Talk:D.Gray-man/Archive 1

Characters
I reckon that starting from the MAIN ARTICLE d.gray-man.. it is unreasonable that one needs to click thru 3 pages to get to Allen Walker, the protagonist of the anime adaptation. >Main page >List of D.gray-man characters >List of Black order members >allen walker So maybe bear this in mind, for future revisions. Thankyou for your attention.

Plot
Should we expand the plot and put it into a different page?
 * yes, do it please.82.31.81.245 19:37, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Total Episode Number
I seem to remember there being a consensus that for all anime where the end number of episodes was known, that number would be listed instead of listing the last one aired. I'm not sure as to whether or not it counts as a valid source, but Anime News Network has the series listed for 52 episodes: http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/encyclopedia/anime.php?id=6764. It's had that number listed since at least mid-December. Well, the Project page has them listed as a reliable source, and various other series are structured this way (Darker than Black, Code Geass, Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha StrikerS), so I went and changed it. Offkorn 05:59, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * theres rumors about 2ch saying ANN being chock full of errors. But when editing wiki, i think you can use your own personal judgement whether it is verficiable, accurate "this series has 52 episodes". Does the official homepage (japanese unfortunately) tell us hwo many epiosdes? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.110.144.151 (talk) 13:08, 16 November 2007 (UTC)


 * No need to refer to 2ch to know that ANN is full of errors, it's about as reliable as IMDB. The fact is, a single anime season generally consists of 26 episodes, with the seasons starting roughly in April and October. New series usually have 52 episodes (two full seasons / one full year) comissioned, and are often continued in such a manner (two-season blocks) if they are popular. Shows with poor ratings are usually truncated to between 46 and 51 episodes, or in some cases, shortened to a single season of 26 episodes, to allow for new replacement shows and potentially better ratings. 52 episodes of D.Gray-man were probably comissioned initially, and its ratings were deemed good enough to warrant the comissioning of another block of episodes (most likely 26 or 52). You might be able to find a press release with this info, though I'm not sure where the best source would be. Probably TMS Entertainment or TV Tokyo, especially if they have investor relations sections on their webpages. WtW-Suzaku 10:42, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

English Talk Rooms
For the little talk rooms in the manga, should we put them on some special page? Suicidal Lollipops 19:58, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Character Names
I don't think that its necessary for where Katsura got Tyki and Rhodes name in the plot. Suicidal Lollipops 15:12, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

2nd Season
It says in the main header that this series has been commissioned for a second season of episodes but there is no source to back up this claim. Does anyone have a reference to back this up Serton 15:49, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for adding the citation needed Serton 01:28, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I was the one who added the fact tag, but someone deleted it. Good to see it's up again. I still haven't been able to find any sources. Something like this should be on AnimeNewsNetwork, so maybe we should just remove it altogether? SoulSlayer 20:49, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * On this page we have 52 episodes but on the episodes page there is a "listing" for 53 and beyond. Is the series just continuing rather than having a second series? Serton 10:43, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, it's pretty obviously not a second series (there is no name change or any other reason to assume so), but it is certainly going into a third season. Anime doesn't just "continue" on an episode-by-episode basis (see my above explanation). They usually don't make a big deal out of announcing new seasons, or even the cancellation of a series. Most people are probably unaware of these details altogether, and I've seen people confuse "season" with "series", IE, assuming "three more seasons" means "three new series", as opposed to "roughly 78 more episodes". WtW-Suzaku 11:01, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

main page sections
ik im just a guy passin by and ik that most of you covet your areas of specilty, wheither it be certain series or what not, but what do you all think about adding a little more information to certain sections such as characters and terminology to make the main page look like less of a... link page, idk... just an idea i thought i'd throw in... i can help if someone would want...  Ancientanubis ,  talk  Editor Review 02:02, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it's fine like this. No need to have the same information on multiple pages. SoulSlayer 20:52, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Question
In Episode 66 of the Anime, in the last scene, the Earl makes a pretty solid statement that Allen is an Akuma, later showing a picture of an akuma with 'ALLEN WALKER' scratched on its head later.

Is this rectified later in the series? I haven't read up to where the Anime is.--Opacic (talk) 23:32, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Characters
I would think that a paragraph, it doesn't have to be long, but a paragraph under the heading "characters" to give an overview of what kinds of characters there are. So far I have this:

''As the story progresses, Allen meets quite a few characters. Many of them are Exorcists, such as Lenalee Lee and Lavi,. But others are from the Clan of Noah, like Road Kamelot, Tyki Mikk, and Jasedebi. But a variety belong to neither group, like Komui Lee, Bak Chan and Fou. ''

Anyone is free to propose one, edit, or reject or accept the idea. itzjustdrama still new to this (talk) 23:38, 9 April 2008 (UTC)


 * A paragraph overview of the characters would be a very good idea :) X (manga) (GA) has an example of doing character sections in that manner if you'd like a guide. AnmaFinotera (talk) 01:13, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, many similar pages have something like it. The problem is this would end up repeating a lot of what is under plot. I worry about being repetitive. I think that section needs to be reworked, though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Itzjustdrama (talk • contribs) 23:09, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


 * It does some, unfortunately. I personally prefer a bulleted list, but the paragraph format is becoming more popular. AnmaFinotera (talk) 00:13, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I prefer a bulleted list too. But I'll keep it as a paragraph. I'll put up what I have because it's kind of annoying me to see a heading Characters and just a link underneath. itzjustdrama still new to this (talk) 00:15, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

VIOLENCE?
Is violence really a genre? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.58.96.135 (talk) 07:48, 12 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Uh, no. Thanks for pointing that out, I've removed it. AnmaFinotera (talk) 07:56, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

English Dub?
Has there been any talk about a potential English dub of the anime? After all, the manga in America, so I would expect the anime to follow suit eventually. Would anyone know if any of the anime companies are trying or at least interested in getting this anime? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.4.136.74 (talk) 18:56, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Never mind. Funimation has acquired the license. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.184.88.239 (talk) 04:26, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Novels
Does anyone know anything about the D.Gray-man Reverse novels? That section is sorely lacking in info. All I have are two links, and as I can't read Japanese all I can do is rely on a web page translation, and those make little to no sense.

