Talk:Amateur voice acting/Archived discussion

I'm wondering about some of the links posted. They seem to be just sitewhoring for people's personal sites, and not actual active forums. Specifically the sites mentioned in the "Expansion" section of the article. Agree or disagree?

-> I agree, however, certain people seem to cry a river when you remove their site. Negavision is already an article in Wikipedia, so it could be worth keeping especially since they are one of the more prominent fandubbing groups around, and have been around for several years.

-> Removing "Breathing New Life" -- Wikipedia is based on fact, not fiction or petty grudges.

-> The removal of the Voice Acting Club link got me sorta peeved, to be honest. It's very well established as the primary alternative to the Voice Acting Alliance, and is already mentioned in the main article itself. Would it be too much of a stretch for it to be re-added? --D-Mac Double 14:54, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi D-Mac. I posted suggestions for the external link clean up at the bottom of this page before removing them.  With the Voice Acting Club, I was trying to trim the links down so we weren't a directory to forum sites (which are not considered appropriate external links).  In deference to what I perceived as a desire by many people involved with the article to include some way into the amateur voice acting community, which does seem to take place almost entirely online, I recommended keeping what seemed to be the most active of the communities - the alliance one.  Is there is a good reason to use the voice acting club instead, or does it provides something that is essentially different from the alliance link?  If not I don't think it's an appropriate addition, I'm a not entirely convinced that the Alliance link is appropriate, being essentially a forum.  -- Siobhan Hansa 15:28, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi, Siobhan. I'm not sure whether you are actively involved in the community or not, however from what you've been mentioning I'm going to assume that you are not... It's not a matter of "instead" of anything... the Voice Acting Alliance is _the_ community for AVA _as it stands right now_ with at least 3,000+ members more than any other AVA community out there. Furthermore, the VAA has served as a main source of information for even the VAC. The VAC is an alternative to the VAA as it caters to a completely different audience (primarily newgrounds, flash artists, etc since it spawned from a thread on the newgrounds forum). If you see the VAA as "just a forum", then perhaps you did not actually take a look at it close enough -- if you did, you'd notice it's served as a main source of information, auditions, VAs, reviews, help, and so on for the AVA community as a whole -- not to mention, some of our staff are at conventions conducting panels on amatuer voice acting with material written for the site -- we have had professional voice overs lend a hand with reviewing demos, projects, and even writing articles and conducting interviews on our site. Given all that, I'd say that indeed, it should still remained linked. Should the VAC be linked? Certainly -- many producers posting auditions are a completely different audience (even if there is some overlapping). I'd recommend digging a little deeper than a first glance before you judge something as appropriate or not...

-> The "World of Voice Acting" site is a sad attempt at a joke and should be removed whenever it is added. Corey Maddox has a fairly notorious reputation within the amateur voice acting community for being a troll with delusions of grandeur.

Started editing with a more precise picture of the AVA community and it's origins o_o

I think it's worth keeping this as a seperate article, fandubs generally refers to only Anime related works, I'd call it a subclass of amateur voice acting...

-> correct, this is definately not to be merged. this is assumed by all who deal with anime to be talking only of anime fandubs. in fact, a google search of fandub won't find you any other kind of fandub. it is very different from amateur voice acting.

-> Fandub is too distinct from Amateur Voice Acting to be merged. --CalPaterson 15:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

-> Funny though, when you look up "fandub" it just automatically redirects to this article. Weird.

Due to some people's immaturity, this page is starting to become defaced with overdramatics and untrue statements in regards to the Amateur Voice Acting community. After seeing the untruths, I've removed them as they have nothing to do with the most updated history of "Amateur Voice Acting," and have only spoken negatively about certain members within it. I'd love to see this page not get removed from the site due to immature spats that some people, for whatever reason, seem to be starting, so I would like to request that this page become locked, if it's possible.

Er, no
I'm quite sure amateur voice acting began a bit earlier than 1996 - contrary to what this article may say I'm fairly sure it didn't start on the Internet, either. Arguably Trey Parker and Matt Stone's voice work for the pre-South Park shorts they made (Jesus Vs Frosty and Jesus Vs Santa) could be described as "Amateur voice acting" and it certainly pre-dates the 1996 year given in this article.

