Talk:Minami-ke

Wikipedia featured in Minami-ke
The Japanese version of Valentine's Day (ja:バレンタインデー) appeared in the sixth episode of Minami-ke Okawari. Don't know if we should incorporate it into the article though. Here's an image of the moment in question. The fund raising notice at the top is still visible too, so they must have taken a shot of it only a few months ago.--  十  八  04:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia references are not usually notable in themselves. If the reference caused an incident or something, it would be notable. --68.161.182.144 (talk) 12:06, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I concur. Why does many other pages about anime, games and TV shows/movies and even music bands have references noted in their articles, but this artice shouldn't have any references noted? Ofcourse, there's a question in hand in HOW to incorporate this reference. Many people must haven't even noticed this reference, so it would be pretty interesting to read. bladez (talk) 09:19, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Dōmu vs. Daume
Is there any verifiable evidence that the animation studio behind series 1 wants their name romanised as the latter? Besides another easily editable Wikipedia page, that is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.110.70.126 (talk) 07:17, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * After a frustrating search, no I cannot find any other mention, nor an official website, nor third-parties using this romanization (or any romanization) except English sites like ANN which use Doumu or Dōmu.--  十  八  09:06, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The only lead I have is a screenshot (http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/4929/mk0401236nn4.jpg), taken from around 0:12:36 of series 1, episode 4. Note the logo in the bottom-left of the game box. 91.109.12.215 (talk) 09:27, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Genre
Ecchi elements? --68.161.182.144 (talk) 12:04, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't say so, and besides, ecchi isn't classified as a genre.--  十  八  20:33, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

3rd Season
Is there any mention of the new season supposedly green lit? 78.105.250.11 (talk) 00:12, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes there is, it airs on January 4, 2009. Official Website or an announcement from Anime News Network 151.9.197.28 (talk) 13:11, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Incomplete summary
The summary of the characters seems to be lacking important details. For example, why are the Minami girls living alone with no mother or father? What's their support? The character listing just baldly says that they are living in an apartment by themselves. --Gwern (contribs) 04:10 12 November 2008 (GMT)
 * This question has not been addressed so far in the manga or anime, so it's more a matter of the information not being there.Cicero225 (talk) 09:20, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Other Minami-ke's eldest brother
In Japan, he is not considered he is working. Because there are some reason about that.
 * First,there are such type's school uniforms at stylish private-high-school.
 * Two,Touma is about 11 year-old, Akira is 13, Natsuki is 16. Generally speaking, Japanese business-mans enter and start to work after graduation of university(4 year system's),and they are 22 or 23 then. In such a case, his age is rather distant from Natsuki's 15 years-old.
 * Three, you can confirm sweater and school's wappen at the original Manga No.49 last page's first square
 * 
 * Usually, high school students often wear such a sweater under blazer in cold season (espesially girls), and businessman's suit doesn't have such a wappen.
 * Therefore, I think he is not working, but going to different high-school.
 * What do you think about this?　--FrmJPN (talk) 22:27, 11 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not a veteran on Wiki, so take what I say with a grain of salt.
 * First, based off of their school levels, I would have thought Akira was 14 and Natsuki 17. Do you have reason to think otherwise?
 * "Elder Brother" is noticeably older than Natsuki, seemingly more than one year. If this were true, he would not be in high school.
 * Also, perhaps he's just weird and likes wearing his high school gear after graduation...
 * The argument is not clear-cut. Without access to 49, I can't confirm what you say, but if you feel that the preponderance of evidence is that he is attending a school, then I would say go ahead and edit, but back it up with links and references.
 * It is perhaps premature to assert that "he is already working" as the article does. Anyone else have evidence showing that he is working? Cicero225 (talk) 04:57, 16 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for replying, and please excuse my "Engrish".
 * At first, High school's first grade corresponds(?) 15-16, 2nd is 16-17, 3rd is 17-18. If they get their new grade's (Nendo:April-March) birthday, their age is the Right one.
 * That is to say, high-school 3rd student's age is 17 in April1, but 18 in March 31.
 * and, Natsuki is 1st grade of High-school, therefore he is 15-16. (Akira is 1st grades of junior high, so he is 12-13)
 * and, I think Elder sibling is 3rd grade of other high-school and he is 17-18 years old
 * But, there isn't a quite decisive evident description for "already working" nor "high-school student" yet.
 * In any case, I show this pict about school-mark-wappen.
 * In this connection, Japanese wikipedia is considering he is not working--FrmJPN (talk) 17:01, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * After examining the pictures in question and also some recently aired episodes, It seems that FrmJPN has a valid point. His clothing is indeed rather strange for someone out of school.  It's probably not enough evidence to draw conclusions, but it seems sufficient to change the statement in question to state that his work-status is unclear, as I will now do.Cicero225 (talk) 22:21, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Funbook vs. Fanbook
In the manga section, after volumes, are listed two "funbooks." I'm fairly certain, especially after browsing these two links (with the same ISBN):TV Animation Book, Minami-ke+5-2 Book, that they are actually "fanbooks". Is there some special reason for calling them funbooks? Yeah it's nitpicky, but it just bothers me.Cicero225 (talk) 08:07, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Looks like "funbook" is typo creep. The first external link you provide shows "fanbook" (spelled in latin alphabet) in the cover photo.—Tokek (talk) 15:33, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay. I'll change it then.  I was just worried that "funbook" might be some sort of generic term I didn't know.Cicero225 (talk) 00:08, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Yamada
From what I've researched, this is a last name, so Chiaki was being polite. While not actually part of the Minami-family, I think a strong friendship was created. No first name is given, but lost forever due to Kana. Was there sufficient data in episode 11 to consider Yamada notable? Tyciol (talk) 00:07, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't even think its notable enough to deserve its own redirect or entry in Yamada. It only appeared once, after all, so it's not like it's some major thing.--  十  八  01:14, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Wiki EL
Okay then. Per WP:ELNO point 12: Links to open wikis, except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors. This wiki fails both those criteria, so it should be removed.--  十  八  00:54, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * My edit summary was a common sense application of that guideline - in general, Wikias don't have the historical stability and participation to pass WP:EL. 「 ダイノ ガイ 千？！ 」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 19:07, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Using Wikipedia guidelines to back up Wikipedia guidelines is a logical fallacy via Circular reasoning.--Sxerks (talk)