D.Gray-man Reverse

D.Gray-man Reverse 2

itzjustdrama still new to this (talk) 19:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Plot rewrite
I think that the plot section should be reworked. I already wrote one myself, found on User:Itzjustdrama/Sandbox. Before I change the section, I think you should at least know what it says, or at least have a say in it. itzjustdrama still new to this (talk) 03:44, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I think it looks better than the currently one, although I still have only read 2 volumes of the manga.--Tintor2 (talk) 23:42, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Some questions
Does anyone think the terms section should be expanded?

Do you think it is necessary to add the chapter cover page for Zone to the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Itzjustdrama (talk • contribs) 23:03, 25 May 2008 (UTC)


 * No, the terms should not be expanded. The link should probably just be moved to the plot section. And no on a cover page of Zone. The plot and production sections are too short to have anymore non-free images, and an image should only be added if the Zone appearances are dramatically different.-- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 23:12, 25 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah, thanks for answering. You're right. They're not that dramatically different. You work so hard. itzjustdrama still new to this (talk) 23:25, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Terminology section taken out
Why was the D.Gray-man terminology section deleted?

Did it not conform to Wikipedias' standards?

Guido MTY (talk) 04:07, 3 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Correct, it did not. Wikipedia is not a fansite nor an in-depth guide to anime series. It is an encyclopedia, with a primary focus on the real world aspects and notability of a series. The fictional elements are only covered with the necessary depth to give those unfamiliar with the work a general overview of the series and its primary characters. A list of terminology is an excessive and unnecessary list, hence its being deleted by consensus. Words that are likely to be unfamiliar to a non-viewer can be briefly explained when first used. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 04:11, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

confusing sentence
I'm not entirely clear on what this sentence is saying so I won't edit it myself, but it needs fixing:

"Hoshino has commented that most she had those ideas for the series when she used to go the bathroom but during the development of the volume 2, she used the a story called kulinguzoru as an idea." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.36.57.3 (talk) 05:03, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Cleaned it up. This article, alas, has quite a few grammar issues. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 05:16, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

New book
I found this book of D. Gray-man in BookNavi (It seems to be a guidebook). Could anybody who knows Japanese add it?Tintor2 (talk) 23:54, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * It is is a profile book of sorts. It shows the character stats and personalities as well as a bit of their past, original character designs and other things. I think it's called Gray Ark or something. Itzjustdrama (drama?) 02:36, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


 * If somebody has that book it help to improve production---Tintor2 (talk) 13:32, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

title is "official"?
Does D.Gray-man come from the true/correct/whatever take of the Japanese title? Maybe it's just me, but it looks like the 'm' is larger than the lowest typeface in the name--though it's not as large as the 'G'. Seems to me like it should be D.Gray-Man, so I was just wondering. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.36.57.3 (talk) 04:56, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * It's D.Gray-man, per most news sources, and ANN. Its D.Gray-Man on Funimation's site. Irregardless, though, we'd use D.Gray-man, per the Wikipedia style guides (much like Funimation is Funimation and not FUNimation. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 05:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Viz Media lists it as D.Gray-Man (Link). So does Funimation (Link). Writing "man" with a capital "M" it's not against the guidelines... just look at Spider-Man.--Nohansen (talk) 21:21, 14 June 2008 (UTC)


 * It's correctly D.Gray-man, just some companies spelled it as D.Gray-Man. It buggs me, although I don't normally prefer English Weekly Jump media. –  「ＪＵＭＰ ＧＵＲＵ」 @ Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 03:49, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Reception
I believe a reception section would be a good idea. I think the IGN review of vol 1 that someone brought to our attention before, ANN anime review, or the ANN vol 1 review would be useful. There are others, like a ANN review of vol 4 and one for vol 7. But I don't think well need those. Any other reviews and such that would traditionally go under reception? Itzjustdrama (drama?) 19:13, 16 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, a reception section would be an excellent addition (and highly desired). The ANN reviews can all be useful, as they may speak to different aspects of the series. Sales information from ANN and ICv2 can also be useful, and reviews from other reliables source (AoD and IGN are two). The reception section should generally cover, as is sourable, sales information for both media, and critical reviews from reliable sources. The primary work should be discussed first, in this case the manga, then any secondary works which do not have their articles (anime, game, novel), where information is available. I can point to some good reception sections in other series articles, if you'd like some examples to compare to if you want to give writing it up a shot. The MoS also provides some general guidelines. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 19:21, 16 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Here there are two reviews from Animeondvd and here there is something that indicates that dgman was as of 2007 one of the best sellers of the shonen jump.Tintor2 (talk) 19:51, 16 June 2008 (UTC)


 * this may also help.Tintor2 (talk) 11:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Noted. Thank you! Itzjustdrama (drama?) 15:37, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * DO you think I could use this site? Translated Webotaku —Preceding unsigned comment added by Itzjustdrama (talk • contribs) 16:54, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Hmmm...It seems to be borderline on being WP:RS. What were you thinking of using it for? -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 17:05, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * For mentioning under reception. Itzjustdrama (drama?) 17:09, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm really on the edge with it. While they do technically list their writers, they don't give any info about them, qualifications, etc. I'm inclined to err on the side of caution and say no, as I don't think it could be adequately defended against the WP:RS criteria in a GA/FA nom. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 17:15, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

