Talk:List of Ranma ½ characters

Note

 * Ranma Saotome article converted to redirect: See old talk-page here
 * Akane Tendo article converted to redirect: See old talk-page here
 * Nabiki Tendo article converted to redirect: See old talk-page here
 * Ryoga Hibiki article converted to redirect: See old talk-page here

Character merges
As already discussed elsewhere, most of the Ranma character articles are potential merges into this article, because they do not demonstrate notability in reliable third party source .See WP:N (although Furinkan.com is a reliable source, it's still a fansite so is not an indicator of notability)

I've already merged Jusenkyo Guide, Tofu Ono and The golden pair because there clearly isn't enough material to account for notability outside of the series as they all have minor parts. Any more merges will be given the chance to be discussed before being made so articles are given a chance to be improved to show independant notability.

With merges, there is a likelyhood that the text will need to be cut down - the amount of text is not a reason to not merge. Excessive plot detail should be avoided where possible as the idea is to provide a summary of the character, not a history of all their actions. You can see this in the edit history on this page - text from the separate pages was copied to this page, and with initial reductions and minor rewriting. They were then further reduced over several more edits to reach a shorter, more "neutral" summary of the character.

The first merges I've proposed should be fairly simple to discuss:

Sasuke Sarugakure Reason: Minor anime-only character who could easily be summarized in a single paragraph. next to no chance of proving notability

Principal Kuno Reason: Minor character who could easily be summarized into a couple of paragraphs. Seems to have no lasting effect on the series. Low chance of proving notability

Nodoka Saotome Reason: Minor character in the anime, I'm genuinely unsure if this is different in the manga (I'm not far enough), although I can see she features more then the anime. Low chance of proving notability, but more likely then the other two.

If people can find examples that will prove their notability outside of fan sites and the manga/anime itself, then there is the possibility these articles can be saved, but they would need to be quite strong. Arguments like "I prefer separate articles" or "there is no reason to merge" are flawed and unlikely to prevent merges from taking place as they don't fix the legitimate reasons being given for merging. I believe a week should be enough to decide the fate of these articles but that is not set in stone and really depends on replys and attempts to improve the articles. However the quicker these are decided, the quicker we can move on to others. Dandy Sephy (talk) 03:48, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, I don't have a particular problem with the above selections. However, given the current somewhat limited scope of the list it might be useful to know that BrokenSphere has the old (too) lengthy versions archived in his userspace, for the sake of reference if transported to Wikia or if the information is needed for the construction here. Lime & Mint, Maomolin, Kiima, Picolet Chardin, and similar should probably get a mention. Given your request I looked around somewhat (just googling), but as mentioned elsewhere, although Ranma is certainly far more successful in terms of worldwide sales than the current circulation of virtually any western comicbook, it is also over and done with since more than a decade/nothing new is produced beyond that 30-minute animated episode, and not of western origin, so not much seems to be written about it in English. (I encourage other people with better web-research (and othervise) skills to make an effort as well) In any case, within the frame of the series itself, Ranma is presented as the main character, Akane the second, Ryoga arguably the third, and it's very debatable after that point. Dave (talk) 19:06, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, those three are the last to be considered. Ranma him/herself should be quite easy to prove notability for being the title character, the other two not so much, but still have a good chance. I wouldn't call the current list "limited" but theres nothing stopping people from adding characters worth mentioning to the article, as long as it's sensible and doesn't end up with all the irrelevant characters that were a large part of the deleted "minor" character lists being added "for the sake of it" (if they appear in one/two episode of the anime and/or only one or two manga chapters then its safe to say they aren't needed here). I'm not sure there is lack of recent writings about the series (it was reissued recently), but there should be plenty of magazine/book coverage from it's VHS/early dvd days. If not for character articles then for the series in general (I need VHS info for the episode lists). Dandy Sephy (talk) 19:25, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * One possibility if we have to delete pages might be to merge the very recurring characters into collected entries to give them at least somewhat more coverage, as there is too much to say about them to give a fair treatise in this type of list. Shampoo+Mousse+Cologne+Taro+Herb, Lime & Mint+the Jusenkyo Guide could together occupy a "Chinese Ranma Characters" page; Genma+Nodoka+Soun+Kasumi+Nabiki+Happosai could go to "The Tendo Household"; Ukyo+Konatsu+Tofu+Tatewaki+Kodachi+Principal Kuno+Maomolin to "Notable Nerima citizens," or something in that vein. Still, while I hope that you are right in that there is more information available elsewhere, I regrettably haven't been able to find anything, and don't have a pre-Internet anime magazine collection, or similar. Nor do I have the time and energy, so I heavily encourage any Ranma fans reading this to help out. Dave (talk) 12:20, 27 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I imagine such pages would just be either tagged for merging or sent to AfD because they will have the exact same problem of notability. Although naming them as groups works fine for sorting the characters in a large list, its really not appropriate to create separate character pages based on that forced grouping. It would hardly be List of Soul Reapers in Bleach, which can make a case for itself based on being an official group of characters and the sheer number of them. Dandy Sephy (talk) 18:48, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

