Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga

Proposed split of List of Pokémon anime characters

Inactive talk page over at List of Pokémon anime characters, so I'm putting it here as well. (Please respond at the source page, linked directly below)

Discussion at Talk:Pokémon Heroes § Recent changes

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Pokémon Heroes § Recent changes, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:01, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Question about Pokémon Anime Series

I've been going through and cleaning out some articles at Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokémon recently, and I've stumbled upon a bit of a strange situation with the anime series that I feel I am not entirely sure how to deal with. Currently, for our anime episodes list, it is split into two: List of Pokémon episodes (seasons 1–13) and List of Pokémon episodes (seasons 14–present), with a corresponding Lists of Pokémon episodes being used to link to individual seasons. Both the individual split lists are reaching size concerns, but I feel like rather than another size split, the use of these lists should be re-evaluated. These split lists I feel are practically useless, since all they do is list episode name and release date for a given episode. When only two episodes of the series actually have individual articles, and both are from the original series, there's little to no navigational benefit gained from listing the episodes out here separate from their given season article like this. Given the fact there is also no information on plot, development, etc, it furthers the fact of the redundancy and lack of aid these lists provide. All of the information for a given season is impossible to slot into these lists without creating further size concerns, but it is better contained at a given season article. My main concern is this: If these split lists offer literally no practical benefit outside of directing users to a specific season's articles, where all of the information on these split lists already exists, then what is the point of keeping these lists? This is especially the case given the Lists of Pokémon episodes article already acts as a directory to specific seasons anyway, just without the redundant information and fluff.

Given the iconicity of this series, I felt taking action directly would be controversial. Given you guys cover this stuff in much more rigorous depth and have far more experience with these kinds of lists, I wished to check this with you all first. I'm not sure if these split lists have a reason to exist, and I'm curious if there is one or not that justifies this branch, or whether these lists should just be outright removed in favor of the series articles and the current directory article that already exist. Please let me know yall's thoughts, since I'm admittedly unsure of how to go about tackling this. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:36, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Category:Anime and manga set in Japan

Japan is often the default setting for both anime and manga, since both are from there. I don't see why this category can't be a container category for all the future categories about prefectures within Japan. This, in my opinion, should be moved to Category:Anime and manga set in Japan by prefecture. SimonLagann (talk) 13:51, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Crunchyroll

I was analyzing many sources and news coverage about more than 200 pages of anime series and movies that for the first time are currently or previously streamed on Crunchyroll, well I just realized that all the time that I make those edits was change the term of "licensed the series" to "streamed the series" both in the anime infobox and in the section below where exactly it said what the media streaming company acquires the distribution rights from Japanese studios and companies for streaming in select countries worldwide outside of Asia (but includes East Asia and the Indian subcontinent) for the seasons that would be premiered this year, but there is a user called Xexerss who denies the reality of what that the blocked user Imperial meter (which is a sockpuppet of the user Silence of Lambs) made was altering the article by repeatedly linking with the parent company of the same name as if it had no relevance here, if it had relevance here is because no one pays attention to the introduction of the initial paragraph of the original article before and after making those unnecessary changes because its parent company does not have the right to licensing anime series for a release on home video directly but currently operates the streaming service after its merger with Funimation since 2022. 190.166.83.153 (talk) 03:10, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

This is about the sixth time I will repeat the same thing. This has nothing to do with the edits of Imperial meter. The problem is that you keep changing indiscriminately in every article the links from Crunchyroll LLC (the company) to Crunchyroll (the streaming service) even in cases where the series have clearly not been licensed only to be streamed and are sources supporting the fact that they were released on home video by them. I am not "denying reality", I'm just telling you to find out on a case by case basis how Crunchyroll handles the licensing of each series. I personally don't see the problem of using terms like "license" or "streaming rights" when Crunchyroll is the only company that distributes a series in English-speaking territories, because logically to have the permission to stream it they had to have licensed it in the first place, but I understand leaving just "streaming" when there is another company that handles the distribution of a series in other formats. The latter is debatable, and I will not object if it is simply left as "streaming", as you have been doing, if it is decided that we should stick to using that term. Anyway, thanks for agreeing to start a discussion regarding this. Xexerss (talk) 04:44, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

That is not the case, first we are going to solve this problem quickly by following the steps of the banned user, using the Efn template as an explanatory note or a quote depending on the reference that was used both from the infobox and the section below at the end of references and followed of external links about the fact that Crunchyroll's parent company has managed to license anime series and movies for release on home video directly all the time since its merger with Funimation in 2022. 190.166.83.153 (talk) 23:11, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Why should we follow the steps of a banned user whose notes didn't include any reference anyway? If Crunchyroll has released the series in home video format, it clearly indicates that the licensee extends beyond streaming and it would make sense to link the article of the company instead of the streaming service. Indicating in the infobox that Crunchyroll (streaming service) has the license of a series, along with an explanatory note indicating that Crunchyroll (the company) has the home distribution rights as well, is just ridiculous, and it is simpler to indicate that the company has the license for the series (without superfluous notes), which wouldn't be false anyway, so I still don't understand your insistence on changing this in every article. I'm getting tired of trying to reason with you, and it's not just me who's getting fed up with this, as I've seen other editors constantly reverting similar edits on your part in various anime and manga articles, so it's obvious that you are doing whatever you want on some whim without giving a reasonable argument. Just like the issue regarding date templates addressed at your talk page, it seems to me that you're not understanding what is being said to you here. My point is, if the large company has the distribution rights to the series in home video format, then why should we limit to indicate that the streaming service owned by the large company is streaming the series instead of directly stating that the company has licensed it? By your logic, does a streaming service carry more weight than a company whose license extends beyond streaming, even if said streaming service is operated by the very own company that also distributes it in home video format? Xexerss (talk) 01:07, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