D.Cray-man?
Has anyone noticed something about the logo? It actually says D.Cray-man on the Japanese edition with a weird little + at the right-hand side of the "C". I even experimented with the Old English Font MT and the strokes and everything on the "C" (G) are the same. They just palced a "+" in front of it, which in the English version they lengthened at the bottom for some reason.... ~_~ I don't know if this can be mentioned on the article, but it is very interesting. –  「ＪＵＭＰ ＧＵＲＵ」 @ Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 01:18, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I think that its just supposed to be a heavily stylized Old English G, replacing the line in the G with the cross. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 01:23, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Old English G? Does that even exist? –  「ＪＵＭＰ ＧＵＲＵ」 @ Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 01:26, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I meant G in an Old English font :)-- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 01:36, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Ooops!! My bad!! : ) That makes more sense! I was looking it up and everything! –  「ＪＵＭＰ ＧＵＲＵ」 @ Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 16:15, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Other Languages
Do you think it would be okay to use any of these sites as a reference? I found them on the dgm articles in other lanuages.

Italian site from Japanese wiki

Glenat manga

Italian wiki

French from French Hoshino

From Russian in Russian

I don't know if there's someone available to read all of them. And I'm not sure if I labeled the languages correctly. Itzjustdrama (drama?) 20:37, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * No. Wikis and fansites in any language are not valid sources. I also removed one link as it is a disallowed link to a site that violates WP:COPYRIGHT. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 21:11, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * The Glenát site.....maaaaybe we can use. That is from the official French publisher. : ) –  「ＪＵＭＰ ＧＵＲＵ」 @ Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 22:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * There isn't anything to use, really, except a link from it is a source for the existance of the French version. Beyond that, its just the plot summary and purchasing details for the 10th volume. :) -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 01:32, 21 June 2008 (UTC)


 * But can I use the author page on the site for info I can't find another source for? It's just one fact though. And thanks for answering my first question! Itzjustdrama (drama?) 00:04, 22 June 2008 (UTC)


 * The author page on which site? -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 00:45, 22 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh, my bad. The Glenat one. 01:42, 22 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, it should be a reliable source, so it can source the existance of the French versions, and if it gives some info on the author or the series, it can also be used as that. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 02:56, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Order of the main characters
After we added the four main characters section to the article, everybody has been changing their order lots of time. We need to decide what order and why.--Tintor2 (talk) 18:26, 22 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed. I've never read/seen the series, so I'm not familiar with the characters. Is there any one character who is the main focus of the series? If so, they should be first. The rest, if they are about equal in their role in the series, should be listed by order of appearance in the primary work. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 18:41, 22 June 2008 (UTC)


 * For what I read, Allen is the main character, Yu Kanda is the second character to be introduced but almost doesnt appear again until later (vol 7, I dont remember). I think that Lenalee Lee should be kept second since she appears more times than Kanda. Deciding the third and fourth, I still dont know.--Tintor2 (talk) 18:44, 22 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Allen is the main character. And I feel they should be listed in order of introduction, meaning the order we learned their names. Which would put Kanda before Lenalee who's before Lavi. If you're unhappy with that, then maybe number of appearances, putting Lenalee and Lavi before Kanda. If you're still unsatisfied, then order of appearance: Lenalee, Kanda, Lavi. As a last resort, we could go alphabetical, making it Allen Walker, Yu Kanda, then Lavi, and then Lenalee Lee. ~ Itzjustdrama (drama?) 19:05, 22 June 2008 (UTC)


 * If you think that is okay then lets do it. Im not unsatisfied, its just that lots of users have been changing the order without explaination.--Tintor2 (talk) 19:11, 22 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Then I guess I'll go ahead with order of introduction: Allen, Kanda, Lenalee, Lavi. ~ Itzjustdrama (drama?) 19:53, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Should we do that with List of Black Order members and any other lists? ~ Itzjustdrama (drama?) 20:00, 22 June 2008 (UTC)


 * The problem is that if we add too many characters to the article, it may receive a plot tag.Tintor2 (talk) 22:48, 22 June 2008 (UTC)


 * The lists are a whole other issue, as there should only be one or two lists, not the many there are. They should, however, also be listed in order of major & most notable/important and in order of introduction. --  AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 23:38, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

I guess that sourced out-of-universe info is found about the characters (creation-recep), some of them may be given individual articles.--Tintor2 (talk) 18:14, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
 * How about Arystar Krory The Third?? He is a main character and has appeared more times than Kanda in the series, yet he isn't included in this list that you're talking about. AngelicMasterMind (talk) 19:57, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Video game?
I think this is the site for a dgm video game. http://www.konami.jp/dg/ But I have no idea what it says and therefore don't know if we already covered it. According to this site, it's for the ps2. Anyone know? Itzjustdrama (drama?) 19:32, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I believe you are right. Looks like its set for a release in Japan on September 11th. And yes, it looks like will be for the Playstation 2. Beyond that, I'm lost without a translator :P I did, however, find a page for it at GameSpot which provides the name D.Gray-man: Sousha no Shikaku, and agrees with the release date and platform from that official site. IGN says it is an adventure game. Spotted a few stores in Japan taking preorders.-- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 19:42, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Pictures
I can provide any screenshot that could be of use. I can't put them up myself since I haven't even edited one page anywhere on Wikipedia, but I have taken over 300 screenshots while watching the episodes. Just ask me and I can give links to them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by One-eyed Nero (talk • contribs) 01:14, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks, but the article is sufficiently illustrated. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 01:26, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Reliable review?
Is this a reliable review? I found it when searching the local library. The search is here although you have to click the title. I've tried to find the review from the main site but found nothing. Itzjustdrama (drama?) 20:36, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Hmmm...the Reed Business Reviews are the same ones that are also posted to Amazon.com's listings. I've used them every now and then, but I've never had it checked for reliableness.-- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 22:39, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Topic workshop
This article is currently part of a topic collaboration at the topic workshop of WP:ANIME. Those interested in contributing are free to sign up under the "collaborators" section. Cheers, sephiroth bcr  ( converse ) 21:08, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Genres
I'm pretty sure that D.Gray-man is a (Gothic-)Horror manga. This isn't such a reliable source, but the reviews refer to it as a gothic-horror and it seems gothic horror to me anyway. Thoughts? Itz just  drama?  20:46, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I think so too. Also, who put "Comedy" on the infobox? Every manga/anime has their funny moments, but that doesn't mean it's "Comedy". –  J U M P G U R U  @ Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 21:10, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Good point. The manga isn't really a comedy. I agree, it doesn't really fit the comedy genre too. In addition, the page is still under the Steampunk category. Does it really fit that too? From the Steampunk article: In general, the category includes any recent science fiction that takes place in a recognizable historical period (sometimes an alternate-history version of an actual historical period) where the Industrial Revolution has already begun but electricity is not yet widespread, with an emphasis on steam- or spring-propelled gadgets Itz  just  drama?  21:47, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Any disagreement to removing the comedy genre? Itz just  drama?  00:37, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

