Talk:Ranma ½

Sales rankings in May 2000

Y'all may find this reference useful: http://web.archive.org/web/20010706135824/http://j-pop.com/anime/news/top10.html

It gives top-10 sales rankings of anime in the US & Japan. This is included in the list. --Gwern (contribs) 01:30 26 January 2010 (GMT)

Ryoga has DTD

"Developmental topographical disorientation", or DTD is a disease where people spend their whole life being lost, even in their own home. The condition was first identified in 2008 and today there are about 1,000 known cases. (178.236.117.122 (talk) 13:08, 16 May 2013 (UTC))

Then it's impossible for Ryouga to have it, if it wasn't identified until 2008. Fictional characters cannot have conditions that are unknown about at the time that the creative works they existed in were produced (without the use of time machines anyway). Firejuggler86 (talk) 08:46, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Fraction in page title

Would anyone object to moving this article to Ranma 1/2 to conform to MOS:FRAC? Presumably all similarly named articles and categories would also be so renamed. (A general discussion affecting mostly articles on trains is at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2021_March_3#Category:10¼_in_gauge_railways_in_England.) -- Beland (talk) 00:55, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm wondering about this also, for other pages besides those related to Ranma. While the article title uses the ascii character, the Infobox and in other places use Template:Frac and Template:Sfrac respectively. List of Ranma ½ video games uses the ascii character; I find these difficult to read, but I don't know how well Template:Frac is supported in article titles / section headings. — Christopher, Sheridan, OR (talk) 09:11, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

I really don't think that Template:Frac would work in article titles, because article titles have to be readable by a web browser &c..like, the url for the 1⁄2 in the title, if you look in the url bar is Ranma_%C2%BD. How would that work with templates? Would the url have to be encoded for the characters '{' '|' and '}' in the template?

In response to the OP of this thread, though, I would would ask: is its being at its current title cause any actual problems, other than "not conforming to MOS:FRAC"? Because, if there is no reason whatsoever other not being the format prescribed by MOS, that's not an adequate enough reason to change it; for, as we all know, MOS is a guideline, with which common sense should be applied, and exceptions may apply. Having said that, there is already a redirect at Ranma 1/2 so searchability is a non-issue. Firejuggler86 (talk) 09:16, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Update: upon reading MOS:FRAC, nowhere in there does it say anything about article titles, at all. All it says about not using the ASCII character ½ is do not use it, excepting articles in which "it is the only fraction that appears in the article". Furthermore, the 1/2 style is only recommended in science and math related articles, where {{frac|1|2}} is discouraged. since the article title IS the only usage of the character, and we cannot use the fraction template in the article title itself, AND that there is a redirect from Ranma 1/2, there is no good reason to move the article. Firejuggler86 (talk) 09:39, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Well, for one the article text and the article title are inconsistent, which seems unprofessional and possibly confusing if a reader tries to search for one form or the other on the page itself. The Unicode character is difficult to type, and having it in the article title forces it to be in category names for consistency. -- Beland (talk) 01:25, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

I was thinking similar to Floppy disk article text which makes significant use of Template:Frac. However, I get Firejuggler86's point regarding the title. If Ranma 1/2 already exists as redirect, would it really be productive to swap the article with the redirect?
— Christopher, Sheridan, OR (talk) 05:24, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
While I was aware of the navbox and related articles, I hadn't noticed there's also a Commons category that makes use of the Unicode fraction. Definitely not worth moving ½ → 1/2. — Christopher, Sheridan, OR (talk) 05:55, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Well, it would be about as productive as any other change that increases consistency. The MOS often arbitrarily chooses between two equally good alternatives for the sake of consistency. Though in this case there is also the usability improvement. -- Beland (talk) 02:37, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Firejuggler86, Beland: What about adding {{DISPLAYTITLE:''Ranma {{Frac|1|2}}''}} to the top of the article? That won't change the url in any way, but would change the display title. This works on my display (in preview mode); can it be confirmed for other displays?