ELNO - "substantial number of editors" criteria is irrelevant, because an infinite number of monkeys can create "Hamlet" or one person(Shakespeare) can. It would be interesting to know why it was added to EL in the first place.

ELNO - "substantial history of stability" criteria is undefined. The wiki has been stable since inception.

The point in linking to external wikis from any Wiki farm is to help users find information beyond the scope of Wikipedia and that is not available from official sources.

It is also there to provide a place for users to add information that is beyond the scope of Wikipedia, and to foster and grow that information in order to come back and create better articles at Wikipedia.--Sxerks (talk) 20:12, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
 * No, WP:ELNO is there for a reason; don't just dismiss it when you don't like it.--  十  八  23:48, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, for trying to act authoritative, but I'm not impressed by childlike behavior. I have debunked (not dismissed) your criteria in respect to this article.  As far as those general wiki-wide guidelines, they also need to be addressed as there is no logic to back them up. And "No, WP:ELNO is there for a reason" is Begging the question.--Sxerks (talk) 17:18, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, I have tried to explain to you why the link shouldn't be added. Now I'll take it to WP:ANIME, where multiple other editors will tell you the same thing.--  十  八  18:55, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The Wiki link clearly fails WP:EL. It does not meet any of the criteria for inclusion, it is a fansite, pure and simple. Sxerks, whether you agree with the guideline is irrelevant. You are, in essence, spamming this article with links to a wiki with which you are personally involved. There are very very few wikis of any kind that meet WP:EL and this is clearly not one of them. Consensus is clearly against you in this matter. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 19:12, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I concur that the link in question fails WP:EL. As AnmaFinotera states, links to other wiki's almost always fail the criteria for inclusion. David Bailey (talk) 10:42, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

ANN right turn only
Right turn only review vol 1 --KrebMarkt 17:53, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Audio cds
needs information on the 5 music/drama cds96.50.4.248 (talk) 18:51, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Outdated
I looked at the Japanese article, and apparently there are now 8 manga volumes. There might be more new info I didn't see. Somebody who can read Japanese better than I should check it out. 71.199.12.36 (talk) 04:07, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I have dealt with the information about the new volumes and thus stripped the outdated header.Cicero225 (talk) 09:15, 1 May 2011 (UTC)