not very Gothic to me, its alot darker than other anime and manga, but it doesn't really show much of goth feel to it. unless u see one of them actually dressing goth or in a horror way. How is it gothic anyways? i understand it has that old look, with those 17 century clothing but that doesn't make it goth. its not goth for sure, its more of a 17th century look. i think the only thing that is goth is the Noah family and even they don't have that big of a goth look. It has a horror/adventure type of story line but not goth.

anyways the series has "a lot" of comedy relief, and i think the comedy genre should stay. its pretty funny, its just that u cant expect so much comedy relief at once. The manga is really funny when its trying to be, but this differs from one person to another. So if its funny in some cases, than it should be left as a comedy genre as well.

D.gray-man is nothing like goth compared to blood+ and ergo proxy.(Haseo445 (talk) 19:52, 7 January 2009 (UTC))

Gothic fiction has elements of horror and romance fiction. The horror in D.Gray-man is found in the elements that can scare or at the very least unsettle an audience, for example the Akuma wearing human skins of their loved ones and being made of human souls and the impeding destruction of the world. The manga also include elements of romance fiction, e.g. the heroics of the main character and such. So I believe the manga qualifies as Gothic fiction. ~ Itzjustdrama C  ? 21:08, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't see any romance in D. Gray-Man at all. There is no real romance going on through the story, and the horror is far too vague to be even called horror. Heroism is not a main element for Goth, sine many stories use heroism, in fact its an over-rated element in stories that it shouldn't be an important element to mention at all because the heroism will be in almost every story.

i admit it has a Gothic feel in very rare occasions when something is going really drastic, but its not Gothic enough to have be a Gothic genre. It also depends on what kind of goth you're talking about, since there are may varieties, but even so, D Gray barely touches one of the varieties.

like i said before, its the 17th century look that makes us believe it has Gothic characteristics. If D. Gray-Man set during modern times while everyone is wearing the same new clothing we wear today, it wouldn't have that same Gothic feel as before right?

In my opinion, it has a Gothic feel to it, but it doesn't have the actual Gothic genre within the story. There is horror in the story, but the characters hardly react to the horror which doesnt give it the amount of drama it needs to be a Gothic genre. Also within the horror, there also needs to be romance. i honestly don't see any romance at all. Lenalee is the only female in the series capable of a love interest, and she hasn't even fallen for anyone, she shows kindness towards everyone and see's everyone as a friend. so there definitely no romance, and the horror is very vague.

the only attributes i feel that could encourage the story to be a Gothic genre is the religious references. Other than that, the rest seems like any other story to me. If i were to compare this story to BLEACH it would make you people believe Bleach is a Gothic genre aswell (if u believe horror, romance, religious references and spirit references are the elements of Gothic). (Haseo445 (talk) 19:52, 7 January 2009 (UTC))


 * The religious and spirit references are not part of the Gothic genre. And I did not mean the love type of romance; I don't see how you didn't understand that as I gave an example. The link to the applicable romance, Romance (genre), is found off of the Gothic fiction article. Quoted from the article's lead: As a literary genre of high culture, romance or chivalric romance refers to a style of heroic prose and verse narrative that was particularly current in aristocratic literature of Medieval and Early Modern Europe, that narrated fantastic stories about the marvelous adventures of a chivalrous, heroic knight, often of super-human ability, who goes on a quest. That's the first sentence actually. It might be a borderline Gothic genre case, but we are not talking modern-day goths. We are talking about the literary genre. They are completely different.  I did use the wrong word. The better word there would have chivalrous. Even if the story were set in modern day due to its plot elements, it could still be Gothic. Most points about the Akuma, the impeding doom of the world, I think the Noah, humans helping the impeding doom, barely count, help its case as a Gothic manga. What kind of Gothic were you thinking anyway? Although Anime News Network is not the authority on genres unless given by a reviewer. In two reviews the series is said to be Gothic. Comipress.com also lists the mang as a, quote, "gothic manga story of Allen Walker" as seen here ~ Itzjustdrama  C  ? 22:56, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Afterthought, choice of dress does not make the mange Gothic of not. I also retract what I said at the very top of the section. I don't believe D.Gray-man is Horror; I believe it falls under Gothic though. ~ Itzjustdrama C  ? 02:36, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

is there a type of romance that is not love? you are confusing. what does romance even mean to you? over time romance has changed and is hard for people to understand when you use the old literature type of romance that they used back then in Europe. So romance wasn't the best choice of words since that word has changed over time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Haseo445 (talk • contribs) 17:01, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

How does it fall in Gothic genre anyway? you stated at first it was that romance and horror gave it a Gothic genre, than you completely contradict yourself saying you shouldn't have used the word "romance" and that it has no horror.

