Talk:List of Tokyo Mew Mew characters/Archive 1

To do
Put available character pictures (preferably thumbnails due to Help:Image page.) --Addict 2006 06:38, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I just got done adding all of the pictures. &quot;THROUGH FIRE, JUSTICE IS SERVED!&quot; 02:53, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

hidden comments
I'm going to move some if the hidden comments here. some of them have turned into mini-discussions. It would be best to just talk about it in this article's talk page. It can get a little overwelming for an article to have alot of hidden comments. &quot;THROUGH FIRE, JUSTICE IS SERVED!&quot; 14:12, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Within "Friends and Family" section
1.) Is Ryou's family worth mentioning here?

Probably. Should we mention Berry's two friends from Tokyo Mew Mew a la Mode?

Hmm. If this page is not only for anime minor characters, then yes, as there is almost no info about them in the articles: they aren't mentioned at all in Berry's article, and are barely mentioned in the main article. Though I doubt there is anything interesting about them. If we mention them here, then the "Miscellaneous" section of the characters list in the main article can be removed.

2.) Regarding Lettuce's family: I wrote the names in kanji as they appear in the credits, but I could misromanize them...

If I'm not mistaken, Lettuce also has a younger brother... I couldn't find any info about him, but I believe he was referred to as "Urī" by his mother.

Within "One shot chracters" section
1.) Regarding Yuebin-ron: He's Chinese, so his family name is written before his first name, when the name is written in kanji, just like Pudding's name. No, I don't care what Anime News Network webpage says.

Mashio?
I have no idea how to sue the talk page, so sory if this is in the wrong place.. But Mashio should defiently be mentioned, he's hardly talked about on Ringo's page anyways. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.106.7.203 (talk • contribs)


 * Sue the talk page?! Besides, I don't know if anyone around here knows much about the storyline behind the Japan-only PlayStation game. --Addict 2006 03:40, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Typo. Sorry, didn't know (that I can't make typos). Anyways, that's true, but theres enough info about him to write a couple sentences. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.106.7.203 (talk • contribs)


 * Well, a few sentences would probably make a stub of an article. It's kinda risky and I'm unsure. And you can quickly edit your own talk comments as well. Just remember to use 4 ~ signs with no spaces (like ~ ) to sign a talk page. --Addict 2006 23:22, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Moving hidden comment about Momoka
dont know how to intergrate it into her section.

Question: "which Kish suspects has Mew Aqua in it). Zakuro finds the handkerchief in the river "

Yume: This is after she runs away because her parents didn't come. She stops near the river and looks at the handkerchief; then she looks around and realizes that she got lost. She runs back, crying, but trips and falls down - this is where the handkerchief falls into the river. Momoka then runs along the river, trying to catch it, and eventually encounters Kish.

THROUGH FIRE,  JUSTICE IS SERVED!  18:16, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

General fixes
I am just noting some issues that I have found during a very quick review of the article. Regards, G.A.S 07:03, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Yes check.svg|20px]]YIndex: The current index have 1 Protagonists; 1.1 Mew Mews; 1.2 Friends; 2 Antagonists; 3 Minor characters. The split is currently half based on real world criteria, and half based on plot based criteria. This should rather be done on real world criteria only. I propose using the following as headers: 1. Protagonists, 2. Supporting characters, 3.Antagonists, each in order of importance.
 * [[Image:Yes check.svg|20px]]YReal world information: Some of the characters provide the Japanese name only, while others provide Japanese name, English name, Translation, etc. We should try to make this uniform.
 * [[Image:Yes check.svg|20px]]YTone and perspective: Some characters are described, for others only a plot recital is given. We should try to provide a description where possible, eliminate plot recitals.
 * [[Image:Yes check.svg|20px]]YLanguages other than Japanese and English: According to Manual of Style (anime- and manga-related articles) this information should be left for the respective Languages’ Wikipedias. I believe this is equally applicable to the list.
 * [[Image:Yes check.svg|20px]]YLinked headers: According to Manual of Style (links) the headers should not be linked, instead, according to WP:SS main should be used. This should also help to identify when the section in the list is long enough.


 * That is a good summary. As mentioned on the Tokyo Mew Mew talk, I just did this very quick using the old one from the sandbox.  I was hoping others would come in and help clean up, but so far, no one is. I'm going to go through it now and try to address at least some of the issues. For the splits. There isn't anything wrong with having Mew Mews as a subcategory, since they are the central characters.  This is done in other character lists as well.  Protagonists/Antagonists is mainly used when there is a lack of clear division on the show. AnmaFinotera (talk) 07:06, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry for my not doing any of it myself, the above list is also a "to-do" list for when I get time, probably over the weekend:) G.A.S 07:09, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * My problem actually with the fact that the first section has subsections, while the others do not. I believe that the fix for this would be to move the "friends" and "minor characters" sections to "supporting characters"; since this is exactly what they are — "friends" are not "protagonists". G.A.S 07:29, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Working on it now :) Almost done fixing the formats (I hope) and getting rid of all OR and the like. Should give us a nice clean based to work from. AnmaFinotera (talk) 07:53, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * And done. I think now we primarily need to work on expansion with both major plot points and and additional real world info. Also, of course, doing any merges per above and adding in plenty of sourcing. AnmaFinotera (talk) 07:57, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Much better, although I believe some of the minor characters could actually be added back, depending on availability of real world information. G.A.S 08:06, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Any in particular? The families play no major role in the manga at all, and most seem to be pure anime creations. I haven't seen the whole anime series, so don't know if they are better emphasized there. AnmaFinotera (talk) 08:14, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I cannot help on that one. They will have to be considered on a case by case basis (vs. external sources, as we need to source the information). I do believe that they are more important in the anime, but not much. Side note: I believe that the production section of the main article could go a bit more into depth re the anime vs. manga issue (per WP:MOS-ANIME point 5). G.A.S 08:37, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Regarding Chimera Animal, Kimera Anima, and Chimera Anima
Just to let everyone know, Tokyo Pop for some reason mistranslated "chimera animal to "kimera anima" and "chimera anima", most likely due to how it is spelled in katakana. the correct translation is CHIMERA ANIMAL. I will be reverting the misstranslations. "THROUGH FIRE, JUSTICE IS SERVED!" 02:27, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

"Anima" isn't incorrect!
1) For those who gets "confused": the word "anima" is originally Latin, and means "life" or "soul". There is NOTHING WRONG with this word being used in the monsters' name.

2) Not all of the Chimera Anima(l)s are animals, so why call them this?

3) Why write the word incorrectly? There is NO WAY the last syllable of the word アニマル could've been omitted just because the writers decided to do so. Due to the phonetic structure of the Japanese language, there is NO WAY アニマ could mean "animal".

Compare the word メタ (meta-) to the word メタル (metal). See? - by chopping out the last syllable, you can COMPLETELY CHANGE THE MEANING OF THE WORD. So, please, stop writing this nonsense. There is NOTHING WRONG with the word "anima".

Sorry if my comment was a bit... harsh... it's not the first time I'm trying to explain this...

Yume no Kishi 23:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I can see what you mean, but sence they ovbiously look like animals, anima would be incorrect relating to tokyo mew mew articles. So, in a way it is right and wrong at the same time, let alone but to the Japanese language being composed of syllables and syllbles ends with vowels, they say English words odd. So, anima, is how they say the english word for animal (though the have their own word for animal.)

hmm, now that i can about it more, you add something like a note or something about it. and how the meaning of anima kinda connects to the jellyfish parasites. &quot;THROUGH FIRE, JUSTICE IS SERVED!&quot; 00:30, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't really know how to put it all in words... but I believe it should be mentioned somewhere, as the word really can refer to both "anima" and "animal" things, and it also can be somewhat of an alteration of the word "animal", as the spelling which omits the syllable "ru" still seems a little bit unusual... Well, at least it can be thought of as a pun, as there are a lot of puns in "Tokyo Mew Mew". Yume no Kishi 05:41, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

The Japanese Name for the Parasite Aliens
I was playing the Japanese Tokyo Mew Mew Playstation game and noticed that the Jellyfish were called "Para Para". I also noticed that Taruto calls them that a few times in the Anime as well so I made the edit on the page.--Hika Yagami 01:34, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Here are the scenes where the Parasite Aliens are called Para Para in the Anime. This picture's from episode 42 and this one's from episode 44. --Hika Yagami 02:14, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Table or list
I think the table looks better. In time it should be done other articles. Angelofdeath275 17:41 (UTC), 14 June 2007


 * I think this should be expanded into paragraphs. For instance, add country, language, meaning of (translated), name, reason for change (Italian), etc. Individual citations can then be added.
 * For instance:
 * Mew Mew: Amiche Vincenti:
 * In Italy, The Blue Knight is known as Cavaliere Blu; Italian for Blue Knight. He is voiced by Davide Garbolino during episodes 17 to 36 and by Patrizio Prata during episodes 37(?) to 52(?). Davide Garbolino also voices Ryou and Patrizio Prata also voices Masaya. His voice changes during the series to match that of Masaya when nearing the end since ... (What do the fans think of this?/Can we cite it?)
 * G.A.S 19:43, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Moved from hidden comments
Regarding "ao" kanji:

Yume: OK, I did some research. Google Translator does actually render the 蒼 kanji as "(it is) green". But when I looked it up in Japanese Wiktionary (http://ja.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E8%92%BC), it came up with both "blue" and "green" (at the beginning of the article), but then listed the meaning of 蒼 as 深い青色 - "deep blue [sic] color".

AoD275: english wikionary also says that. I already knew that, but the citation I add for 蒼 says "blue, pale", so I ommited pale. I guess it depends on the context??

Regarding attack name:

Japanese Wikipedia says that 藍玉 (pronounced "ai-dama") is actually the Japanese name for aquamarine. Oddness... That's a different color!

