verifiable." Verifiability: "One of the key policies of Wikipedia is that all article content has to be verifiable. This means that a reliable source must be able to support the material. All quotations and any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged must include an inline citation of a source that directly supports the material." Spshu (talk) 13:32, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Why is it too much to ask to actually to leave the sources on the sourced information. Why are you removing additional sourced information? Spshu (talk) 15:38, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Don't know whether something like:

"Akira's older brother, and is the more calm and mature of the two. He possesses the purple DISK which contains Thor."

is considered less sourced or any different than:

"Akira's older brother, and is the more calm and mature of the two and is Thor's partner."

Only notable difference is the mention of the color of the Disk which can be verified by merchandise, promotional artwork, images in news articles, and the official site.

Don't know whether a new one month old ongoing anime that would most likely become a toy franchise should be subjugated to extensive sources for every single detail, to a point that main characters or additional info about said characters can't even be added unless they are sourced. Most of the info is going to come from the show itself at the moment.

Don't know what type of sources are actually asked for especially due to explanations given. Info from the official site can't be used. Info from a notable website like ANN due to wiki-like nature can't be used. Info from blog-like sites like Kotaku can't be used. Info from news articles can apparently be used but due to the show being new, there aren't extensive news articles like them yet. They are probably such articles in Japanese, however don't know if they exist or if they would be accepted.

Don't know if the article should be hounded like this especially so early on in its infancy.

If isn't so different than why are you fighting over sourcing? Promotional artwork doesn't necessarily "verify" the color of the disk, it is at best we can assume is that it is just some color that the designer place there.

Would you prefer that you do tons of work on the page then leave considering the job done. Then months or years later some looking at the poor job done decides to completely rewrite the article since they cannot make heads or tails of the sourcing in the article? Spshu (talk) 15:39, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Okay, there's some extreme miscommunication going on here and some massive explanations need to be given so that there can be some understanding.

The original edits involved the removal of some info based on the fact that they were not sourced. Among said removals were the main kid characters. The very premise as given by news articles and pictures suggested that these kids would be worth mentioning. Would it not have been at more productive to at least tagged them and others with a {{Citation needed}} tag rather than outright removing them.

Sources were then given, however info not necessarily covered by the sources were taken out. Some edits were probably justifiable but some look like they were more of a step back than helping. Some basic stuff like:

"The main antagonist. He orchestrated the plan to use the DISKs to allow all the prisoners on Ryker's Island to escape and to summon them in battle."

were still being removed on the grounds that they were not sourced yet various source materials already provided pretty much prove such statements are verifiable. Along with massive removals, which edits were good or not were indistinguishable from one another thus reverting was done.

It didn't help that some edits like:

| writer = King Ryuu<ref name=cast/>

were constantly placed in even though quoting user:Raamin:

"Not needed in the infobox. Animation production by Toei Animation alone; Disney Television International Japan is not a studio."

To provide sourcing for some info not covered in some areas as well as provide sources that prove the show is notable, some other sources were sought out. However they were not accepted on the grounds on being primary sources along with this argument:

"So, primary source should not be used if it can be helped and can be removed"

The argument though is starting to become confusing. It can't be helped at the moment that primary sources are the only things that could be used. A simple tagging that the article uses primary would have been more helpful than constant removals.

For the colors, they can also be verified by pics of the very merchandise provided even by the official website, artwork within a source provided which clearly looks like it was taken from [an official page] provided by the company itself, and even pics] via a Japanese news article. If these multiple sources can't be proof of verification then an explanation for how something so obvious covered in multiple media, would be helpful. What exactly is required? The burden on proof is the responsibility of the editor however what type of proof is required for something like this.

As for "someone rewriting the article since they cannot make heads or tails of the sourcing in the article", there's most likely obvious problems however some explanations in where there are problems would be most appreciative. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.190.144.162 (talk) 07:21, 14 May 2014‎ (UTC)

The whole article was tag with citation needed and that hasn't stopped you and other from adding information with out sources. Until some one put there foot down (me), you didn't give a care to add sources so why would the in line tag help since you were ignoring that the whole article was tagged. Adding stuff that isn't sourced when it could have then blaming some one else for its removal. The lack of sources make "indistinguishable from one another thus reverting was done." Exactly. Rammin, is not necessarily right and quoting him doesn't make it right. Cites are needed in the infobox for information not in the body of the article, which none of it was in the article's body except Rykuu. Considering that you and other add info contrary to the article "need citation" tag, what would stop you from add primary sources with such an article tag.

The colors don't mean much of any thing for the characters, as those color mostly are already associated with the characters (and perhaps to indicate their partners) as the color for Spider-man (is red not yellow) and Loki (is green not purple) don't match up with what is claim in the article. So that isn't proof of any thing except that the marketing images were done with those colors. So, it is not obvious. Spshu (talk) 14:09, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

The color of the "triangular pog-like toys" which are called DISKs are in question. Spider-Man and Loki have not been captured yet as far as the show is concerned and not been placed in DISKs. The character titles of the five main Avengers being used in the official Tv tokyo website have DISKs in the title pic whose colors match the toyline. The character titles for Spider-Man and Loki however are not accompanied with DISKs and the color of said titles are more likely more associated with their characters rather than what DISKs they would be placed in. There is actually a Spider-Man toy however based on images that show that the DISK he would be in is yellow thus coinciding with certain facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.190.153.128 (talk) 01:48, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

There is not a wirtten source for everything. Sometimes the "original material" is much more important because everything written is already an interpretation. In archeology, for example, if your sources say that the artifact is blue, but you have it in front of you and see it's red. What should you trust : the sources or your eyes ? In this case, Marvel Disk Wars : The avengers just starts being brodcast in Japan and isn't completely translate yet. It is normal there is not many references avaible. There should be a way to cite the episodes as sources and they should be seen that way too, at least for the characters developpement and the summaries. It's a little like analysing a movie. If you do the work correctly, you will watch it and not only referred yourself on what was written. comment by 109.133.130.6 (talk) 08:38, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

Listing Further Staff

Something I've been kicking around lately is trying to find ways to update the article with more information regarding the production staff members. So far we have the Series Director mentioned, the producer, and the head writer/series organizer. What we haven't mentioned is the character designer, Yamamuro Tadayoshi. Yamamuro is mostly known for his work as the character designer and an animator for the Dragon Ball franchise, also produced by Toei Animation. I think trying to at least work his name into the article somewhere would be a nice idea.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Marvel Disk Wars: The Avengers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140717011949/http://comicsalliance.com/marvel-disk-wars-the-avengers-website-animation-art-video/ to http://comicsalliance.com/marvel-disk-wars-the-avengers-website-animation-art-video/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140715135331/http://comicsalliance.com/marvel-disk-wars-the-avengers-bandai-bachicombat-pokemon-pogs/ to http://comicsalliance.com/marvel-disk-wars-the-avengers-bandai-bachicombat-pokemon-pogs/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:09, 31 March 2017 (UTC)