And now you say its the Akuma who influence the Gothic genre.

Akuma are just creatures who feed on souls and the millennium earl is trying to use them to destroy the world. there are many manga out there (that is not a Gothic genre) that had similar creatures like the Akuma.

it has a Gothic feel to it, but no Gothic genre. For the most part, it has a lot of comedy relief and adventure. Its just that some if the comedy isn't so funny but they do have a lot of it though and even the antagonist have comedy relief. Usually Gothic genres don't have much comedy relief.

comedy relief is like the opposite of a Gothic genre. Gothic genre has a lot of drama and tension and what comedy tends to do (like always) is break the tension and drama that goth genres tend to be. Romance and Horror is also an attribute to a Gothic Genre. D Gray-Man has a lot of comedy relief, vague drama, and no romance.

(Haseo445 (talk) 16:32, 8 January 2009 (UTC))


 * I said I should not have said the word HEROISM. Let me explain the genres first, please, please read the articles I link to. Please:

Gothic fiction: Gothic fiction is made up of and combines elements of both horror and the romance, NOT the LOVE romance, but the genre also know as the chivalric romance genre. The APPEARANCE of the DRESS of the characters and the ARCHITECTURE are NOT criteria.

Romance (genre): I know the word has a different connotation when used generally today. But when talking about GENRES, the word refers to a style of heroic prose and verse narrative. This is the romance I was referring to and what it means to me IN THIS PARTICULAR DEBATE. The really is no other word for it. Later romance pieces usually of French origin tend to focus on love.

Horror fiction: Horror is intended to scare, unsettle, or horrify the audience. Historically, the cause of the "horror" experience has often been the intrusion of a supernatural element into everyday human experience. Since the 1960s, any work of fiction with a morbid, gruesome, surreal, or exceptionally suspenseful or frightening theme has come to be called "horror".

Now, I believe that D.Gray-man doesn't fall completely under the Horror fiction genre due to its comedic touches. However, some plot elements, such as the Akuma and everything else I said before are horror elements. The chivalry of the main character in his attempts to save the world and continue his mission even when his allies doubt him are the romance elements. The Romance genre originally focused on ADVENTURE and NOT LOVE. Even so, two reputable and reliable websites have called the manga Gothic. I have not heard that a story with comedic moments is not Gothic.

Let me clear up a plot point: Akuma do not feed on human souls. They use it as a battery. I used Akuma as an example because they use the skin of the loved one who brought them back to life to blend in and kill others. The fact that the Earl promises such a "wonderful" deal and you die and are used as a doll for eternity is pretty unsettled at the very least. I'd also say the same about how "God" decided to flood the world all over again when he promised not to and how some humans actually advocate this.

You yourself said that: [i]t has a horror/adventure type of story line. The horror would be, well, the horror part of the Gothic literature and the adventure would qualify for the Romance (genre), romance as a genre, chivalric romance, please read the article, element. If you still object, please completely tell me all of you criteria for the Gothic fiction genre and give examples with reputable, reliable sources stating it is a Gothic fiction. If you want to provide examples of manga, novels, short stories, whatever similar to D.Gray-man that is not considered Gothic, please tell me and provide reputable, reliable sources that state that are not Gothic. ~ Itzjustdrama C  ? 22:38, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

sigh....this is getting tired.

You said you should have used the word Chivalrous (not heroism), but this is wikipedia, you can edit your own comment making yourself look right, and me wrong.

even so, heroism is in a lot of genres, so why count it specifically for a Gothic genre?

Akuma mean nothing in the story. Akuma using souls as a battery is basically feeding on them, try not to contradict me just for that reason. Give a more Basic reason to why it leads to a Gothic genre without mentioning the word "akuma", maybe say the "creatures" known as "akuma" or something. I already read the chivalric Romance but that romance is usually known as adventure in today's time. So and like i said...Adventure is basically on every story. Cant you be a little more modern please? In fact reading over Gothic genre, it never stated what kind of romance, so you really cant say "NOT LOVE" in romance of Gothic genre

If i were to say i was "gay" when i actually mean I'm happy. people will still get confused and assume I'm homosexual.

chivalric romance is basically everywhere now, its no point to use anymore. bleach, full metal alchemist, S-CRY-ED, Final Fantasy etc. They all had chivalric romance.

Again, like you said, spiritual references and religious references are not part of the Gothic genre. So why count it now? you contradict the points i say, but when it comes to support your discussion you say the same thing. The way you state everything, of course is going to "sound" Gothic, and i see what you are doing.

i didn't say it was a horror/adventure genre, i said it had very vague horror elements within the story. Read comments carefully, the same way i read yours.

D. Gray-man has a few Gothic elements, but not Gothic enough to have it known as a full fledged genre. Its like calling D. Gray-man a comedy genre, just because it has a lot of comedy elements.

the word ROMANCE has changed over time, the word GAY has changed over time, and GOTHIC has changed over time (but not as much as the others).

i suggest you stop using chivalric romance, and just keep it as adventure, or something. Also not to rely on Gothic genre article 100%, because the article said architecture was important within Gothic genres and you said they weren't, so i cant trust everything you say.(Haseo445 (talk) 19:53, 9 January 2009 (UTC))

OK, lets just take one big brake from all this arguing,
the reason why i don't want this to be named "Gothic genre" is because if it were to be named that,  the idea would be very vague. its almost saying Gothic genre but its actually saying vague Gothic genre.

there's Gothic elements, but not a full fledged Gothic genre, vague horror, the tension brakes too soon within the story, even the antagonist have more comedy relief than the heroes themselves and not enough drama or feeling when something happens to the heroes, and when they do, they use it as comedy relief!

