This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime, manga, and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anime and mangaWikipedia:WikiProject Anime and mangaTemplate:WikiProject Anime and mangaanime and manga articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles
Album covers are not supported in discographies. This has been long standing practice now and is not in dispute. Pick any random sampling of 50 articles from Category:Discographies. You will not find a single article in that category that contains album covers. If by some miracle you do find one, it will have only recently been added and the covers will be removed soon. I've removed the album covers again, as this is a clear violation of our guideline and policy. Do not re-add them. Thanks, --Hammersoft (talk) 15:02, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Again? What are you talking about? They've never been removed from this article since it was created. Why are you acting like someone has re-added them when the article history clearly shows they've never been removed once until now? Please get your facts straight before accusing people of something which clearly isn't the case (WP:AGF and all that). Additionally, when the article was created (June 2006), there was nothing in WP:NFC which said this use was not acceptable (see here). ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 00:30, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nihon, please relax. There's absolutely no need to get ruffled up over this. I was pasting the same message across a large number of talk pages. That's all. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:27, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps in the future it would be good to have two messages: one for when it's clear that the images have been readded, and one for when they haven't. Then the ruffling can be avoided. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:23, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Getting ruffled up over one word seems pointless to me. The core point was valid, whether it had again or "for the 100th time" on it. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:45, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