Moved from the article
Since non-Japanese are more familiar with 青 ao meaning "blue", this could have lead some fans (fans who know Japanese) to suspect that Masaya would most likely be the Blue Knight. Since most of the Tokyo Mew Mew sites show only romanization of his name, not the kanji, fans who haven't seen the Japanese version of the anime and manga assume "ao" would be 青, not the other kanji. Because of this, the Blue Knight's name is sometimes incorrectly written as 青の騎士, making his identity far more obvious.
 * Can't prove it anymore. 夢の騎士 Yume no Kishi - Talk 18:13, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Interestingly, the Blue Knight's kanji for blue, 蒼 ao, originally meant "green". So, in the old sense of the word, his name would be translated to the "Green Knight". But in today's sense, this kanji no longer means green, so a fairly new kanji now means green, which is now 緑 midori.
 * Needs some rewriting and/or clarifying. 夢の騎士 Yume no Kishi - Talk 09:02, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Profile section

 * Japanese Name: Ao no Kishi
 * Name Translation: " 蒼 ao" = blue, " 騎 ki" = riding on horses " 士 shi" =  gentleman, samurai (" 騎士 kishi" = knight)
 * Japanese Name pronunciation: Ah-oh-noh-kee-shee
 * Height: Unknown, possibly the same as Masaya.
 * Weight: Unknown, possibly the same as Masaya.
 * Hair Color: Blond
 * Eye Color: Sky Blue

Random manga description moved from the article
After Ichigo reveals to Masaya Aoyama that she is a Mew Mew, the Blue Knight shows up to help her fight the numerous Chimera Anima. Kish looks rather pleased to see him, saying this will be a chance to get revenge on him. Kish then splits into many illusions, confusing Ichigo and the Blue Knight. The Blue Knight attacks one of the illusions, thinking it is Kish, but it disappears. Kish then holds Ichigo, which angers the Blue Knight. It is not clearly shown what happened, but Kish states that he destroyed all the illusions and injured him badly as well. Possibly because he realizes the Blue Knight is stronger than him, Kish says he wants the Blue Knight to kill him. Looking rather surprised that he was going to kill him, Ichigo stops him from doing so, saying it is enough. He then disappears and is not seen until the next volume.


 * Will probably need this, but not now...

Random comments

 * I'm not sure if we really need citations for each kanji. They are a good thing, but none of the anime articles I've seen so far cite sources for kanji translation... 夢の騎士 Yume no Kishi - Talk 10:44, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I do not think it is necessary in the article, it can be provided in the talk page for interest's sake, maybe in a table at the top that lists the Japanese text, translation and the source. G.A.S 10:48, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I've never seen them in anime articles either, but I dont really care. I remember coming across some mistranslated kanji, and the Jinmeyo (sic?) kanji are harder to translate. I used them to verify each kanji was translated correctly. I know there is wikionary (I think), but I dont like using wiki relates things like that. THROUGH FIRE, JUSTICE IS SERVED! 03:31, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * These translations also make references sections HUGE. This is very inconvenient, especially if there's a lot of manga/anime citations. I think if we leave them in the articles, they'll need to be somehow put into a separate section or something... 夢の騎士 Yume no Kishi - Talk 04:17, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Now I came up with one more idea... no footnotes for kanji (already said why I don't like them), but if *anyone* wants to verify the translation, the links are still here... 夢の騎士 Yume no Kishi - Talk 07:45, 28 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Please comment on what I did to content notes section: I think headers just make these sections look too big, so I formatted it to look more like the one in Che Guevara article. Does it look better than before? 夢の騎士 Yume no Kishi - Talk 17:23, 27 June 2007 (UTC)


 * It is much better than before: I did not do it originally because I started with the age issue, which did not look good due to the list. If it is changed into paragraphs though, it too will be better. G.A.S 20:15, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I think this can now be done in other articles (I edited Ichigo's age section a bit). 夢の騎士 Yume no Kishi - Talk 04:17, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Only I'm not sure how to do it there, because of that "see also" thing in the "reborn" note. Can it be moved to the end of the paragraph (if headers are removed)? 夢の騎士 Yume no Kishi - Talk 16:34, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * It is a good idea but I think you can link "'Reborn' was incorrectly translated as 'Ribbon'" to the article's section. G.A.S 17:00, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Done with all of the content notes - now they don't look so huge. 夢の騎士 Yume no Kishi - Talk 18:28, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Random comments - 2
I formatted the VA section in all articles like the one in this article. I think they look better now.

Now... two other changes: linking the kanji and combining the history sections. The second one will now be a problem in the Mews' articles, considering that the manga sections are now gone... 夢の騎士 Yume no Kishi - Talk 09:57, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I think some of the manga section will have to be re-inserted, in any case as far as Sailor Moon's profile section does it. (But I am unsure of the extent that will be applicable). As for linking the Kanji, I will gladly help with it. Just ask... G.A.S 11:26, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Anime references
Looks like there's some redundancy... In the anime, the BK doesn't appear often, so many references are to the same episodes (18, 26, 45...), but some of them are to several episodes. I was wondering...
 * ...whether they should be left in their present format ...
 * ...or better make things like and then reuse them as many times as needed. This will result in multiple footnotes for one statement, but will make the "references" section less messed up.

夢の騎士 Yume no Kishi - Talk 19:11, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

...Harp?
Um, since when is the dub "Harp Arrow"? Has this been confirmed on the 4Kids website?

--Because I don't think it has...

I'm pretty sure that was some bonehead's mondegreen for 'Heart Arrow'.Seven-point-Mystic 13:48, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Messed up
Somebody messed up the article, and made everything a lot less specific. I fixed the "Abilities and Weapons" section. ~MewFushi

Actually you know whats messed up? Lol Zakuro is not Mints love interest. Geez, the way people think nowadays. Someone should take that out of the article and just put that she has no love interest.
 * Just rename "Love interest" to "Relationships", and it'll be OK...

i agree mint's love interest isn't zakuro so you should Chang it 2 "no specified love interest"

Infobox?
Why is Minto the only character with an Infobox? -Denryuu (01:45, 12 November 2006)


 * This has now been solved. G.A.S 19:34, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Mint's age
Moved from the article — G.A.S 07:25, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Age = 11 according to Absolute Anime,

This stems from Ichigo's incorrect manga age. Moreover, this site is not reliable - I can tell by some statements... Unless I happen to see her age stated in the *original Japanese manga*, as Tokyopop's translation has tons of errors, I won't put ANY citations here. And, BTW, she is in the same grade - she can't be 11 in the 7th grade!
 * Does anyone have the original Japanese manga to look up her age there? 夢の騎士 Yume no Kishi - Talk 07:44, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Thats the reason I dont trust absolut anime anymore. Only Ichigo's age is listed in the manga. I'm assuming this is true for the Japanese the manga, but I dont have it.

Blue lorikeet
Mint is infused with the DNA of a Blue Lorikeet:
 * The Japanese Wikipedia lists Mint as being infused with the DNA of a Blue Lorikeet.
 * The doll's packaging's kanji, ノドジロルリインコ, is that of the Blue Lorikeet.
 * The Finnish version also has her infused with a Blue Lorikeet.
 * TMM's episode 19 has it as ノドジロルリインコ, the "White throared Lapis Lazuli (blue) parakeet".
 * TMM's episode 12 has it as the "Tahiti Blue Lory", but they don't provide the kanji.
 * Even 4kids had this one right ("unofficial" episode 1 - they even mention "the rare blue ...").

Note that the Blue Lorikeet and Ultramarine Lorikeet are different species:


 * 1) Vini peruviana, Blue Lorikeet, ノドジロルリインコ
 * 2) Vini ultramarina, Ultramarine Lorikeet, コンセイインコ

(See List of parrots by family and List of parakeets on the Japanese Wikipedia — All names are also listed in English.)

Weird though, as the Ultramarine Lorikeet is much more endangered.

Where did Ultramarine Lory come from then? What does the Tokyopop translation say? G.A.S 19:52, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

This may be yet another section for English_adaptations_of_Tokyo_Mew_Mew. G.A.S 21:03, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * It is indeed. THROUGH FIRE, JUSTICE IS SERVED! 04:41, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Mew Two — second or third episode
This episode can be regarded as the second episode since it does not seem that the events in the pilot episode are canon, and keeping with the Japanese numbering. (Until such time an official episode list is provided.)

Also refer to Mew Mew Power Uncensored for further details, on that page it is listed as the second episode. It is likely though that that section will be re-written.

G.A.S 16:42, 7 July 2007 (UTC)


 * ANN actually lists it as the third episode. I think better not mention episode number at all, since different sources have different info on this. 夢の騎士 Yume no Kishi - Talk 16:53, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Weapon content note
Summary from page history:
 * DIFF trying to insert a ref...
 * DIFF (no description)
 * DIFF why put the citation needed tag??
 * DIFF I want a reference saying that her weapon name uses "tone" and not some other word.
 * DIFF sigh..if YOU want that reference, GO FIND IT YOURSELF instead of doing nothing.
 * DIFF You're the one who decided it was "tone" in the first place, you're the one who has to find the reference. I don't even agree that it's "tone", but I'm giving you a chance to get proof.
 * The weapon's name is written ミントーン min toon.
 * Google translate translates the mint (ミント) as mint and the toon (トーン) part as Tone|en.
 * This site also translates トーン as tone.
 * What more do you want? G.A.S 14:50, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

What that person could have done is get off their lazy butt and try to find this proof of "tone". This is the same stuff this person did with "reborn"; start up an argument, but do nothing. I do not appriciate something demanding a refernce, but then say "You go find it yourself" when they clearly said "I want". You truly do nothing but whine. THROUGH FIRE   JUSTICE IS SERVED!  19:14, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Love Intrest. . . Zakuro?!?!
I do NOT think that Mint's love is Zakuro. I wouldn't make it seem like Mint is one of those girls. I hope no one is saying she is. . . that (you know, girlxgirl? don't know how to spell it) I really don't think anyone means to say that she is that but just in case, I think someone should edit it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.18.132.105 (talk) 22:04, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * That section doesn't say Zakuro is Mint's love interest, but actually the opposite. Nevertheless, I feel compelled to tell you that the NPOV wikipedia policy means, beside lots of other things, that wikipedia doesn't allow discrimination. So what you (or any other editor) feel about homosexuality is irrelevant here, and is of course no basis for editing. Kazu-kun (talk) 03:49, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Merge Discussion
As I originally posted to Talk:Tokyo Mew Mew: I'd like to propose that all of the character articles in Category:Tokyo Mew Mew characters be merged into a single List of Tokyo Mew Mew characters, with minor characters and species articles deleted all together. None of these articles meet the necessary notability requirements for existence. As such, they should be shortened up to not be pure plot regurgitation and merged into a single, well-written, well-sourced list.