Methinks this article needs a complete rewrite.

Hullubulloo 13:23, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

-> Hullubulloo, the "History" section of this article deals mainly with the more recent history that can be recalled by the older members of the current amateur voice acting community (VAA and previous iterations). Obviously, there have been amateur voice acting productions and communities stretching way back before 1996: probably all the way up to when the first tape recorders were available to the public. As such, the "History" section of the "Amateur voice acting" article is lacking, and will probably remain that way until someone with more knowledge of pre-1996, pre-internet popularity of amateur voice acting comes along and gives details. I don't suppose you have any resources in that regard?

->>> 20th October 2006 All his stuff about these voice acting sites I've never heard of is drivel and can't be proved one way or the other. Leave in the basic definitions of genres of voice acting and cut out all the drama mongers by leaving out the sites, as has been said they aren't all of the subject let them talk about their own histories on their own sites.

> Site and name references should be used when they fit the Wikipedia guidelines. These do not. This is not a billboard for people's pet projects, but to be used for informational purposed only. To that end, Negavision, FLAVA, the VAA and certain other references are applicable, but the rest are not and should be promply removed.

Additionally, some effort should be taken to make mention of the numerous Amateur Voice Acting events that go on every year, such as the National Radio Play Festival and to my knowledge the multiple panels relating to AVA work that have been held at several large venue cons (both anime, and non-anime).

It is also rather obvious that AVA work did not begin back in 1996. A quick reference on google would show that there are several amateur voiceover groups that date back to the 1950s and are still going strong. I see no mention or links to the NATF, which is the largest group of AVAs in the world. A more detailed search shows that the first AVA group actually originated in 1906, approximately two months after the first official radio broadcast (though the link seems to be broken to the article ATM, else it would have been edited in already).

If people cannot "deal with the drama" of getting the facts straight, that is their problem. This is not a place for self-promotion. As it stands, this article is based on one person's observation, and does not use much fact to support itself. The article should be rewritten with a better-rounded point of view. Let's also keep the personal drama out of this as well, as there seem to be some users who thrive on it when it comes to this article.

FWIW, the first "South Park" did not meet the definition of AVA as it was not intended as a personal or amateur project, but at use in a demonstration. By using the aforementioned example, my voiceovers for business projects could be considered as AVA work, when in fact they are not.

One last thing. If there is going to be a list of AVAs who have done professional work, you need to follow the Wikipedia guide once again. To that end, nearly all of the names listed in one of the revisions need to be left out as they are unknowns.

Resource Websites
These aren't resource sights, they're forums and fail our external links guidelines. But given the lack of good resource links, and the fact that this seems to be the way practitioners participate, a link to the most active site might be appropriate. I suggest, on the basis of number of posts:
 * Voice Acting Alliance  Keep
 * FLAVA Delete
 * Voice Acting Club Delete
 * Newgrounds Voice Acting Club thread Delete

Audio Drama Groups
These are links to individual projects. Since Wikipedia is not a directory, and there is no clear encyclopedic value in linking to the projects I think all these links should go. The exception is the podcast. This isn't really any different from a blog (which generally our external links guidelines regard as generally inappropriate. I'd delete but could see an argument for keeping it if it's particularly well known.
 * Circus-13 Productions Delete
 * Darker Projects Delete
 * The Doctor Who Audio Dramas Delete
 * Dramapod.com Delete
 * Dreamseed Delete
 * Pendant Productions Delete
 * PodActs! Delete ?
 * Star Wars Fan Works Delete

Fandub Groups
As with the Audio Drama Groups these are individual groups working on voice acting. As a general rule these links should also be deleted. The Negavision productions link isn't even to a proper page!
 * Negavision Productions Delete
 * TFCog Productions Delete

If anyone disagrees with this suggested edit please post your comments here. If there's no opposition i'll go ahead with the deletions in a couple of days. -- Siobhan Hansa 21:30, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Neutrality
This article reads like a love song to fandubs and AVA. There's also absolutely no sources to anything. For example, the article claims the Sailor Moon S fandub was well received. By *who*? Because I remember it being very *poorly* received. In fact, the vast majority of fandubs tend to get torn a new one. Where's the NPOV? Where's the criticism? Rebochan 13:28, 10 April 2007 (UTC)