Talk:Anedoki

First header
Someone who speaks English should re-write this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.234.59.163 (talk) 22:09, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Reception
In reception i add response of fans in mangaupdates.com, sorry in past i not mention reliable source about opinion in this manga.(Db84x (talk) 10:28, 13 August 2010 (UTC))


 * Not only is Manga Updates an unreliable source, it also engages in the distribution of illegal scanlations. —Farix (t &#124; c) 13:38, 13 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree that Manga Updates was engage in or promotes the distribution of illegal scanlations so it can't be use in wikipedia but about Manga Updates is is not a reliable source it really wrong. Honestly before i read manga updates i often saw official review in AnimeDb and each but found that the review was uninteresting and often disappointing (Often they said it was a good anime but in reality it really worse). I don't have problem with deletion of my edit but say that manga updates is unreliable was absurd. (Db84x (talk) 05:30, 15 August 2010 (UTC))


 * I suggest you read up on what a reliable source actually is before disputing, Db. Just because someone posts a review online doesn't give it enough credit to be used as a source. There's quite a bit of factors involved, and personal opinion is not one of them. Fox816 (talk) 15:41, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Correction Note
Ichigo 100% and Anedoki are two completely different works and although they are from the same author should not compare the characters of both works. It would be almost an insult to the creativity of the author. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.124.75.174 (talk) 17:41, 15 September 2011 (UTC)