Additional discussion has already taken place at Talk:Tokyo Mew Mew. For a short summary:


 * It is agreed that the character list and articles need to be cleaned up
 * It was agreed that this list needed to be renamed to its current name, cleaned up, and changed to be a regular character list (which has been done).
 * It has been agreed that at least some, if not all, of the currently existing individual character articles do NOT meet the requirements for existence per WP:FICT and need to be cleaned up and merged back here. The first round of those articles that most blatantly need to be merged in have been tagged and are listed on the front.
 * Side story and video game characters do not belong in the list at all, and should only be briefly mentioned in relevant sections of the main article.

AnmaFinotera (talk) 01:00, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

From Tokyo Mew Mew talk
(to facilitate discussion, I've copied over part of the discussion from the Tokyo Mew Mew talk page regarding the merge discussions)

(←) The AfD has been closed (result - no consensus). I presume that the best approach would be to get a proper list up and running, merging and moving information as necessary. We can decide what to do with it after said proper list has been compiled. G.A.S 08:23, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed. I think we can start by at least going ahead and cleaning out the minor list to remove the ones we are pretty sure are not going to stay, like the episodic characters. I've been bold and removed the most obvious ones to me if you'd like to take a look and hit anymore (or put any back if you feel they are notable to the series). AnmaFinotera (talk) 12:42, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree with the removals, they are not all that important. I believe we should actually move List of minor characters in Tokyo Mew Mew to List of characters in Tokyo Mew Mew, and then add appropriate sections for all major characters. That way there will only be a single article history. G.A.S 05:42, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Move done (moved to List of Tokyo Mew Mew characters per standard naming convention) :) I've also done a quick and dirty set up of the major characters using the sandbox. The formatting needs to be fixed, and several articles will need to go ahead and be merged here, but that gets us started I think. AnmaFinotera (talk) 05:46, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * To merge: The following articles can also be merged into the character list, they fail WP:FICT: Ringo Akai, Cyniclons. G.A.S 06:50, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Added :) AnmaFinotera (talk) 07:39, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

(←) Regarding the redirected articles. The links to those pages should be updated and linked to the video games (etc.) section in the main article. I believe we should try to at least mention these characters in the appropriate section. G.A.S 14:17, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: Some of the links from the main article are redirected back to the article itself. This should also be fixed. G.A.S 14:19, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * For the video game characters they do not need mention at all beyond what I believe is already there, that a new mew mew or new enemy was created for the game. We can put in the names if they aren't already there, but that's about all they need. In general, unless the game is notable enough to get its own article, their characters don't warrant a ton of attention and are less than notable. I think I got all of the self-redirecting links on the main article. I've also cleaned up the character section, which just needs to be a shorter quick summary of main points since there is a full list now, and added in the two obviously missing ones :P  AnmaFinotera (talk) 14:45, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I concur. (The same would actually go for the episodic characters being mentioned in episode summaries; but if this is to be done – what will we do when there is English and Japanese names?) About the game not being notable – so true – I could not even find enough information on the internet to write a short summary for it in the media list. G.A.S 15:16, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Usually, for the episodic characters, we just list the original name, though with the whole Mew Mew power thing, maybe add the dub name in parenthesis with a note in the lead stating that. AnmaFinotera (talk) 15:25, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Discussion
As the started of the discussion, I feel all of the individual Tokyo Mew Mew character articles should be cleaned up and merged here. None of them meet WP:FICT requirements for having standalone article in that none have significant real-world coverage from third-party reliable sources. With the excessive plot regurgitation cleaned up, and the rampant OR, all of the characters can be properly discussed here without any size issues. AnmaFinotera (talk) 14:51, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree about the goal, but believe we will run into too much red tape if we try to get rid of the remaining individual articles first (whether by moving content, or via AfD). I rather we attempt to get the list up to FL standard first, by copying content from the articles as needed. We can then remove all OR, then fancruft, then excessive plot details: if the remaining content is a duplicate of the list, we can redirect* it as such, or otherwise attempt to expand on it. *If we were to redirect first, I believe we could run into problems, due to recent editors' habit of redirecting non-notable articles en masse. G.A.S 16:36, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I disagree. It is something that needs to be done simultaneously. If the consensus is merge, then we need to merge and clean at the same time. This list can't get to FL standard if we're stuck with just a bunch of short summaries that link of to a bunch of bad articles. Remember, as long as there is the main link, what is in this list shouldn't be anything more than a brief summary.  So basically, what's there now is about all that can be there without merging because everything has its own article. I don't think there will be any problem with red tape as proper procedure is being followed. First, tag and discuss to reach an agreement on which articles should be merged. If a consensus about merging can not be reached at all, then we go to the Fiction Noticeboard for assistance.  If consensus is reached to merge, then we do the work and the appropriate redirects.
 * If someone tries to undo the merges despite consensus, then we correct and take appropriate measures as needed. For the redirecting "en masse" the main problem was not the redirecting itself, which was following policy and guidelines, it was primarily people's issues with one specific editor and his not allowing discussion if the redirects were challenged, and with his not always merging properly.  Quite a few merges like this are happening in some other big anime/manga articles without a ton of fuss at all. List of Fruits Basket characters is one that comes to mind, which I've aided in the discussion of, though not the work to avoid spoilers about the ending. :) AnmaFinotera (talk) 18:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I see your reasoning, but I do not believe that the existance of subarticles are reasoning enough to keep list summaries brief: According to WP:SS, the entry in the parent article should be at twice as long as the daughter article's lead (thus 2 - 4 paragraphs).
 * I guess my point is, regardless of whether the subarticles are kept or not, we need to get the list up to standard, so we might just as well start there.
 * G.A.S 19:13, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * To me, doing that just duplicates the effort. I'd rather do it all at once, tackling one character at a time than having to do everything twice, especially when the character articles will just get redirected when merged. Better to clean and merge one by one.AnmaFinotera (talk) 05:53, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Why this ever became an issue, I will never know... But the attention these immaterial items gain is unbelievable. Getting rid of all immaterial details and original research seems like a better idea all of the time...
 * I guess it is not a matter of how we deal with this, but when.
 * G.A.S 05:36, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, that one tripped me out a little too. And agreed, its primarily a matter of when to address rather than how. AnmaFinotera (talk) 06:47, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Merging proceeeding
Its been one week with no objections for the merges, as I believe you agree with them G.A.S.? If so, I am going to begin the merge process. AnmaFinotera (talk) 03:45, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I presume you mean the tagged ones (Saint Rose Crusaders, Masha (Tokyo Mew Mew), Chimera Anima, Ringo Akai and Cyniclons)? Yes, please, I am eager to see the finished products. (Please remember to tag the old articles with R from merge, and list the permanent links to the old articles in this article's edit history per GFDL requirements.)
 * We should try to find group pictures of the characters, as I believe we could picture all of the (major) characters in less than 5 pictures.
 * We can also propose the following merges, as there are painfully little information for these (if fancruft and trivial details are removed): Berry Shirayuki, Kish (Tokyo Mew Mew), Tart (Tokyo Mew Mew), Pie (Tokyo Mew Mew), Deep Blue (Tokyo Mew Mew), Ryou Shirogane, Keiichiro Akasaka, Tasuku Meguro.
 * G.A.S 05:02, 27 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed on those, which were going to be my next set :) Thanks for the reminder on the edit link. I use the templates but only recently learned about that GFDL requirement to put in the link in the edit summaries. :) I also agree on the pictures. While I tend to like to go with manga over anime when manga is the primary source, we're probably more likely to get good color pictures from the anime. Of course, with the anime, we're reduced to finding fansubs or promotional pictures. I'll check the official site to see if it has anything usable. I'll probably start the merges this weekend. I'm mostly just waiting for the shipment of my volumes of the manga to arrive, so I can reference to specific pages instead of just volumes. AnmaFinotera (talk) 05:21, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Merge additions and progress
(←) I have added the appropriate merger notices to more of the sub-articles (Berry Shirayuki, Kish (Tokyo Mew Mew), Tart (Tokyo Mew Mew), Pie (Tokyo Mew Mew), Deep Blue (Tokyo Mew Mew), Ryou Shirogane, Keiichiro Akasaka, Tasuku Meguro) as I feel that these articles fails the notability requirements, and that if the fancruft, trivia and excessive plot content is removed, these article's content will help to improve this list to featured list status. At this moment, no more improvement to these sub-articles are possible due to the lack of reliable secondary sources, so failing a merger, these content have no possible hope of achieving featured article or good article status. Some of these articles have very little content as things stand now, in any case. G.A.S 12:19, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Just found this template to tag the old redirects with CharR to list entry, it may be more appropriate than R from merge. G.A.S 05:58, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * So far so good, I think, on the merges. Six remaining, so I'd better get to reading A La Mode ;) Any thoughts on the merges so far? I've been sourcing as much as I can, and for each character I search for real world info. Unfortunately, despite the relative sales success of the Tokyo Mew Mew manga, I have found almost no reviews from reliable sources on it and, of course, the anime has even fewer reviews due to never being released to DVD. :(  Once the merges are done, I'll recheck all of the volumes for any additional development info, though so far only Masha has any at all.


 * I'd also like to suggest adding The Blue Knight to the merge list. Not sure how he was left out, but he's about the same level as Deep Blue, I think, with even less information available. Thoughts? AnmaFinotera (talk) 03:21, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I would say great work on the mergers so far! Unfortunately, I believe most interviews – if any – would be in Japanese:(. There are only a few sources with interviews that I am actually aware of; and the Japanese Wikipedia does not have a "reception" section (that could have been translated; or followed to the source, and added from there.); nor do I believe that the other languages' Wikipedia's has sources we are interested in:(. It might be worth revisiting them again, though.