Also since romance has been moved to a new definition, and this Gothic genre article is a bit old we cant fully rely on it, since the definition of Gothic genre could have been edit by modern times.

if you say Gothic/adventure, that would be completely acceptable, but not Gothic alone


 * I think that's an excellent idea, the break. I'd like to say I'm very, very, sorry for the shouting I did earlier. I understand your view better now. But I don't know the next course of action. Should the Gothic be left in genres due to the presence of adventure in there? What do you think? ~ Itzjustdrama C  ? 03:20, 10 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I forgot to apologize for being contradictory. I'll pay closer attention to what I'll say. I just thought: we can even move Gothic closer to adventure, although I'm not sure if that'd make a huge difference. But it could be worth a try. ~ Itzjustdrama C  ? 21:08, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

i feel it has alot more of adventure in general than gothic elements. in fact, gothic genre is a bit more complex.

its better to leave it as advenure, gothic. gothic is too specific, and d. Gray-man has more adventure than horror, chivalric romance (basically adventure but in a more priginal way. so if u wish to add gothic, doo not remove dventure since adventure is the main theme (Haseo445 (talk) 20:36, 11 January 2009 (UTC))


 * Okay, I'll leave it exactly as it is then. Adventure is listed second and Gothic last (fourth). Again, I'm really, really sorry. ~ Itzjustdrama C  ? 20:51, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

no problem, i just get tired of talking about the same thing for a large ammount of days.

anyways dont beat yourself up for it, sometimes it gets to the best of us. did anyone remove the comedy off the genre list? i tihnk that one should be speculated since they do offer alot of comedy but not a story about comedy.

I did it myself because someone mentioned that every manga has comedic moments. But D.Gray-man isn't created for the sole purpose to make an audience laugh, or isn't as devoted to the cause as say a gag manga. I couldn't disagree, so I agreed and removed it after a number of days sufficient for dissent when nobody did disagree. ~ Itzjustdrama C  ? 21:24, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

true, i saw the most in comedy in D. gray-man (manga) but its just my opinion. yeah, i guess it was ok to remove it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.249.176.77 (talk) 16:18, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

More production
There is a fanbook called gray ark that seems to have a lot of conception info of the series. If anybody has it or has read it, it would help a lot to add the information to the article. Thanks.Tintor2 (talk) 00:25, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

manga v anime
It should be mentioned on the anime section how much of the manga is covered. 70.55.86.100 (talk) 17:27, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

I concur. That is a piece of information that is very valuable to individuals interested in learning about the series before actually reading/watching it. It's also the kind of information that it makes sense to include in an encyclopedia article on a series.153.106.4.95 (talk) 00:29, 24 February 2009 (UTC)Fiery Diamond


 * Reply from Dinoguy1000 on Talk:List of D.Gray-man episodes:

It's not about whether the info "fits quite nicely", it's about sourcing it reliably - otherwise, it's just a bunch of original research, regardless of how obvious it may seem to you or anyone else. And I agree. Find reliable sources about the differences or it cannot be included. ~ Itzjustdrama C  ? 01:01, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Soundtrack Reception
ANN has an article on D.Gray-man Complete Best. It reviews the ending and opening themes individually. ~ Itzjustdrama C  ? 21:48, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

English Voice Actors
I really, really would like to wait on the DVD release on March 31 before adding the voice actors. Although I trust the actors listed on ANN are the ones doing the dub, I want to be doubly, triply sure and the release will make it official (With the exception of those who have the role listed on their resume). I keep reverting good faith IP's because of this. I'd like to add a hidden note to prevent adding the actors for the month until the DVD is released and the actors can be verified. This will extend to the character list (maybe just the protagonists section as that is where the edits seem to be focused). ~ Itzjustdrama C  ? 02:32, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Capital m?
As seen in the edit summary of my most recent edit, it seems that the series is spelled with a capital m in the official English translations by Viz Media and Funimation. However, the Japanese translations spell it with a lowercase m by Shueisha and Dentsu (?). The font on the cover of the Japanese volume doesn't help, but if one were to look here you can see it's a lowercase m. As I understand it, the WP:MOS-AM says that we should use the official English translation: D.Gray-Man. 71.167.76.193 (talk) 22:36, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Steampunk
i suggest we add fantasy if we want steampunk to stay since steampunk is a sub-genre. that would mean the fantasy genre would have to be listed. so which is it? adding fantasy or removing steampunk. Death Berry  talk  17:12, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
 * If it's a genre then it's more specific than fantasy. I'd leave it how it is. If steampunk is a sub-genre of fantasy, then I'd say it's already categorized under fantasy and there is no need to add fantasy. Not to bring up the discussion again, but I though we agreed to leave gothic fiction where it was (Discussion). Itzjustdrama as 71.167.76.193 (talk) 21:29, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

i don't know, this isn't me, my friend usually gets on when i go to mc donalds, but if we leave Gothic in, we should remove other genre's since Gothic is a specific genre that covers many other ones, just like steampunk. sorry if my friend hacks my account sometimes. Death Berry  talk  17:22, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually, after looking back, steampunk seems to be more out there. i dont believe D.Gray-Man is steampunk. its similar to steampunk but its not exactly steampunk. steampunk is industrial buildings mixed with old fashion house.

i dont know how to explain it. though gothic must stay, you must remove adventure since gothic is a genre that covers adventure (going by your logic of sub genre must stay without saying the actual genre listed) Death Berry  talk  17:27, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I'll agree with the adventure, gothic thing. I you're right about the steampunk too. It doesn't seem to fit. So I say we remove it and add fantasy. Itzjustdrama as 71.167.92.137 (talk) 21:55, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Ok then, we go by that then. Death Berry  talk  16:02, 7 April 2009 (UTC)


