Talk:Kamen Rider Gaim (character)

Formatting
I'm not understanding your reasoning for these reverts, Ryulong. My suggestions for formatting, in which literal translations are used instead of references leading to "'keikaku' means 'plan'", are perfectly valid. You, on the other hand, seem to be rejecting these edits outright, and instead of properly explaining why these edits shouldn't be used, you just seem to be dismissing them outright and shouting 'edit war' when I revert them for the, again, perfectly valid reason that you have not properly explained yours. Now please, explain how you're formatting is better in a believable manner, remembering that this Wikipedia is for English users first and foremost. Wonchop (talk) 21:59, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The phrases exist in mixed Japanese and English and several of them have meanings that are difficult to translate properly due to the cultural implications. "Hanamichi" is an esoteric kabuki term. "Shushutto" is a phrase explicitly used to refer to the ninja. And, because this is currently an individual article, it frees us up to use the footnote section to give better information. Besides, there is no reason to say "Masked Rider Armored Warrior" simply because that's what the kanji in gaimu mean. No one will ever read those kanji as gaimu in normal parlance. It's unique to the show.—Ryulong (琉竜) 03:06, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note I'm not actually changing the terms themselves, like how I previously attempted to translate Shiro Mahoutsukai as White Wizard. Those are being left intact. I also leave Hanamichi untouched since there's a link to its article explaining what a Hanamichi is. I'm just providing it so that translations are within the context of the articles, rather than just piled up in the end. If it was heavy on terms like okonomiyaki or word puns, heck maybe shushutto could count, then it would probably have more grounds, but words that can just be directly translated into English can just go next to the Japanese. That's why we have the nihongo coding. Think of it this way, if you were reading something that had a lot of Japanese terminology, would you rather it be instantly explained to you or be told to go look it up in a dictionary and come back to it? A typical non-Japanese speaking reader would be scrolling up and down a hell of a lot.Wonchop (talk) 13:28, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The information is clearly provided in the end of the article in the footnotes because your format of adding the translation again is disrupting the flow. Also, 鎧武 is not a real word in Japanese. It's components are but no one uses them together to be read as gaimu. You've been reverted by two different people now. Please accept that your format is not what is wanted.—Ryulong (琉竜) 15:06, 28 November 2013 (UTC)