[Sorry, I should have noticed that produces an "inconsistency" error message, so it won't work as written. Is the concept still sound?] — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR (talk) 19:42, 7 July 2021 (UTC) (struck and appended 19:51, 7 July 2021 (UTC))

If that proposed change doesn't work, I'm not sure what "concept" you mean? -- Beland (talk) 23:30, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

I wasn't aware of the DISPLAYTITLE: magic word until today. Perhaps there's another template not listed in Template:Correct title examples that I'm not aware of? I've read on MediaWiki that $wgRestrictDisplayTitle=false can override the restriction (doing so should be extremely rare), but I think that only works when actually coding the magic word/template (which means altering its function across Wikipedia), not simply using the magic word in an article; I couldn't find anything that specifically shows how to do it. If I find something that works, I would only apply the changes to the article with consensus, but even if we leave the article as-is, I've learned a lot today. — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR (talk) 04:57, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Just mentioning this as an option. If this article was moved Ranma ½ → Ranma 1/2, then we could add {{DISPLAYTITLE:''Ranma <sup>1</sup>/<sub>1</sub>''|noerror}} at the very bottom of the article, which would display the title as Ranma 1⁄2, but the URL would still be Ranma_1/2. The magic word DISPLAYTITLE would have to be at the very bottom in order to override the magic words inherited by the infoboxes. — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR (talk) 09:58, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

In concurrence to Firejuggler's comments, I am of the opinion that there is no need to change ½ at all, since ½ is the only fraction being used in the article. If there were multiple fractions being used besides ½, it would be necessary.--Loyalmoonie (talk) 02:12, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

OK, I do like CJDOS's solution, but if we're leaving the precomposed character, then it appears we should clarify MOS:FRAC that precomposed fractions are at least sometimes OK in titles. I've started discussing that at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Fractions in article and category titles. -- Beland (talk) 19:27, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

FTR, I have added an exception to MOS:FRAC. -- Beland (talk) 05:32, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Fraction formats in article

Hello, Loyalmoonie. I have reverted your changes to this article, as I could not find the reason you specified within MOS:FRAC. I therefore invite you to discuss your proposed changes here. It is my understanding that we generally avoid using the ASCII fraction except when otherwise impossible (such as article titles); {{Fraction}} is the accepted norm for displaying fractions within an article body. — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR (talk) 02:49, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

I have now made a second revert of your edit, Loyalmoonie. Please do not undo again without discussion. It should be noted that both MOS:FRAC and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Mathematics#Fractions currently says to avoid using the ASCII fraction character except in special circumstances. I do not believe those circumstances have been satisfied here. — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR (talk) 06:15, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Incorrect. According to MOS:FRAC, the "½" fraction CAN be used to maintain typographical consistency. Under this discovery, the fraction can stay to maintain this consistency because the name "Ranma ½" is a PROPER NAME/TITLE, while "Ranma {{frac|1|2}}" is not a proper name, and adds unnecessary weight to the article. It's like retitling The Price Is Right to "The Price is Correct" because one claims that it is more "professional tone" of an encyclopedia to say "correct" than "right," when this styling violates a proper title.--Loyalmoonie (talk) 03:36, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

FYI

 – Beland added the missing clarification to MOS:FRAC per the discussion in the previous section. CJDOS's comments here in § Fraction formats in article, were made prior to said change. Loyalmoonie's reply to said comments, was made after the change. — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR (talk) 19:30, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

"Inai Shuji" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Inai Shuji has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 31 § Inai Shuji until a consensus is reached. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:34, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

Move the anime to separate pages?

So, similar to how Urusei Yatsura has two separate pages for the anime adaptations, is it possible if we can split them out into two from the main page so the Ranma page could only have the manga info while the two new pages have the info for the 89 anime and the upcoming 24 version? VenezuelanSpongeBobFan2004 (talk) 23:31, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Support --Meester Tweester (talk) 19:01, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

I would Support if the topic of the 2024 anime is notable enough. For now though, I will Oppose. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 17:24, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

I think that this seems to be a good idea that I support, but maybe we should wait until the new anime has been released, and we have more material to include? David A (talk) 19:28, 6 October 2024 (UTC)