 * It's most frequently called "dark fantasy" (ダークファンタジー) in Japanese, I believe even officially, though it's also usually included in the "action" (アクション) genre as well. WtW-Suzaku (talk) 17:21, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Terminology
I feel D.Gray-Man needs some kind of terminology listed, not sure if it needs it for the type of innocence or the Akuma. but i believe D.Gray0Man needs at least one terminology on that. Death Berry  talk  15:45, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think a terminology section needs to be sectioned out. But rereading the page, it doesn't really explain what an akuma or Innocence or an Exorcist really is. I guess it can be thoroughly explained in the plot and characters section. ~ Itzjustdrama ?  C 15:48, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

wouldnt that be a bit in-universe to further explain the akuma, exorcist, and innocence without a terminology. i think we need a third party to decide this. Death Berry  talk  17:30, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think so. The character page explains it just fine without it. I think it'd just take a bit of rewriting. Maybe a poke over at WP:ANIME/TW would get a 3rd party. ~ Itzjustdrama ?  C 17:56, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

but it sounds strange for the character page to describe it much better than the main page. after all, we could simply just make the character pages even simpler. Death Berry  talk  18:05, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Eh, I did a complete rewrite when merging various character pages, so I made sure it explained it clearly. I would have done one for the main page, but I was busy with a couple of chapter lists. ~ Itzjustdrama ?  C 18:11, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * He (DeathBerryHaseo445)'s now blocked as a sockpuppet. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 01:53, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

actually, terminology is bad idea. but the idea of explaining akuma, innocence and exorcist in main page is good idea. why not place it onto the plot are erase all the unnecessary terminology in the characters section.65.101.177.152 (talk) 21:28, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Comedy and Drama
I think it's fairly obvious to anyway who's read a good amount of D. Gray-Man, that no matter what you think of how good it is at doing it, it has heavily incoproated both comedy and drama. Jokes about Allen and Kanda's realtionship, Allen's eating, Cross and Allen's realtionship, etc are all COMEDY. Even if D. Gray-Man is more serious than humorus, it still has plenty of comedy moments throught the series, same for drama. I don't even see how I need to discuss this, because I think it would be fairly obvious to anyone who has read or watched this series, that it has Comedy and Drama. I leave out Gothic because I think it is a stupid tag that should be used for shows the are overly dark, just because a show twists Religion does not mean it's "Gothic". That one I don't mind if it's in, it's just my preference to keep it out as the show is not "overly" dark with it's incoproation of uplifting drama as much as dark drama, and use of comedy. However comedy and drama have been done plenty of times throught the series, more than Action, and are essential. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.163.33 (talk) 22:00, 30 July 2009 (UTC)


 * There has already been a discussion about genre in the archives. (/Archive 1) While consensus may change, that doesn't mean that you can change the genres on your own before a new consensus is reached. Therefore, I've reverted your change to the genre for the time being. --Farix (Talk) 00:06, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
 * As Tintor2 has pointed out on my talk page Comedy is for manga whose focus is comedy. That doesn't really apply to D.Gray-man. TheFarix removed the drama genre, edit summary: Drama yields to other genres. I have no idea where adventure went, as the original consensus was to include adventure and then gothic. Although you mention you don't mind, I believe Gothic should be left there as most reviewers describe it as Gothic. The concept is also dark, although I'll agree it doesn't seem as dark in execution. I think that action should be left out because the action genre doesn't focus on character development or storytelling, and I believe that isn't true of D.Gray-man. I believe supernatural is there for obvious reasons. ~ Itzjustdrama ?  C 14:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Genre labels by reliable sources

 * ANN: Supernatural adventure, tournament
 * Manga Life: Action, Horror
 * Anime Corner Store: Supernatural, (Anime: Action, Drama, Fantasy, Supernatural)
 * f.y.e.: Fantasy


 * With the sources above, I propose reducing the genre list to just "Fantasy" since that is the most common genre label given. Thoughts? --Farix (Talk) 15:15, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, by me. ~ Itzjustdrama ?  C 21:54, 6 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Agree.Tintor2 (talk) 22:16, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Shounen Comparison
I think to anyone who knows about the demographics of Manga, would consider D. Gray-Man a unique Shounen show (if they went further into the series that is). Personally I think the reception section says lots of things that are not true, and/or based off of only watching the beginning of the series, and not giving the later half a chance. Sure you could say "that's for critics", but it's misleading, and as such should not be placed there at least without having something that isn't so misleading. I'm not saying it's the most unique series out there (though as far as popular Shounen series goes, it ranks up there), but it certainly should be defended. Pick up a couple of reviews off of MyAnimeList or something, after seeing those comments pointing to "hardly orginal", I stopped watching it after around 20 episodes for a while, which I found out later was a mistake, as the series does many orginal things later on. I'm just wondering what other people (ones that know enough to judge the differences, not people who just watch Naruto, Bleach, and some other popular shows) were thinking about this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.142.163.33 (talk) 22:06, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I'd blame that more on the failure to update the reception section. I'll try to fix it as soon as I can, but I'm going on vacation soon. ~ Itzjustdrama ?  C 14:13, 1 August 2009 (UTC)


 * All the sources cited in reception are reliable sources. By the way, since when Bleach and Naruto do not have negative responses. Just check their articles.Tintor2 (talk) 18:53, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Artbook?
Does anyone know anything source about the artbook D.Gray-man Noche? It just released, it would be great to include it in.Bread Ninja (talk) 19:06, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I added the fanbooks, including Noche into a section merged with Novels. ~ Itzjustdrama ?  C 23:10, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Plagarism?
I've been looking 'round the wide world of the internet for several hours now, and i've read what i'm interpreting to be rumors of Plagarism in this manga (some time ago, but even so, it might deserve mention) stemming from characters created by Takeshi Obata, Mangaka of Death Note (among others). i've not been able to find a solid source, though several forums have posts on it that vary from 'this is BS' to 'ZOMFG how could she [the writer]??'. if anyone can dig anything up, or even wants to write a little blurb somewhere about it, i'd deeply appreciate it. that or just disprove the damn thing, that'd work too. 143.60.134.87 (talk) 06:21, 27 April 2010 (UTC) (Masterofmymind, Tryntu, Ekian are my most common hooks.)