 * I believe the Blue Knight section can be expanded. Did you read through that article yet? It seems that it is better written than most of the character's articles – for the most part – and where possible, to be sourced to the manga. Could you indicate what information would be left out in case of a merger? It seems to me that the writing style agrees to that used in the list, so any merger would likely be "cut and paste" (minus removed OR/...). G.A.S 05:24, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks :) I'm going to try to remember go to Hastings this week to see if the 2nd edition of the Anime Encyclopedia I have has an entry on Tokyo Mew Mew, and if so if it goes into character details. So far, the only book mentions I've found was a rather humorous one: Mint mentioned in one sentence, along with Usagi from Sailor Moon, in a book on hairstyles in the Odongo section! :P


 * So far the only thing I've left out of the mergers is anything unsourcable, physical descriptions, and minor details (so and so tripped on page X kinda thing :P). If there is some indication of a source and it seems pertinent, I've kept with a fact tag. Just took a look at the Blue Knight's article. Its certainly better than most, so it wouldn't require as much work, but the prose needs tightening to better clarify manga vs anime, and to remove the "seems" and the unsourced aspects (like the supposition about the Mew Mew power episode being a pun). I don't think much would be left out, though, mostly just rearranged and reworded a bit. And the refs fixed to use the same formatting as the rest. :) AnmaFinotera (talk) 05:34, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * If you don't mind, please edit the article accordingly on the article's page first — please keep move edits, remove edits, source cleanup edits, and "tightening" edits separate, as I would like to go through the diffs on this one:) — before I can comment on a merger go-ahead. G.A.S 05:46, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay. However, keep in mind that all of the articles do still fail WP:FICT as they all lack real-world information. It will be awhile yet before I get to working on that one, as I plan to finish the agreed on merges first. AnmaFinotera (talk) 07:21, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I actually suspected that they will be merged in time, however in this case I would like some more information than "Before" and "After";). I like the way you combined the "aliens" into one section with subsections, it looks very professional. I believe the same could be done with the other sections as well (esp. Protagonists), but we'll cross that bridge when we get to it. G.A.S 10:47, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks! :) One other thought I had last night while my insomnia was on a roll, if not a merge here (for now), how about a merge to Masaya's page? It would be in keeping with how we have the rest. Alto is covered as part of Ryo's section/article, as are the individual Mew Ichigo/Mew Mint, etc. The Blue Knight is Masaya's alter ego so it would make sense to cover it with him rather than considering it a separate character. Deep Blue is a separate personality all together, that is killed, but in a La Mode, Masaya specifically notes he's lost most of his Blue Knight powers but can still sense the Mew Mews being in danger. What do you think? AnmaFinotera (talk) 11:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Whichever way works better:) The rest of the mergers are very well done, so you are free to merge both of them here in any case. I am not sure how/if the Blue Knight → Masaya merge would work, as they are for the most of the series separate characters. Also, considering that Deep Blue is also Masaya, the combined article would be incomplete:(, so maybe it is better to merge both here? G.A.S 18:44, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I thought about that, but I think the final volume makes it fairly clear that Deep Blue and Masaya shared one body, but were different personalities. I kinda wish they had explained it better (or maybe its a translation issue), though from what I gathered, Deep Blue "created" Masaya then went to sleep, so Masaya became a separate individual and soul. I wish there were more reviews for the series, especially the end. :P And thanks! I've finally read half of a La Mode (the Ballad of Shinigami novel claimed my reading time for the last few days), and will read the second part tonight so I can tackle the rest of the ones in the list.  Then we can revisit the remaining separate ones to see if they can be brought to FICT standards or should be merged. The biggest obstacle, I think, is the severe lack of reviews and coverage of the series as a whole, much less the individual characters. :(AnmaFinotera (talk) 18:50, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I never attempted to understand the whole DB/M/BK thing—since he/they are but a fictional character:), but thanks for explaining. I agree that it would have been much better if more reviews were available, or if the writers explained the issue in one of the books (since only they could truly "know" this).

Remaining mergers
(←)The remaining characters would require sections at least as long as the others, so we may just as well end up with the list entry in any case (As the individual articles would not add any value, unless they are backed up with real world information). I believe that the current articles are lacking most of the information that is required by WP:MOS-ANIME. If this cannot be added, they would have very little good article potential. And we cannot have that, can we?. Maybe we should start assessing them sooner than later? (I would rather that, if merge tags are added, the discussions are held at the source articles, as that would allow us to properly assess the articles individually. (We should then link to those discussions from here). G.A.S 05:54, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, the default when tagging for merges is to discuss in the target page, though we could make new sections here for each if desired. I think it would be better to keep all the merge discussions central, since much of the discussion is here. For the rest of the articles instead of tagging straight for merging, we could start by tagging them for lack of Fict notability and letting discussion start from that to see if anyone can provide the necessary sourcing and info while the first stage of clean up begins? Would that work? AnmaFinotera (talk) 06:09, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Default: yes, Required: no. Ultimately the location does not matter; but it would help if the disussions are isolated from one another since arguments that are valid for one, is not necessarily valid for another (such details seem to go missing in group discussions).
 * Unfortunately, I have never seen the notability templates have any effect:(, so I believe that may be a waste of time.
 * Would it be possible to spend no more than 3 minutes per remaining article, and clear out trivial details and fancruft? (Which would be removed regardless of whether the articles are merged or not); That it might be easier to identify the amount of useful information?
 * G.A.S 18:52, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, I guess it depends. If you and I are the only active editors in the TMM articles right now, then yeah, the notability templates probably will not have much effect, but then neither will the merge tags :P For the merge discussions, I think its better to have them here, even if in individual sections for several reasons: 1, anyone coming to discuss it can see the history and what has already been done, and 2, if the articles are all merged here instead of being hidden over in now redirecting pages. I haven't really seen that anyone is active on any of the TMM articles anymore, besides you and I, since User:Angelofdeath275 was indefinitely blocked back in December. I'll try clearing out some of the crufy and trivial details either tonight or tomorrow on the articles not already tagged for merging to see what's left. AnmaFinotera (talk) 05:07, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * My point with the tags are as follow:
 * Q: How many Wikipedians does it take to change a lightbulb?
 * A: Zero. Just tag the light bulb as and let someone else worry about it!—Wikipedia humor
 * The purpose of any merge tags are to let others know our intention — notability tags does not.
 * And yes, at the moment only we are active here (To be honest, mostly you—thanks:) ), so any tags are probably just a formality. I actually believe very few people have ever been active in these articles; and definitely not in a long time. G.A.S 05:36, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Tee hee on the joke. :P I've now done Mint, Lettuce, Pudding, and Zakuro so far. I mostly just removed the extra stuff, per my edit summary. Many still need rewriting beyond some quick stuff to fix the grammar, remove repeating statements, and just improve the prose order and flow over all. Thoughts on what's left? AnmaFinotera (talk) 05:51, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Eish! That means that virtually all of them could easily be merged into the list. Too bad about the remaining pictures, which were really good. G.A.S 06:10, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah...Just finished Masaya and his isn't much better. Gotta give two points for the imaginative theories some folks came up with on stuff though (and their brazen declaring of some of those articles to be B class!). :P I also did a brief clean up of The Blue Knight, but not the rewrite were talking about earlier. That's all of them but Ichigo's, which will take the most work, but also has the most potential (barely) to remain separate. AnmaFinotera (talk) 06:19, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Would you mind adding the appropriate merge tags, or would you prefer to wait until the current mergers have been completed? With the current content it does seem like most of them can quite easily be merged.
 * Some of the removed content are appropriate to the "Production" section of the main article (Differences between the anime and the manga); consider expanding on this in the main article.
 * G.A.S 06:36, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll wait until the current is done so as not to get the two parts mixed up conversation wise. The problem is that quite a bit of the changes stuff was not sourced, but eventually it does need that sort of content, in a more general manner, discussing changes made from one to the other. BTW, finally added one picture, of the Mew girls. Thoughts? AnmaFinotera (talk) 02:58, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * RE: the changes between the manga and the anime — we can continue that conversation on the main article's talk page, it is the proper forum:). RE: The picture, yes, I saw it, and believe it is a good choice; esp. the description. Could you please add the website where it was obtained under the image's source in the table; I believe that is also required? G.A.S 05:32, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * For a poster, we can also just note it is a scan of the physical poster, but I've added a URL to give credit to the person who actually did the scanning. :) Now, to tackle the chimera anima merge. AnmaFinotera (talk) 05:54, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Another Update and Revisit the Minors
Only two left, Berry and Tasuku which I'll hopefully get done this weekend. In doing the Saint Rose Crusaders section, I went ahead and mirrored the aliens by giving each their own paragraph. I also decided to list them by their code names as it is never made clear if the names two use are their real ones or aliases, and only part of a third's is said. Duke's section was hard to right due to the ambiguity about his/her gender. For Sweet Juliet, the Tokyopop versions say female so unless reliable sources specifically say he was male in the Japanese, the discussion on that has been removed. For an update, there are two characters left and the page is now at 60k with 106 references.