No objections or improvements, so I'll merge these soon. Dandy Sephy (talk) 05:58, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Round 2
I'm on vol29 now, so combined with reading the articles in question I'm looking to tackle - Shinnosuke (Ranma ½), Ryu Kumon,Hikaru Gosunkugi. Again, no lasting affect on the series,2 of them are limited to single storys across a handful of chapters, one only pops up in random chapters and often does very little. A week seems long enough. Once I finish the manga I'll be looking to do all the pages except Ranma, Ryoga and Akane unless something in the remaining volumes covince me otherwise.


 * Well, Shampoo, Tatewaki, Mousse, and Ukyo can also be argued as main characters, especially within the anime, and along with the main 3 protagonists Nabiki has the most complex and distinctive personality. Genma-panda and Happosai are also very characteristic ongoing traits of the series. Given that the Tendo household, the Amazons, and perhaps the Kuno family at least are official groupings within the series, it might be an idea to merge these pages into groupings. The frequently recurring characters (particularly within the anime, wherein the cast appears in most episodes) should probably warrant more than a few lines written about them. If this isn't an option, do you know if there is some handy Wikiquote-style Wiki-link tag that could be inserted in the main list? For example putting a: "See also:"-link at the end of the columns of the important characters? Dave (talk)
 * Shampoo and Tatewaki possibly, but Ukyo and Mousse certainly not. Mousse only appears for small scenes much of the time and although Ukyo has a larger role calling her a main character is jumping the gun. Again, "tendos", "chinese/amazons", "kunos" don't qualify for seperate pages, and the result will be the same - i.e. notability concerns. No ones saying characters can only have a few lines, but it needs to be relevant and easy for people not familiar with the series to be able to read and understand. Shampoo for example can easily make use of several paragraphs, if it's not excessive plot summary. Nabiki for example is a perfect example. I respect the work gone into it (it's certainly one of the better character articles), but it's excessive (sourcing every single aspect of her personality with a reference per word - no matter how minor).


 * You've been quite understanding about the whole thing, and I appreciate that, but your suggestion just makes the existing problem drag out longer. Leaving Akane and Ryoga as separate pages is actually a compromise on my part, because there is a long running storyline there that does develop over the series. Most characters in Ranma just appear every now and then for minor scenes most of the time. Again, notability in third party sources outweighs importance within the series. Dandy Sephy (talk) 17:15, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok. Perhaps we should focus on coming up with some way to reference the Wiki back-ups for those who want excessive information instead? Would doing so in a similar fashion to the current (ex: "Main article: Genma Saotome") be acceptable, even if it links to a Wikia outside of Wikipedia itself, or is there some other linking format we could use at the bottom of the page, preferably to each of any mirrorred profiles?


 * Less important, rambling parts. Ignore at will:


 * Btw1: Nabiki is a very special case, which at the time required point-by-point literal transcription of virtually every line due to an, in my experience, extremely vocal fan-community. It really had to be nearly 100% accurate to not be vandalised. Unlike with the other characters in the series for which fandom tends to focus on 1-2 traits and disregard the rest (Akane being the perfect example), Nabiki is reinvented nearly from scratch to the extent where many fans were very outraged when the foundations were pointed out. (I have an issue with mischaracterisation/think that any characters should be transcribed/literally described as they are)