Nothing is no longer original in the field of anime/manga, so really any new shonen mangaka artist can be accused of unoriginality, but plagiarism is another thing. The story would have to follow word for word, the plot would have to be the same and use the same references seen in the series it's being accused of. We cannot add in original research, so unless there's a source on it, then there is no chance it will make it here without getting reverted. On the other hand, people already reviewed the series in the reception that says similar to what these people have said but still contain positive review. So you can show that to who ever says this.Bread Ninja (talk) 15:45, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Review(s)

 * CBB: manga vol #18 manga #20
 * Sequential Tart: manga #20

--KrebMarkt (talk) 21:50, 30 January 2011 (UTC) --Gabriel Yuji (talk) 05:38, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Manga Life: Vol 1

So what happened?
Why hasn't a new chapter been released since Dec. 2012? Did the artist die? If he did don't you think a remark here should be added? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.160.174.166 (talk) 14:53, 4 August 2013 (UTC)


 * The author is okay. She designed the characters from Valvrave and also wrote a one-shot. In 2009 Hoshino mentioned she had an injure so my guess is that she was injured again or she just needed a rest.Tintor2 (talk) 15:32, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Cancellation
This series cannot be considering "Ongoing (hiatus)" because there is no official hiatus. It was confirmed that the magazine is dropped the series due to the author's poor health, no 'temporarily dropped' comments or anything of that nature. Thus, it cannot be considered "ongoing" because it has nothing to 'go on.' That would also defeat the purpose of the words "Original Run" used to describe it's length. Unless a magazine in the future of Japanese publishing takes on her series, it cannot be considered ongoing or on hiatus. IMustang (talk) 08:21, 12 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Did the newest volume confirm that? We need to source that.Tintor2 (talk) 14:12, 12 November 2013 (UTC)


 * It was confirmed in the magazine itself, which was translated online. I included the source when I initially updated the page. http://dgray-man-sj.deviantart.com/journal/Important-news-regarding-the-DGM-Manga-357612962 IMustang (talk) 19:40, 12 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Devianart can't be used as a source. The writer made it clear he can't be reliable. It needs the magazine itself or a commonly reliable one.Tintor2 (talk) 19:53, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

August 5, 2014 hasn't happened yet.
A portion of the article reads:


 * As of August 5, 2014, Viz Media has released the twenty four volumes in the United States.

However, at the time I am reading and posting this, it is March 23, 2014, and that date is approximately 4.5 months into the future. Clarification requested. --JCipriani (talk) 05:16, 23 March 2014 (UTC)


 * It probably meant "2013". its a common typo, but just to be sure, check the List of D.Gray-man chapters. Lucia Black (talk) 05:23, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Hm; that list also shows August 5, 2014 for the English release of volume 24. Amazon lists that date as well.. So either "as of... has released" was a typo, or whoever wrote that was just thinking ahead. I don't see any reason to change it. The grammar will be correct eventually, although it runs the risk of being incorrect information if that release date is missed. --JCipriani (talk) 04:31, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Soundtracks
The first paragraph of "Soundtracks" has some text that was commented out. Why is this text commented out? Folklore1 (talk) 02:34, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * We must look at its history to know but I'd risk it was probably because the statements are unsourced. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 03:52, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Clarification needed
In the lead section, see the sentence beginning "Many characters". It is unclear whether "her assistants" refers to Hoshino's assistants or the assistants of Zone or Continue. Folklore1 (talk) 02:25, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

"Exorcists who makes use" also needs clarification. Perhaps "makes" should be "make"? Who is doing the making, all the members of the organization or just the hero? Should "Exorcists" be lower case? Folklore1 (talk) 02:33, 2 December 2014 (UTC)


 * To fix that first issue, changing it to "and Hoshino's assistants" probably wouldn't hurt. And to answer your question, it is correct when it says "makes" because all of the Exorcists can use the Innocence. The sentence would sound better if mention of the organization itself, the Black Order, was inserted. And no, Exorcists should not be lower cased, though I don't exactly know why. Sebastianpls (talk) 02:49, 2 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Check out Blue Exorcist, Exorcist is also capitalized there. Sebastianpls (talk) 02:50, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

The Blue Exorcist article uses both "exorcist" and "Exorcist" inconsistently. In the VizMedia reference, D.Gray-man, Volume 1, "exorcist" is lowercase. Folklore1 (talk) 01:18, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Is "Exorcists" the name of an organization, making the word a proper noun? And is an "Exorcist" a member of that organization? Folklore1 (talk) 01:27, 3 December 2014 (UTC)


 * It's neither of those, they just have exorcist powers. So in that case, yeah lowercase them. Sebastianpls (talk) 03:46, 3 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Generally fictional concepts are written on upper case because the concept "Exorcist" in-series is different from an exorcist as traditionally described (though they're similar). I don't know if there's any guide or rule on this matter, though. Gabriel Yuji (talk) 12:17, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm going to leave it uppercase in my copy edit. If somebody knows of an applicable Wikipedia guideline or style preference indicating lowercase would be more appropriate, please mention it here and make the edit. Folklore1 (talk) 01:34, 4 December 2014 (UTC)