Should we revisit the section on minor characters section at this point and reconsider whether to keep or leave, or wait until the remaining merges are done? AnmaFinotera (talk) 05:53, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


 * 60k ... not too bad? Although I rather we see what the effect of the main characters' mergers are. We can have peer/FL review decide on the minors, as it is only a small section, any recommendation from them will be quick to impliment.
 * It seems to me that the "Saint Rose Crusaders", section will require copy-editing, as the writing seems to be "in-universe" (The others to a much lesser extent). See WP:WAF and Guide to writing better articles.
 * G.A.S 09:45, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


 * There is so little on them, its hard to say much about them at all. Its funny how trying to write their section made me realize they are like a huge plot hole in a La Mode. Most is going to be more in-universe than not, though, as there is little information about any of the characters. Masha, somewhat ironically, has the most real-world info because of Tokyo Black Cat Girl. AnmaFinotera (talk) 16:56, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The solution would probably be more of a style change: eg. Instead of "The teenagers were all born with special powers..." consider "According to the story, Royal Highness, Happy Child, Blue Bayou and Sweet Juliet were all born with special powers...".
 * It also seem that you are only retelling the story: "Royal Highness is furious when his face is scratched by Berry, but Happy Child makes him retreat." Why is this important? This seems like detail plot retelling only.
 * "Sweet Juliet seems to have trouble focusing at times" OR? Consider: "On page x of it is shown that...".
 * It seems that this section will need a major trim and cleanup, unfortunately. (Which would not be so difficult to tell you had I not seen the quality of the rest of the article.)
 * G.A.S 18:19, 20 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah, got you. I'll give it another pass through. I think part of that one was just in having to retool the whole article from before. :) AnmaFinotera (talk) 20:04, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay...that's the last one done (for now). Wee! Want to tackle giving it a copy edit? Where shall we go from here? AnmaFinotera (talk) 01:38, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Nice:). I have already read through the rest, so I only need to visit the newest mergers, which I will do soon. I guess we should merge the other characters as well? We may(?) justify an article for Ichigo, but am not too sure about the rest. How about merging BK, MA, LM, ZF, PF, in that order? G.A.S 10:21, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Which MA? Masaya or Mint (or both) :P AnmaFinotera (talk) 16:56, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


 * MaA, BK, MiA, LM, ZF, PF — Thought Masaya was done by now...:) G.A.S 18:43, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Sounds good to me. You want to add the tags or should I? AnmaFinotera (talk) 19:14, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Does not really matter:) I will only be able to continue editing tomorrow, so if you would like to have it added before then, it would be up to you; otherwise I will add them. G.A.S 20:03, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Done. AnmaFinotera (talk) 20:19, 27 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I did a word count on the article: It is currently 42k of readable prose. There is clearly more than enough space left for the new mergers—which if existing characters are an example—would be 3K to 4K each. G.A.S 08:10, 30 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Cool. :) I'll probably start in another day or two, or this weekend. Wanted to let the tags sit a bit, see if anyone objected, and give my brain a Mew Mew break ;) AnmaFinotera (talk) 14:10, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, they've all been tagged nearly two weeks with no oppositions, so I'll try to get started on the merging this weekend, brain allowing. :) I've also added a notability tag to Ichigo. So far, I've found no extensive coverage to help her meet WP:FICT, so maybe tagging might wake someone up (though I suspect not). AnmaFinotera (talk) 04:59, 10 May 2008 (UTC)


 * That long already? Best of luck on them, I am looking forward to the final result!
 * Are there any development information about the (individual) characters out there (as it is usually the most interesting part in the articles)? If there are any available, it should be added to the article in addition to reviewers' comments.
 * G.A.S 20:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC)


 * So far, no, the only one with any development information is Masha, which is already included, and the video game folks that's in the main article. :( AnmaFinotera (talk) 23:38, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Mint
The merger is seems quite good. Her introduction in the Anime is somewhat different: do you think we need to expand on it here? Or in the main article? As for the voice actor change: We should attempt to keep it the same throughout, so either this one, or the rest will need to be changed at some time. I believe one of the more recent discussions was regarding the use of this template, but I cannot seem to find it now. Do you know where the discussion was (I believe it was re. naming convension, where the use of the template would make it seem that the Anime is the original format where it was not)? G.A.S 06:05, 2 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, it I think it was at the MoS talk page. The Naruto character list up at peer review as well is using the style used here in Mint's. I wanted to try it out here and get feedback before changing them all over. The differences in the meeting should be different, but I'm still working out the wording so each of the Mew Mew sections won't sound too repetitive. :)--  AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 06:12, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Last ones
Okay, Lettuce, Pudding, and Zakuro have finally been merged as well. Now we just need to deal with the lead, decide what to do with Ichigo, and find the missing episode citations. Also, those three sections need a quick review, though I tried to do some copyediting as I worked. ~goes to rest her brain~ -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 03:04, 15 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I will review and provide the citations, but only after the main article is done (Although I did not see specific issues during a quick review:) ). I noticed that you used the spelling "café" - we should try to be consistent throughout the articles. Shall we use this spelling throughout?
 * Lets add Ichigo here for now. We can always split the content if it seems too long. It is also easier to check for consistency.
 * G.A.S 08:34, 15 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I think, when its said as "the café" or "a café" (i.e. lower case), we should use the accent. When saying "Cafe Mew Mew", though, no accent as there isn't one in any of the Tokyopop volumes indicating there isn't one in the name. I'll add that tag for Ichigo. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 17:06, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Merged articles talk pages and assessments
I have noticed that the article assessment of the articles being merged here have stayed the same (e.g. start class); as such I have asked what Version 1.0 Editorial Team's recommendation is in these cases. Their recommendation is that we just remove the Wikiproject's details from the page.

In the same breath, maybe we should archive each of the affected talk pages, and add links to those archives to the archive box on this page.

Your opinion?

G.A.S 05:08, 4 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, normally I remove all project templates, and if there is any relevant discussion, I moved it to the archive here. I thought I'd cleared them all from the project after merging. I must have missed some. Just went through and found a few I forgot to do and fixed those. Let me know if you see any others. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 05:11, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Character... Deletion?
Please excuse me, I'm not very good at talk pages. XD I'm am a big fan of Mew Ringo, and it warms the cockles of my heart when she is mentoined on Tokyo Mew Mew websites. Of course, theres been a wiki article for her before an offical profile even came online. I read you planned to delete the character articles, and as much as I kinda thought "y'know, there really isn't a limited amount of space on the internet" I didn't mind much. But, I checked tonight to see all the mews have kept their articles... save Ringo. Now, if Ringo's article was paticularly small and limited, I would understand, but everything was reasonable. Seeing as Mew Berry kept her article, I was confused. I understood you guys can be *coughrudecommentanalretantivecoughrudecommentcough* picky... but seeing as she is mentoined in the main article about four times, and isn't mentoined in the character page (most likely a slip), and you also got rid of the games article... she seems to be getting the short end of the stick. ~Moonie (aka, crazy nooby Ringo fan.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.122.162.88 (talk) 04:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Article deletion is not an issue of space on Wikipedia. Wikipedia has guidelines and policies which help determine if any given article should exist. Fictional character articles rarely meet those guidelines. Ringo's articles is one of many that does not meet the requirements for existing, having no real-world significant and no significant coverage in third party, reliable sources. She is mentioned in the main article because her individual article, which fails Wikipedia guidelines for existance, was merged into the main rather than here. This list is specifically for the characters in the manga and anime series, not those in the single video game. Mew Berry is the central character of the second manga series, hence her being here. What is said about Ring in the main article is about all that can be said about her from available sources. The game isn't licensed, and little additional information is available about her from . The game articles were removed as they also fail Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Being unlicensed, and seemingly little known even in Japan, what can be said about them from sourced material is already said in the main article.


 * The merging in of individual articles has not been completed. Whether the remaining Mews will keep their articles is a matter for debate. There is very little information about the series as a whole from reliable sources, making it very difficult to justify even Mew Ichigo's article. Those discussions will take place shortly, and if you'd like to join in you may, but leave the rude comments (even disguised ones) from someplace else please. We frown on such impoliteness in discussions as they do not aid conversations, only hinder them.AnmaFinotera (talk) 04:58, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * How has the video game been dubbed "below" the manga, manga spinoff, and the anime? It's a 20 hr game, and there is plenty of story. I know atl east six people who have finished the game, 3 of them who understood at least part of it. Ringo is pretty much the central character of the video game, when you think about it. You play as Ichigo- but the plot really revolves mostly around her. I don't see why you couldn't add the characters of the game- it's not like readers are going to get all nitpicky. If you were to make the video game characters their own section, that would be an article with low standards, do to "lack of offical information". People read wikipedia to get information. Ringo, is very little known. If all you post is what they already know from their manga book- we've got "ringo noobs" as I call them, running around with false information and spreading rumors. ~Moonie —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.122.162.88 (talk) 14:23, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * We only post what can be sourced from reliable sources (not necessarily official, but reliable). The video game is unlicensed, and very little is said about it in Japan, much less here. Core Wikipedia policy is not "what someone thinks they know" but verifiability. It isn't the readers being "nitpicky," its called adhering to the quality standards of Wikipedia and sticking to sourcable, notable data. There are plenty of Tokyo Mew Mew fansites that have all sorts of unsourced information. Wikipedia is not the place for such rumors, half-truths, and unverifiable information. Putting such information here would, in fact, do what you claim you don't want to be done, giving people false information. AnmaFinotera (talk) 14:32, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually I believe the appropriate policy applicable is undue weight; which states that "NPOV says that the article should fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by a reliable source, and should do so in proportion to the prominence of each." and "An article should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject, but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject." The fact that there are very few (almost none, to be honest) reliable sources available about the character means that she has very little real world prominence to the story, and as such, only a small portion of text is devoted to the character. I hope this helps. G.A.S 15:12, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Exactly how many of you people complaining there are no reliable sources on Mew Ringo have read the manga? Apparently none. As a Ringo fanatic, I've made sure that all the information I collect on her is accredited and I must say that you're a sorry bunch for not having been able to come up with a single source of information for her. First off, if the Phoenix Wright games can have articles and be counted as sources for such so can the Tokyo Mew Mew game. Simply because some of you view it as lower importance, doesn't mean that it is. Also, she is mentioned at least twice in the back of the Tokyo Mew Mew Mangas in two diffrent volumes, information that I can provide you with if you deem it necessary. Also, she doesn't only appear in video game as she has also made appearances in the Petite Mew Mew section of the mangas. By getting rid of Ringo, your deeming her not an important character. All I have to say to that, is if you plan on getting rid of Ringo you have to take down Berri too. She's no more main than Ringo is and far less important.