 * Btw2: Given the elsewhere mentioned "copied text from Furinkan.com", I recently checked out the site profiles, and it (at least for the parts I recognised) actually seems to be the other way around, given that I remember writing several virtually identical phrases myself long ago but through mostly matter-of-fact referencing from the manga. Perhaps the maintainers wished to increase overall reliability? Regardless, there are still several fanon myth blatant errors, such as downplaying Nabiki and thin air stating that she 'cares about her family'. (Well, no, that's blatantly contradicted). Or using the phrase (from memory) 'regardless how _many_ times he's defeated by Ranma they have always been very close battles' for Ryoga, which, you know, isn't really true. Within the manga he's been beaten 8-9 times or so, half of them through cheating or trickery, and won nearly twice as many himself. Going area by area in displayed upper levels, Ryoga seems to be about 3x stronger, 1.6-1.7x as durable, over 10x the chi-generator, more talented, but somewhat less skilled due to less benefitting of proper instructors, 0.95x as swift, and 0.9 the evasion/reflexes. Ranma thinks more flexibly and strategically, which is his only real advantage in more out-of-universe context, but within the series (and the common heroic story requirements of the protagonist matching more powerful foes) they're a roughly even match head-on. Additionally, Ryoga's statistics seem to shift wildly from story to story. In any case, rambling aside, the reliable parts of the Furinkan profiles seem borrowed from here, and the less reliable parts to be created on-site. As such I'm not sure if it's a good reference source. It seems a bit 'circular watering down' if that is a proper expression? Dave (talk) 18:21, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * The "copied text" was just a rough assesment from a very brief work. It would have taken me hours to go through the history and compare everything! In general Furinkan is a very reliable site, at least for the stuff that really needs reliable sourcing - episode titles, history, stuff that plays a big part in main articles. Theres no policy for "oh but the character sections aren't great", the site as a whole is considered reliable (if it was user editable then it would be different)


 * As for wikia, I've asked at WP:Anime, but it seems Wikia's have been proven to be unsuitable External links. Even if it wasn't, we can use Furinkan as a valid External Link. Currently the furinkan references are temporary until better refernces are added (such as pages of the manga, although I only have access to the Viz monthly versions for the first 17volumes, and scanlations of the japanese version for the rest), it's likely to be that as the references improve the furinkan refs can be replaced with an Etermal Link to the character section. Perhaps not as detailed as the Wikia, but the best way to do it from a detailed/reliable viewpoint (remember, Wikipedia doesn't class it's own regional sites as reliable, never mind a seperate wiki) Dandy Sephy (talk) 18:26, 8 February 2009 (UTC)


 * No offense intended regarding the copied text mention, and I agree that it is a reliable site beyond the character sections. I just turned curious enough to check it up, and thought that I should mention the implications.
 * Regarding the intended Wikia mirror, I wasn't thinking so much about using it as a footnote reference as an outside link for further information. I hope that putting such a one at the bottom of the page should be within the limits of acceptable at least? Dave (talk) 19:30, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I knew what you meant :) As for what you suggest, thats what i was asking about. There was never any question of using it as a reference, only a inexperienced editor would try that. Wikias fail WP:EL, and have been proven to do so on several occasions. I've not read the previous decisions, but I've no reason to doubt them or the person who answered my question (quite the opposite). I wasn't expecting to be able to use wikia, Furinkan is a good compromise (we can be thankful Furinkan can be used given its still a fansite, very few become reliable sources) Dandy Sephy (talk) 19:53, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm. That's odd. There didn't use to be any problems with adding a relevant Wiki link at the bottom of the page. :\ Dave (talk) 12:13, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * There were no problems, or just that no one ever brought it up? There is a bit of a difference. For example a registered user posted youtube links in another article, then asked why I had removed them, seemingly unaware that there are actually rules on links, and links to copyrighted material is a big no. I've seen a lot of either link to scanlations or even use the scanlation site as references! Dandy Sephy (talk) 15:33, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The way I remember, it was suggested by a veteran editor that I should add a link to Wikia character reference files, which is what I was thinking of. From a usefulness standpoint fans of the series would find it highly beneficial to see where to go for the previous far more extensive versions of the character profiles. Given that this is a fiction subject it should be acceptable. Dave (talk) 19:41, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Dave,I checked the source from the person making the 'saying' that Ranma lost to Ryoga twice as many times as Ryoga does to Ranma.It turns out that you 'count' short battles. At least three of them were debatable joke sequence when Ranma deserve it and should be taken as a joke. Nearly 1/3 of your suppose short battles turn out to be 'battles' in which Ryoga has a power-up like Mark of the God that makes him invincible.You also neglect to mention that Akane stated that most if not all of their offscreen battle was Ranma victory.