I don't know and I don't understand what you mean, I was just trying to tell you nicely that don't you repeatedly link to the article from a streaming service with the namesake parent company instead of adding the efn template so that you can better explain to the users who used to see and edit anime and manga series' article to avoid from many getting confused by compairing with another topic related to media company or an entertainment enterprise, I give you an example here, an IP indicates that Crunchyroll (streaming service) acquires video distribution rights and streams a series, and adds a note along indicating that Crunchyroll LLC (a parent company which also operates this service) licensed an anime series for a home video release directly for North America, followed by the United Kingdom and Ireland through its division Crunchyroll UK and Ireland and in Australia through its division Crunchyroll Pty. Ltd. 190.166.83.153 (talk) 03:40, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

It seems excessive to me to add so many notes with sources that do not even mention the series in question. I wouldn't be surprised if those notes were added anonymously by Imperial meter, given that it's same kind of notes that they used to add in several anime articles. In any case, I suggest you to get familiarized with WP:OTHERCONTENT and note that not all articles have to structure this kind of information in the same way. What I'm saying is very simple: if Crunchyroll only has the rights to stream the series, let's leave the link to the article of the streaming service. If Crunchyroll has the rights for both streaming and home video release, let's leave the link to the company (company that owns the namesake streaming service), what's so complicated to understand? Xexerss (talk) 03:58, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

So it doesn't help you if you leave it linked like this because I explained it wrong without thinking and repeatedly about the same topic in asking you to first find well out the news coverage indicating that if the streaming media company acquires those video distribution rights of a Japanese animated television series and stream it in select territories globally outside of Asia and East Asia; before making this change because I'm tell you that an entertainment company which currently operates the service would not be dedicated to managing the licensing for the home video release of some selected titles internally. 190.166.83.153 (talk) 06:41, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

The streaming service is operated by one company. It doesn't matter if it releases a series on home video in one or more territories, it is already inferred that they are the ones who have the license for the series in the English-speaking territories where it operates. Your logic is simply "Crunchyroll released the series on home video here, but not there, therefore Crunchyroll doesn't have the license, it's just streaming it", which simply ridiculous and you're the only one I've seen that is so insistent on defending this stance. In any case, perhaps in particular cases of which I'm not aware at the moment, most of the series that are distributed on home video in North America are also released in other English-speaking territories where the company operates (since 2022 at least). My Home Hero for example: NA, UK, and AUS; considering that these are the three main English-speaking regions where the company operates, I think it's safe to say that Crunchyroll has effectively licensed the series and is not simply available for streaming. The 'licensee' parameter of the infobox is for English licensees (per Template:Infobox animanga), so it doesn't matter if the company just streams the series in other non-English speaking territories where it operates. If the company has not acquired a series just for streaming, why would we state otherwise? Xexerss (talk) 07:43, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Discussion surrounding the evaluation of Lycoris Recoil

Good afternoon I would like to ask other users to help us in my dispute with Nguyen280405 around Lycoris Recoil. The user insists that the text "mixed rating" in the professional criticism section should be changed to "mixed-positive" because their own calculating the verage number of ANN's editorial reviews for the premiere episode showed 3.2 and since they considers this rating to be above average, the user believes that we have to change the description. I considered this to be original research, since the resource does not determine the average number in the premiere review scores, not to mention that the figure of 3.2 seems too average for such conclusions. But the users did not agree with me and, as you can see, further discussion simply stalled. In particular, they believe that with this approach, the "mixed score" can also be considered original research. So I ask third-party users to leave their opinions and, if possible, somehow resolve our dispute, I will not mind if some other more experienced user thinks that I was completely or partially wrong. The article was already at risk of starting an edit war, so I want to refrain from acting alone after the last compromise edit. Solaire the knight (talk) 13:38, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

The user would also like to ask more experienced users to add a general summary of the review of the ANN show to the critical section, since at the moment the section only covers the premiere collective review and the review of the first 3-4 episodes of ANN and AF. So, I'm posting their request here. Solaire the knight (talk) 13:38, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Also, in the Vietnamese Wikipedia, there are 3 English language sources. I think we should add those. Nguyen280405 (talk) 17:12, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Isn't there a bluray box that contains all Lycoris Recoil episodes and has been reviewed? That would help to make more general overviews of the series rather than relying of one episode reviews.Tintor2 (talk) 23:11, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

I haven't heard of this, but I think it could be a great solution. Now all that remains is to find an experienced user who will make a summary of this that suits everyone and add text to the section. Solaire the knight (talk) 01:12, 14 October 2024 (UTC)