 * MewBlackberri (talk) 19:11, 16 June 2008 (UTC)


 * First off, if you intend to discuss things on Wikipedia, I suggest you read the civility policy. Insulting others will not get your view heard, but will likely get you blocked in a hurry. As for reading the manga, I have now read the entire manga, both TMM and a la Mode, no less than 10 times in working on this character list. There are no reliable third party sources on Ringo. The only sourceable information about Ringo comes from Ikumi's notes, which is a primary source, and even those are only a few bits and pieces. She has no notability at all, and what little info there is about her is already adequately covered in the main Tokyo Mew Mew article's video game section about that specific, single game. There are no reviews available from reliable sources on this game, so there is no other information about her. Ringo is already gone form the list, and will remain gone as there video game characters are outside of the scope of this list. Her minor appearances in the Petite Mew side stories is also of no relevance as those side stories are, again, not notable nor mentioned at all.


 * And no, we don't "have to take down" Berry, she is at least mentioned in third party sources, such as reviews of a la mode. She is also the central character of the manga sequel, well within the scope of the list. Your comparison to Phoenix Wright is somewhat laughable. Phoenix Wright is an actual notable video game, licensed, with plenty of significant third-party coverage. The Mew Mew games are not. They aren't even covered that much in Japanese websites, much less English ones. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 19:19, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Saint Rose Crusaders
Items requiring further cleanup
 * "His primarily appearance in a La Mode is in making the first attack against Mew Berry by posing as a special lecturer at her school" — Making?? There has to be a better way to say this.
 * "Happy Child first shows himself to the Mew Mews when..." Is this the character's first appearance in the manga? We should information about the introduction of each of the characters to the reader.

Excessive plot detail? I rather the plot detail is left to the manga plot descriptions and we stick to descriptions of the characters – not their actions here. I have summarised the following from WP:MOS-ANIME:
 * Lead: ..., including that this is a fictional character, who she or he was created by, what works he or she appears in, her or his role in these works, and why he or she is notable.
 * Information about the character revealed in the story goes in this section—note, however, it should maintain out-of-universe prose (see Writing about fiction for guidance) and should not be mistakable for a biography. ... special attributes/abilities... Citations to the series as primary sources are appropriate here, though for personality and other aspects that require reader/viewer interpretation, reviewer/critical/academic comments are strongly desired.
 * Development / Production notes: Out-of-universe information about the creation process, including influences upon the CREATORS.
 * Reception: Out-of-universe information on responses to, popularity of, and influences upon OTHERS.

G.A.S 11:19, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't think its excessive plot detail. They have a pretty small paragraph each out of a two volume series. Some context needs to be given for the characters, and all of the other character sections include information on their major points in the plot. Our FA/GA character articles have 2-3 larger paragraphs of plot, usually, in addition to the reception and creation/conception info. We have none of that information available at all, so for Saint Rose, its going to be almost all plot and that's fine I think. We can't add what doesn't exist.


 * For the specific points, if you can think of another word for making, please go ahead and replace. Performing sounded odd considering he was attacking, and launched sounded to military to me. :P No, it wasn't Happy Child's first appearance in the manga, only to the Mews. All four Crusaders and Duke are shown to readers talking about their plan to kill Berry and eat her. "We should information about the introduction of each of the characters to the reader." Huh? AnmaFinotera (talk) 14:41, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Can we add a bit more about physical appearances?
 * We should include information about the introduction of each of the characters to the reader.;)
 * G.A.S 15:35, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


 * There isn't much else to add about the appearances, without treading the OR territory because no reviewers commented on them specifically besides Duke's robes. I'll add a note on the intro to readers tonight when I can check the page number. AnmaFinotera (talk) 16:24, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Some more questions
Please clarify the following: G.A.S 17:27, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
 * "Tasuku and the Mew Mews rescues Berry and Royal Highness retreats after his defeat is pointed out by Happy Child." — Is this Happy Child's last appearance? If not, are further appearances important or only minor appearances?
 * "Duke admits their methods were wrong after Berry breaks the spell on Tasuku and the brainwashing done to the citizens of Tokyo to turn them against the Mew Mews." — Is this the conclusion of the manga?
 * "In the flashback where the Crusaders first met Duke, Happy Child is called "Utamaro""—by Duke?
 * "Happy Child attacks Berry by using his ultra-sonic attack, but Berry is able to defeat him when she is joined by Mew Ichigo."—and then...?
 * "They then publically accuse the Mew Mews of betraying everyone one, and with the use of more subliminal messages, are able to turn the public against the Mews Mews"—everyone – who? // and then...?
 * "but also notes that she "guesses" Berry deserves it." —and then...?


 * No, its his first appearance before the Mew Mews. Royal Highness did the first attack. Other Mew Mews arrived, Happy Child appeared to take him back since he was out numbered. Happy Child later came to do attack two.
 * No, but it is the conclusion of their appearance. It goes on a little further to show the happy resolution with Berry and Tasuku and showing that the Mew Mews are all still friends and working at the cafe though they no longer need to fight.
 * No, one of the others calls him that when he runs to jump off the roof. I'll have to check the panel to see if its clear which one said it.
 * And then that's pretty much it for Happy Child except for minor background appearances
 * everyone = public. The public first surrounds the Mews, then decides Mew Berry made the others evil so they physically attack her. The crusaders do nothing more at that point but watch until its over and they change their ways.
 * That's it. It occurs when the public starts their attack on Mew Berry, but the Crusaders do nothing but watch. I only included it because she was the only Crusader to express any symphathy or other feelings regarding the Mew Mews besides a desire to kill them until its over.


 * Hope that helps. AnmaFinotera (talk) 17:57, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


 * "Tasuku and the Mew Mews rescues Berry and Royal Highness retreats after his defeat is pointed out by Happy Child." — Is this Royal Highness's last appearance? If not, are further appearances important or only minor appearances? G.A.S 05:21, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * It seems like all of the characters sections ends "incomplete", but it seems to me that this is the way the manga ends as well(?). Could we maybe mention to the effect of "that is it, and they are not seen again"? (I.e. something about their (or just Duke's?) change of heart(?), and deciding not to fight anymore?) G.A.S 05:29, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * It isn't his last appearance, but all the rest are very minor (pretty much just, seen in a panel with the rest of the group). After each one does their major attack, they fade into the background. After Duke's says she/he has realized he's wrong, they aren't seen again. And yes, alas a La Mode has quite a few plot holes and a rather abrupt end. I personally think it suffers badly from the loss of Reiko as the main story writer. Ikumi does great art, but her writing for a La Mode is not so good :( AnmaFinotera (talk) 05:46, 22 April 2008 (UTC)


 * If you can update the section with the following, we can consider it complete:
 * That each of them features in one major attack, and then fade into the background.
 * That they are not seen after Duke's change of heart.
 * The name of the character that calls Happy Child "Utamaro", or the fact that it is not specified.
 * The conclusion to the final fight in the SRC section. (Maybe move it from Duke's section?)
 * Regards, G.A.S 19:35, 22 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay...how's that? AnmaFinotera (talk) 20:09, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Very good:) This section is now much better than what we had.:)
 * Do you think we should consider adding the picture (in the old article) to the list (But add the names in the description)? I believe it would help to make up for the lack of descriptions for these characters.
 * G.A.S 05:33, 23 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I was thinking the same. I've put the old picture in for now, but going to see if there are any that have all 4 + Duke. AnmaFinotera (talk) 05:34, 23 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Is it just me or is the one at the centre in the back Duke? G.A.S 05:58, 23 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay...I'm tired, and yes it is :P AnmaFinotera (talk) 06:02, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Images
I'm going to actually go to WP:3O since WP:RFC recommends this if the dispute is between two editors. My stance is that the image at the top, which was previously 400px, was much too large to still pass fair use, though User:AnmaFinotera resized it down to 350px after a discussion on my talk page, though I think it should still be at most 300px. Also, the black/white image down below, while at 300px width, still appears very large due to it's length, and I think that it also needs to be resized smaller to comply with fair use guidelines.--  十  八  02:47, 25 May 2008 (UTC)


 * 3O works for me, as well, though considering you are basically arguing against the policy that allows 300 pixels to be the minimum size of the smallest dimension, not just height, it may be good to ask on the relevant policy page. I resized the first down so that its shortest dimension is 300px, and I resized it in the article. The image in the image space was borderline, so I agreed with that. As for its use in the article, if it fair use in the image space, its fair use in the article, and its size is only an issue of image placement guidelines, not fair use. It is the primary illustration of the list, and due to its placement, it helps full up the white space beside the large menu. I think this image placement is fine, as it mirrors that done in other similar character articles by a consensus of several folks, in lieu of having it at the top right corner.


 * However, I firmly believe that the second image perfectly meets all fair use requirements. I myself resized it to ensure compliance, and its smallest size is now at the 300px requirement. The full size would be the manga page itself, which would be thousands of pixels in width and height. Reducing the size would make the top character nearly impossible to distinguish, which would also violate the overall image use guidelines. That character is the leader of the group, and their particularly costume is discussed within their section because of its resemblance to the white robes worn by members of the Ku Klux Klan. --  AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 02:51, 25 May 2008 (UTC)


 * It's size does not just have to do with image placement guidelines. That's spelled out quite clearly at WP:FUC where it says, Low- rather than high-resolution/fidelity/bit rate is used (especially where the original could be used for deliberate copyright infringement). This rule also applies to the copy in the Image: namespace. This is instituted so we don't have an image 1000s of pixels large in the Image space, while it's only 300px in Article space. I realize you resized the top image down to 375px from 500px in the Image space, but I'd be willing (and I'm sure others as well) to argue that it should probably be no more than 300px in both Image and Article space.--  十 ' 八 ' 04:27, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, but if the image in the image name space meets the requirements, then it also meets them in the article. It can't be an okay size in the image, but not in the article as the image in the article will always be equal to or a LOWER resolution than the image space. The image meets the fair use requirements in the image name space, so it meets it in the article space. And, please look again, I resized the first image down to 300px on its shortest dimension, which is in perfect compliance to the rule. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs)
 * I believe fair use criteria is subject not only the main space, but to other space as well. For example, we can't have galleries in categories because of fair use. So the same rules apply to image space as in main article space, hence my opinion that the image in image space should also be resized down to 300px width. Plus, if we just resized down to the smaller dimension, in this case height smaller than width, then sometimes we may have a problem, like if the image was over 1000px in width, but only 300px in height.--  十  八  04:36, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Having a gallery is a whole other issues, its having too many non-free images, not an issue of size. In such an extreme case, the image would violate the basic Image use policies, which notes a max size of 550 in an article, not non-free. And really, comparing that to this is something of a red herring. For the first image, it is 350x280 in the article, again well within the compliance requirements. Shortest dimension is under 300. Full size image is 375 × 300. Exactly at 300, again well within the guidelines.