Also 3 times stronger?.9 times as swift?Where the hell did you come with those calculations?Its known that Ryoga has higher strength feats than Ranma,but you also shown that when they grapple they were on equal footing or Ranma was winning.The only source you got was Ranma being unable to pull himself out of a golden bell.That was it,and everything else contradict it or shown Ranma as equal to Ryoga.How did 'grapple' someone on equal footing if you'r so much weaker?You don't. It makes much more sense that Ryoga got far better durability and weaker or equal strength. That would allow Ryoga to last longer than Ranma but allow Ranma to fight equally with Ryoga in strength.My suggest makes alot more sense than you proposal of Ryoga being three times stronger,unless you want ignore all the times Ranma got hit from Ryoga and keep going like nothing. If you remove 'the short fights' that involve Ryoga with a invincible power up,pure comedy scenario, and finally girl Ranma.You'll realized how biased you really are.Hell now that I check,You also even admit that Ryoga stat swing wildly.Yet you don't admit that Ranma could be the same if not even more so since he's the main character/resident butt monkey ?What about Ranma incident against Hawaiian zombies(classmates) that force him to almost lose against normal humans ?What about Akane hitting him in a serious situation that nearly killed him?What about him losing a card game when he was shown to be winning against his friends in the past and future?Contradiction happens.You have doublt standard toward Ranma and refuse to accept it.If you want to see my reasoning.Look at how 'determine' Ranma acts when preparing to fight Ryoga.(sleeping,relaxing,dodge training that's all?) Compare that to how determine he's against other people.I rest my case. 151.213.190.231 (talk) 13:41, 8 July 2013 (UTC)Ryogaisnotamazing

more merges
I've finally gotten around to doing the previous "nominees"

The next ones proposed are:
 * Hinako Ninomiya
 * Konatsu
 * Tsubasa Kurenai
 * Mariko Konjo

Dandy Sephy (talk) 18:58, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Apparently, three of the ones left over may have some sort of potential, while the other is just insanely referenced with primary sources. I'll leave this up for a while, and if nobody comes up with anything, I'll merge them. TTN (talk) 17:18, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
 * As far as I'm aware of the rules here, primary sourcing does not establish notability (not to mention most of it would also be considered original research). I disagree with the policy particulars, but I'm not in charge here so doesn't really matter.  With that in mind the only one that may stand is Ranma (as it has some independent sources), however, even for him I would say it's too little given how much of his page is primary sourced.  It would probably be better to either seriously trim his article down, or to simply move the independently referenced stuff into this article. Derekloffin (talk) 17:25, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Since it apparently wasn't very clear what was being proposed here, we're talking about the pages for:
 * Ryoga Hibiki
 * Nabiki Tendo
 * Akane Tendo
 * Ranma Saotome

And again, I believe only Ranma's page has the potential to stand on it's own, but even it I would merge currently, just keeping the info that is secondarily sourced intact in the merge. Derekloffin (talk) 02:59, 17 September 2009 (UTC)


 * This post got rather long. Skip to the second "--" for the gist of it. If I recall correctly, I was the one who originally suggested (in a discussion with Dandy Sephy) the mentioned three as possibly meeting the GNG. Just to make this clear: I'm not commenting on whether the articles should be merged or not, only about whether the characters are notable or not. -- To back up my initial gut feeling, I did some searching of the web. Partial results of that search can be seen here. For the individual characters, that search did turn up nothing. However, I found lots of reviews for rather late additions to the franchise, like OVAs, season box sets, or the last volume of the manga. Those reviews don't talk about the characters, because the characters weren't new at the time of those reviews' writing. Keep in mind how old this series is. The bulk of articles written about it will be in print media. -- I've tried, but I can't establish those characters' notability. However, I wouldn't be surprised if someone with a pile of magazines just walked by and did it. Good raise  05:34, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * My arguement was with whoever proposed it that Ranma, Akane and Ryoga were the most likely to have the amount of discussion that would really indicate notability. Nabiki has no chance, she's only really active in a few random chapters for most of the series. I would agree that Ranma stands a much better chance of being able to stand alone, but someone mentioned that the article would need to be completely rewritten first (I agree, but thats secondary to establishing notability imo). I have no objection to merging the other three pages, but Ranma's article could probably be left for a while longer. Another concern was raised about merging the details from the character list in the main Ranma article here as someone objected to my attempt to remove the excessive list there and place a link to this list. Dandy Sephy (talk) 14:14, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I have read the articles in question and do not believe that merging them is the correct answer. That being said if the articles on Ranma Saotome and Akane Tendo can be revised and shown to be notable then keep them otherwise delete all four of the articles as I do not believe that notability can be shown for either Nabiki Tendo or Ryoga Hibiki. 97.115.129.240 (talk) 19:49, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * It seems the kind of merge that is being propose is pretty much equivalent to a delete anyway as we'd be stripping it down to the bare bones. Derekloffin (talk) 20:21, 17 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I think it is time to get down to business. Delete both Nabiki Tendo and Ryoga Hibiki via WP:PROD (propose for deletion) as I don't think either warents discussion but others may disagree enough to deprod them. As for Ranma Saotome and Akane Tendo either Defer or Delete via WP:AFD (article for deletion) as any prod is likely to be deprodded in short order. -- (aka 97.115.129.240) allen四names 16:19, 20 September 2009 (UTC)


