Talk:Editing of anime in distribution

Article title and focus
The article was recently nominated for deletion (and subsequently kept) due to it's poor state which has lead to the start of a cleanup of the article. While assessing the article for cleanup and how to move forward I began to have doubts over the article title. While edits to anime are typically associated with American distribution for TV networks, they are by no means the only edits to anime. In fact despite the regional focus in the title the article even discusses edits to japanese releases and the "fifteening" technique largely used by Manga UK. Even now edits to Japanese versions of broadcast anime are still in the news, Osomatsu-Kun being a current series undergoing domestic edits. It's also reasonably common that animation fixes are made before home releases in Japan or uncut versions released that weren't broadcast.

While a regional article would make sense if it was a subject limited to that region, we would be better served by an article without an implied regional bias in the title. However I don't currently have a suggested replacement title so suggestions are welcome.SephyTheThird (talk) 14:07, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree that the title needs to be less regional. arwiki even calls their article "Changing anime content before it is distributed in the Arab world". Considering that these changes are usually made for broadcasting as opposed to home release on DVD, maybe "Editing of anime for broadcasting"? "Editing of anime" would be too broad because it could encompass the editing process in general. Or in line with the previous title "Editing of anime for distribution", which has he benefit of not precluding DVD edits. Opencooper (talk) 14:44, 7 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Editing has occurred in direct to market releases as well, not just what makes it to broadcast television, example Angle Cop. A more appropriate title would be "Editing of anime in international distribution" or it could be simplify it to "Editing of anime in distribution". —Farix (t &#124; c) 12:07, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * "international distribution" suggests it's a practice limited to outside japan when we know it isn't and I don't see a need to separate the two. "Distribution" works better for me.SephyTheThird (talk) 05:30, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * What about "Editing of anime in Japanese and worldwide distribution"? Will that sound better, or is it still sounding biased since it ain't limited to American localizations anymore? --75.136.131.188 (talk) 19:15, 17 March 2017 (UTC)