 * Resizing the second image down anymore, when it doesn't need to be and already meets all fair use requirements, will degrade the quality and viewable, making it less than useless. I think you are really misinterpreting what that statement was trying to say (i.e., don't try to put an image in an article at 300px width when the uploaded image is actually much larger and violating the fair use policy...it doesn't speak to this issue at all as the image in the image space meets all fair use requirements. Anyway, its obvious you and I are just going to continue in circles here, so how about just waiting for the 3O, though I'd still prefer the topic be brought up at WP:NONFREE since your request would be a de-facto change to the current standing policies by saying that it now much be 300px on the longest dimension instead of the shortest and it will result in dozens, if not hundreds, of images having to either be resized or deleted. That would the vast majority of our manga covers as they are usually 300x477 when good size covers can be found. Also all DVD covers and other book covers. And film posters, etc etc etc. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 04:45, 25 May 2008 (UTC)


 * No you misunderstand my intentions. Let's not talk numbers here, let's talk practicality. The first image is, currently, 350x280. Now, I have a fairly large resolution as we have discussed in the past, which leaves a vast amount of white space even with the image taking up the top corner of the space, but then I don't see why we should be clamoring to fill that space up when it's an unavoidable result of long table of contents. The point is that, in cases like this one, there will still be a great amount of white space, even if you try to fill it with some 350px image, and anything larger would be crazy (like if you tried to fill the entire white space with the image). Not to mention that large images generally look obstructive, such as IMO the second image, which stands at 275x445. I don't know about you, but in all the time I've been on wiki, I have seen very rarely images of this height and width used in articles. Most DVDs/book covers/film posters are held at 200px or less (230 or so in infoboxes). Look at Air (visual novel) at the DVD image down below. It's held at 175px in the article, and 227px in the image space. I don't have to tell you that Kano and Minagi are very hard to make out in that image, even in image space, but the reason it's not so large as to encompass the entire Anime section is for fair use purposes (and the fact, as I've said, that it would be obstructive for people with lower res screens). Think for a second about people with lower resolutions. That 445 fills more than half of my screen from top-bottom, and people with lower resolutions probably cannot even view the entire image in one screen; that is precisely why it should be resized, and is the reason the width limit is strictly held at 550px for those while lower res screens. I realize that the second image in this article provides context in regards to the KKK-looking costume, but I don't think we should start having the prose dictate if an image should be large or small. I know images are meant to be used to illustrate topics in an article, but we have fair use guidelines to dictate how they are used, and low-res images are always preferable to higher-res ones.--  十  八  05:09, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Again, the image is in keeping with all relevant guidelines and the size and placement of the first image was dictated by consensus. Both are in keeping with all guidelines and policies regarding non-free images and fair use and do not need changing. I've seen the very small images you have uploaded, and I think they are undersized to an excessive degree, making some, like the Air character images, not even really worth including at all (and, are of sizes I have myself replaced with larger more appropriate sizes in my editing). Fair use doesn't mean you have to make it so tiny no one will even bother looking at it. It means be fair. The sizes here are perfectly fair use, well within all non-free requirements for resolution, and provided appropriate illustration to the sections they are used in. Again, I feel you are making a horrible mountain out of an ant hill, and are really misinterpreting the policy in a way that is, frankly, detrimental the images you upload and use in articles. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 05:18, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Third opinion
My interpretation of the "low resolution" recommendation is that some scans are high enough resolution that the image, when reproduced on a printed page, is nearly indistinguishable from the original work. There is no hard requirement for "no more than 300 pixels wide" or whatever, such that an image fails to be fair use if you're 1 pixel bigger. To reproduce a high-quality picture, you'd need far greater resolution than the 300 or 400 pixel images being discussed here. The sizes used currently in this article seem adequate to me. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:45, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Fact check
In the last section, I observed 5 brothers and sisters. Is this correct? I thought it was 4 brothers and 1 sister. G.A.S 10:47, 1 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I believe it is 4 and 1. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 14:01, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Minor Characters
Thought it was about time to revisit this issue...should the minor character section stay? They are already mentioned, briefly, in the relevant character sections where necessary, so I don't think it is a necessary section, and is only serving to up the page size. Thoughts? -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 07:26, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Quick review
A quick review follows. G.A.S talk 06:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The article has quite a few "Citation needed" and "Episode needed" tags (14 in total).
 * The TOC is very long, even distracting. Consider moving it below the first image (right align).
 * The titles in the reference list are quite long, but only have a few different sources. Consider converting them to Shortened footnotes. (Maybe we should address this on WP:MOS-ANIME).


 * Working on the cites slowly. I added a limit on the TOC...is that better? I don't quite get the last one? Do you mean have a section listing all the books with footnotes for page numbers? I don't like doing that at all, as I find it fairly useless (as a reader). Per the guidelines, I believe Shortened footnotes is purely option and up to editor discretion (like most of the referencing systems) -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 07:25, 21 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Third one clarified above. I know that it is optional, but currently it is quite difficult to scan through the list of footnotes. There are just too many, all of which line breaks. This would allow one to at least skip listing the author, ISBN and release date each and every time. (I.e. just list Title, publisher and pages for each citation). G.A.S talk 07:39, 21 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Another option on the sourcing would be to do like Naruto's list and reference the chapters without the specific page numbers. That would reduce the manga references to 29 individual refs reused a few times. I prefer specific page numbers myself, but that could be a compromise to reduce the refs without the shortened thing and seems acceptable for the FL process. What do you think? -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 02:14, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * That is a viable option. You can always leave the page numbers as comment should it be required later. G.A.S talk 05:52, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * One question though...would we use the English chapter divisions, or the original Japanese ones? -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 03:07, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * That would depend on the source you are using:) English source=English divisions, Japanese source=Japanese divisions. G.A.S talk 04:52, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * True :) I'm using all English right now, so will keep going with the English divisions. Glad they only did that combined chapter thing for the first two volumes though ;-) -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 04:55, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, all done. Also did added missing episode airdates. Now...what to do about the few cite episodes/fact tags remaining? Take it out until we can find it? -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 03:40, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

More items. -- G.A.S talk 20:32, 21 January 2009 (UTC)


 * All done :) Let me know if those changes work. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 07:10, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Edit point
Copied from User talk:AnmaFinotera for easier referencing here (in response to asking Sephiroth BCR to take a quick look and offer some suggestions: Need to mention the conception/reception in the lead. And also, the character entries are way too long. Remember the job of the character list is not to regurgitate plot points; it's to give a general description of the character. The only plot points you should mention are those that result in a significant change for the character in personality or some other aspect. Even in the most plot-intensive series, I doubt you ever need to exceed two decent-sized paragraphs, three if absolutely necessary. Give List of Naruto characters a harder look, especially in the character entries, before you go for a peer review and copy-edit. —  sephiroth bcr  ( converse ) 11:46, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Guess trying to cut each section down some more will be the next task. :) -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 14:01, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I was thinking the same thing... just needed someone to confirm it. Though I rather that is two paragraphs of plot information per character; i.e. excluding out of universe information where available. Remember that List of Naruto characters uses subarticles for thee major articles. Also put in a request at WP:ANIME/ASSESS when done before going for PR. G.A.S talk 16:15, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * That's kind of what I was thinking. For more minor characters, I think I can cut back to one, but for the majors, I think two, maybe three is fine since they don't have separate articles and three versions of the series to cover. I've redone Masha and Tart so far to try to make it briefer...thoughts? -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 16:29, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * The rewrites seems better than before. Part of the length seems to be due to duplication, for instance relationships between characters. Not sure if anything can be done about this. Some of the reception info from Berry, Duke, Tasuku, can also be moved to reception. This will help to centralize this info.
 * With regard to should Masha out of universe stuff be moved to creation/conception? — merge "Masha is the only character from Ikumi's Tokyo Black Cat Girl—the short story that would later become Tokyo Mew Mew—to retain his original name and general appearance. However, in Tokyo Black Cat Girl Masha is depicted as a male intergalactic police officer who partners with Princess Azumi to defeat alien parasites called the Baku." to creation to avoid duplication.
 * G.A.S talk 20:57, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Review (March 2009)
I had a look at the article per the request on my userpage. The following should be addressed before any FLC attempt is to be made:
 * The article needs a copy edit, e.g.
 * The Mew Project itself, however, was started by Dr. Shirogane, Ryou Shirogane's father, five years before the time when Tokyo Mew Mew is set. It was started by Dr. Shirogane, the father of Ryou Shirogane. 
 *  In the The manga, it is never fully explained explains why the project was started or how they knew about chimera animas and the aliens . , but Dr. Shirogane does mention s that they must learn how to inject animal genes into human DNA in order to fight the aliens.
 *  In the The anime, it is said that shows that Dr. Shirogane discovered the fossilized remains of an ancient civilization, called the Chimera, during an archaeological dig . He and began researching the race of people who lived there , with his assistant Keiichiro Akasaka , in a laboratory based at his home.  – Not sure how important that last part is.
 * When Ryou was 10 years old, a A laboratory explosion killed Dr. Shirogane, and his wife when Ryou was 10 years old , leaving Ryou him orphaned. He moved to Japan , with Keiichiro to continue the Mew Project. In the The anime , shows that the lab explosion was caused by a Chimera fossil that Dr. Shirogane had found waking up woke up and set ting the house on fire.
 * In the main Tokyo Mew Mew – this is implied(?).
 * (I have only had a detailed look up to the second paragraph of "Mew Mews" in this regard.)
 * to "reclaim it" – reference needed.
 * "stronger tactics will be needed. " – closing quotation mark needed.