 * No, all the pages have been here for a long time, and theres no need to remove their very existence. Redirect them. The same has been done for all the others, no need to change that, they are valid search terms. It also means that if evidence for notability is found, it's easy to restore the articles and add the sources. Dandy Sephy (talk) 16:59, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Convert to redirect can be made acceptable. I will need to read Help:Merging again to refresh my memory. Then I will take a look at those pages you mentioned. -- allen四names 17:15, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * All the examples of merge types are given using redirect. Theres no reason to delete over merge here. This is especially necessary as there are links to these pages all over wikipedia. Dandy Sephy (talk) 17:33, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * A conversion to redirect can be done but something like the following should be found at the top of this page.

Ranma ½ articles converted to redirects
 * Ranma Saotome (old discussion)
 * Akane Tendo (old discussion)
 * Nabiki Tendo (old discussion)
 * Ryoga Hibiki (old discussion)
 * Something may be done about the other pages but the edit summaries of Ranma (et al.) should state &quot;Article converted to redirect&quot; not &quot;merged&quot;. allen四names 17:42, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I am going to convert Nabiki Tendo and Ryoga Hibiki to redirects today. -- allen四names 18:07, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I put links to the old talk pages at the top of this one. -- allen四names 19:02, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Either Ranma Saotome and Akane Tendo will be merged or we wait for the inevitable WP:AFD. It is clear now that no editor with the nessary skill is going to touch these pages as they turn into vandal bait. -- allen四names 13:05, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Theres no need to AFD them, they are not deletion candidates. Theres no need to take it to AFD to merge the pages. Theres no rush, leave it at least a month first, there are plenty of printed sources discussing these two characters in depth. These two pages actually stand a chance of being notable unlike the others, and the need for article cleanup is not a reason for deletion or merging in itself. I could easily reduce Ranma's page down to a sensible size and detail, but it takes time to find sources (I have a box of mags at my parents house that should be of some use). Dandy Sephy (talk) 13:24, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The recent edit by an IP user has gotten me a little depressed. I may remove the two pages from my wacthlist so I am not tempted to convert them before they can be improved. -- allen四names 14:02, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * What edit are you referring to? Good raise  14:12, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The edit shown here. -- allen四names 14:21, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sadly, those edits don't decrease in number when articles are merged, they just change their target by following the redirect. Good raise  14:31, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Seems like a routine IP edit, it's unreasonable to expect them to know content guidelines and such. You shouldn't let such things bother you, in fact until someone starts to cleans up the page, it's probably best ignored when the articles are in such a mess (I wouldn't ignore it on the character list). Dandy Sephy (talk) 14:59, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay. -- allen四names 15:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I feel that the articles are notable enough because Ranma was a successful series and that the merge templates should be removed. Or is this going to go into consensus? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:42, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It doesn't work like that, the articles themselves have to prove it, the series itself being successful doesn't factor into it. The two have survived because there is the possibility of them being made notable, but this requires third party reliable sources (such as reviews) discussing the character(s) in some form of discussion/criticism/praise of the character (be it personality, interaction with other characters, design, etc). Without that, it doesn't matter how notable the subject is in theory, the merge template, and any actual merge is completely appropriate. Dandy Sephy (talk) 14:07, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe that in general, most of the characters pages may be deleted, such as Nabiki Tendo since, thoguh her character is more prominent than others, only the two main protagonists Ranma Saotome and Akane Tendo have substantial credibility. For a manga/anime as old as this one, both are well known and obviously central to the storyline. Neither were ever missing from an arc. Their pages make as much sense as Harry Potter and Hermione Granger from the Potter series, though admittedly, those two are a bit more famous than Ranma or Akane. If a merger is created overall, then there should be a seperate pagee for these two, since their contributions far out way those of the other cast members. Vinearcher 6:17, 20 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.2.127.132 (talk)
 * What exactly is needed to be considered notable? Akane and Ranma have been referenced (together or separately) in the book Anime explosion!: the what? why? & wow! of Japanese animation by Patrick Drazen, used as an example in the book Samurai from outer space: understanding Japanese animation by Antonia Levi, noted by name in The complete anime guide: Japanese animation film directory & resource guide by Trish Ledoux, Doug Ranney, Fred Patten, have brief descriptions in the book Manga: the complete guide by Jason Thompson, analyzed in depth in the book Anime from Akira to Howl's moving castle: experiencing contemporary Japanese by Susan J. Napier, listed in the book 500 Manga Heroes and Villains by Helen McCarthy, and many other references in books and magazines dealing specifically with anime and manga. Add to this their usage in an article in the Psicología Evolutiva: Adolescencia I (Developmental Psychology: Adolescence I) titled "Adolescencia, sexualidad y muerte en los dibujos animados japoneses" ("Adolescence, Sexuality and Death in Japanese Cartoons") by José Barrionuevo, Mabel Belçaguy, and Alicia Farro in 2008 from the University of Beunos Aires, being referenced in Peter Calantropo's 2004 sociology thesis titled "Il Karate: aspetti sociali, educativi e culturali" ("Karate: social, educational, and cultural aspects") at the University of Rome La Sapienza. Being used as literary examples in the Dictionary of Fiction by Ashish Pandey, and they are analyzed as characters and representations in the book Imagined families, lived families: culture and kinship in contemporary Japan by Akiko Hashimoto and John W. Traphagan. None of the other characters in Ranma 1/2 are as widely included in or analyzed by multiple sources both dealing specifically with animation and manga and by scholarly articles, thesis, and books dealing with social sciences and the affects of culture. They are even notable enough to be included by name alone in a tertiary source book on terms in fiction. Simply put, Ranma and Akane are notable characters within a hugely popular series and are being referenced over a decade after the series ended in numerous third-party, reputable, and reliable sources. To me this means that the separate articles on Ranma and Akane need to be cleaned up and properly referenced, not marginalized and reduced to another subsection on a list of other minor characters. --Md.knopp (talk) 22:01, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Thats exactly why the two were left as seoerate articles, they are the only ones with significant discussion in reliable sources. All of those books are certainly reliable sources, and should be used where possible.Dandy Sephy (talk) 01:42, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * MD, given that you've found quite a few references, would you mind checking if the 3rd main character, Ryoga, the most interesting personality, Nabiki, or any of the other maainstays, are also mentioned somewhere? It would be helpful. Dave (talk) 14:57, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Removal of merge templates
On September 1 a registered user added merge templates to Ranma Saotome, Akane Tendo, Nabiki Tendo, Ryoga Hibiki, and List of Ranma ½ characters without stating a reason in any of the discussion pages. If you wish to merge these pages please add a reason for it. 97.115.129.240 (talk) 02:22, 17 September 2009 (UTC)


 * You may not have noticed: Merging those character articles is being discussed here. Good raise  02:24, 17 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Yeah, uh, look directly above this topic and you'll see the discussion (which would be nice if more than me and the merge purposer commented on). Derekloffin (talk) 02:55, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Lead (section)
I am starting this discussion by presenting a version of the lead section. Unfortunately even this is an improvement over what is in place now. Feel free to make edits within the table above leaving your comments below. -- allen四names 01:40, 3 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually, you should completely avoid "List of Ranma ½ characters" altogether. The lead needs more depth, but the proposed intro creates a self reference within the article that we must avoid. —Farix (t &#124; c) 02:58, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on List of Ranma ½ characters. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.animedat.com/Ranma/Raninte.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot II <sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS"> Talk to my owner :Online 05:18, 11 July 2016 (UTC)


 * I have repaired the link. David A (talk) 07:44, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Pronouns
The lead describes Ranma using male pronouns even when in female form ("while hot water changes him back into a boy"). The Ranma-specific section uses careful phrasing to avoid using the pronoun "she". Other sections use "she" to describe Ranma in girl form: Ryoga "is pushed into a cursed spring by female Ranma (while chasing Genma and not looking where she was going)".

The latter is arguably more correct, but risks confusing readers who aren't used to pronouns changing like this.

Is there a Ranma-specific convention for this? 23.83.37.241 (talk) 12:56, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

I think that "she" is used for the female form, and "he" is used for the male form. David A (talk) 17:23, 19 December 2017 (UTC)