 * The level of detail seems fine for me. I'd say the article is probably up to B class and I recommend requesting an assessment in this regard.

Good work. Regards, G.A.S talk 04:55, 27 March 2009 (UTC)


 * All done and thanks :) -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 07:29, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Here are some further suggestions. I will again continue later. G.A.S talk 05:23, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks, all implemented. For the other question on the editor, Ikumi never mentions any of them by name in her production notes. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 05:36, 31 March 2009 (UTC)


 * More suggestions. I'd recommend watching the sandbox if you are not doing so already. G.A.S talk 05:14, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Implemented and added :) -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 05:35, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

From hidden comments: G.A.S: Expand: This is not always the case. Refer episode 19 AnmaFinotera: in 19 she can't always do it when desired?


 * According to episode 19, this only happens in the presence of Mew Aqua. (This is again the case in a later episode) Furthermore, she cannot swim otherwise. G.A.S talk 05:46, 8 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay, I guess that's a difference in the adaptations. Will note so :) -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 06:00, 8 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Interesting:) Some more copy-edits can be found here. G.A.S talk 09:39, 8 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I think that I am done, but the lead still needs a rewrite. G.A.S talk 17:22, 8 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Awesomeness, thanks! I'll try to get that lead done this week, and do the last of the CE updates later today. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 18:25, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Explanation of edits
Hello AnmaFinotera (and other editors, but it seems to be mainly you here),

My edits, or at least most of them, were reverted because "no reason [was] given for removing content and changes result in excessive quotes." I am restoring my edits (your minor additional edit is intact), and will give reasons for each of them here.

A quote was mistakenly attributed to Carlo Santos. I noticed that two sentences cited the same source, one directly after another. After searching Santos' review, I could not find the quote attributed to him. After a quick Google search, I found that the correct source was Mike Dungan of Mania Entertainment. I then noticed the following:
 * The primary issue


 * The new characters introduced in Tokyo Mew Mew a La Mode received more mixed reviews. Mania Entertainment's Mike Dungan found new Mew Mew Berry Shirayuki to be a "fun character" due to her energy and cheerfulness and found Tasuku to be a well-crafted complement, praising the way his seeming clinginess avoids being annoying.[86] However, Janet Crocker of Anime Fringe felt Berry was an overly shallow heroine that just mirrored the life Mew Ichigo (from the original Tokyo Mew Mew) in a shorter form and she dismissed the Saint Rose Crusaders' costumes and plans as being nothing more than concepts borrowed from Sailor Moon. She also criticized the specific design used for the character Duke, whose white robe she felt was too similar to those used by the white supremacy group, the Ku Klux Klan.[61] Anime News Network's Carlo Santos disagreed, feeling Berry acted like a "typical preteen girl" without crossing the line into being a potentially annoying and avoids the appearance of being a standard "a marketable character trying to rack up charm points".[87] He also felt that Tasuku was "an excellent complement to [Berry]" and found his "outgoing charm and clinginess ... surprisingly never annoying".[87]

Both bolded portions had undoubtedly come from Dungan's review, since they read almost identically, the primary difference being that one paraphrases and the other quotes. I found the paraphrase to be slightly off ("excellent" doesn't necessarily imply "well-crafted" in particular, and "seeming clinginess avoids being annoying" sounded a bit awkward to me), so I removed the quote and used it to replace the paraphrase.

In retrospect, however, I do agree that my solution resulted in too many quotes in close proximity to one another. In my revert, I have rewritten the sentence:
 * ...cheerfulness and found Tasuku to be a well-crafted complement, praising the way his seeming clinginess avoids being annoying.
 * ...cheerfulness. He also found Tasuku to be a great complement to Berry, praising the way that his seeming clinginess avoids becoming annoying.

I split the sentence into two since it seems to increase clarity and dampen the effect of using "found" twice so close together.


 * Other issues
 * Moving Santos' quote - The quote relates to Berry, and all other comments related to Berry were at the top of the paragraph
 * Removing "disagreed" and "however" - The content and new positioning of the statements suggested that they were not in direct contrast to one another
 * Removing phrase "the white supremacy group" - This phrase is already used in the lead section, and thus is redundant
 * Switching quotation marks and periods - In cases where the original quote ends with a period, the rule is to go with "...quote." rather than "...quote".
 * Replacing "just" with "simply" - More formal tone
 * Addition of commas - To increase readability
 * Fixing date in reference - The "date" parameter in Santos' reference read "ate", and thus did not display
 * Replacing the first of the following two lines with the second:
 * ...without crossing the line into being a potentially annoying and avoids the appearance of being a standard "a marketable character..."
 * ...with the potential to become annoying, but avoided the appearance of being "a marketable character..."
 * In addition to the multiple grammatical problems with the former sentence, the original quote specifically says that Berry is potentially annoying ("While Berry has the potential to become insufferable..." ), while the former sentence suggests the opposite ("without crossing the line").

I must say that I generally admire the quality of the Tokyo Mew Mew articles, and sometimes even use them as a guideline when editing. However, I made several improvements and fixed a rather serious referencing error, and those changes were reverted. I admit that I should have been more specific with my edit summaries, but the phrase "redundant and misattributed quote" is quite clearly present, and should surely have been a tip-off of something worth looking at more closely before reverting.

I would ask that in the future before reverting, you take more care to see whether the edits are actually unconstructive. Thank you. tktktk (talk) 08:20, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I have undone your edits, again, and will ask you to respect WP:BRD. I'm glad you admire the quality of the TMM articles, and encourage their use as a guideline in editing anime/manga articles as all but the episode list are featured content. I am glad you spotted the error in the citations, and I have restored those corrections. However, your moving of the quote was inappropriate, as they are grouped by date/reviewer, not character. I did tweak the Santos remarks to address your concern that the paraphrase was a misstatement. And yes "the white supremacy group" is in the lead. The lead is a summary of the list, and therefore everything in it must be cited in the article itself, hence its being there twice. This is done in all high quality articles and is part of Wikipedia's stylistic methodology. I have refixed the quote/period issue. The rest of the issues which you say are grammar issues, I disagree. This article was copyedited by no less than THREE editors during its FLC a few weeks ago, and none had any problem with the use of the word "just" nor noted any need for additional commas. And no, "fixed redundant and misattributed quote)" wasn't clearly seen from your edit at that time. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 15:52, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I do apologize for not having followed WP:BRD. I have only recently become more involved in editing Wikipedia, so I was not familiar with that essay. However, after looking into the "revert" portion of Bold, Revert, Discuss, this is what I found:


 * Revert vandalism and other abusive edits upon sight but revert a good faith edit only as a last resort. A reversion can eliminate "good stuff," discourage other editors, and spark an edit war. So if you feel the edit is unsatisfactory, then try to improve it, if possible - reword rather than revert. Similarly, if only part of an edit is problematic then consider modifying only that part instead of reverting the whole edit - don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.


 * I don't wish to pursue this matter any further, but suffice it to say that at this moment there is at least one obvious, indisputable grammatical error in the Reception section that I had fixed in my original edits, and that you have reverted not once but twice. This alone suggests that your current approach to reversion may not be the best one. tktktk (talk) 16:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Ucha
Just a quick question: Why does it say in one part of the page that Ucha is R3000, and in another part of the page he's R2003? Did they change it when they translated it? 98.217.132.179 (talk) 13:31, 29 August 2009 (UTC)


 * No, just a typo in one section. Fixed. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 15:08, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Tokyopop
You state that Tokyopop is the professional, yet I recall that they have mistranslated in the past. Futhermore, both the anime and Chuang Yi english version state that Mint is infused with the DNA of a Blue Lorikeet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.168.1.219 (talk • contribs) 19:36, June 5, 2010
 * We use the official English version, in this case the TP manga is the first released and it is what we use. Further, yes, they are the professionals and without reliable sources, it is not our place to declare any translation a "mistranslation" -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 04:00, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * This has already been discussed before:

* The Japanese Wikipedia lists Mint as being infused with the DNA of a Blue Lorikeet. * The doll's packaging's kanji, ノドジロルリインコ, is that of the Blue Lorikeet. * The Finnish version also has her infused with a Blue Lorikeet. * TMM's episode 19 has it as ノドジロルリインコ, the "White throared Lapis Lazuli (blue) parakeet". * TMM's episode 12 has it as the "Tahiti Blue Lory", but they don't provide the kanji. * Even 4kids had this one right ("unofficial" episode 1 - they even mention "the rare blue ...").

Note that the Blue Lorikeet and Ultramarine Lorikeet are different species:

1. Vini peruviana, Blue Lorikeet, ノドジロルリインコ 2. Vini ultramarina, Ultramarine Lorikeet, コンセイインコ

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.168.1.219 (talk) 04:40, 6 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Other Wikipedia articles are not reliable sources, nor is deciding that TP is wrong based on the reading of the kanji. TP decided to call it that, and unlike some other translations that people felt were wrong, they did not change it in later copies of the manga. At best, a footnote might be appropriate, as was done with the chimera anima, which I will add now. Will that work for you? -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 04:55, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

A couple character genders
I was looking in the Japanese wikipedia page and it states that both Duke and Sweet Juliet are male. I know that other wiki's aren't proof enough so I'll be buying the first Japanese volume of A la Mode to try to confirm it. And also, Masha was always male. He was only referred as a girl once in volume 3 of Tokyopop's English version. In the other volumes they called him a male. Tokyopop has been known to make those mistakes before(calling Tart a girl and such).Hika Yagami (talk) 19:31, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Bad Guys
If two of the bad guya are Pie and Tart surely the other one is Kish Kish? HughesJohn (talk) 09:33, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Quiche is a food, everyone else is names after food, Kish is not a food. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.20.13 (talk) 11:04, 5 August 2012 (UTC)