Talk:Revoltech

Japanese script
Done. --Nightshadow28 17:48, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Fist of the North Star
Fist of the North Star Revoltechs are to be released. Evan1975 (talk) 22:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Gurren Lagann Misc.
Any evidence of seperate releases of the Gurren Lagann Revoltech? Judging by the promotional photos of Lazengann, the mini-drills and wingpack will be "Build a Figure" parts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.105.108.151 (talk) 17:49, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

No, but you just deleted the entire section of Revoltech 2G. Please pay more attention when editing. GogDog (talk) 01:05, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Arbitrarily Adding Series Numbers and Release Dates
Please don't do it. People are just adding whatever number is next for TBA figures without any evidence whatsoever. Same with release dates. Please only add this when it has been CONFIRMED. Otherwise, just use "TBA" in place of the series number or release date. Enki may end up being #060, who knows, but right now we don't and it's pretty amateurish to just arbitrarily tack it on. GogDog (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 01:13, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Big O figures?
I can't find any news to confirm the Big O figures listed under the 2G line. I think they may be fake additions —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.186.231.170 (talk) 22:30, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

They were shown officially by Kaiyodo at the Winter Wonder Festival earlier this year, but no other official word has been released yet that I have seen. I have neither seen any information as to which Revoltech line they will be released under, but if Yamaguchi doesn't design the mold, a 2G release is not impossible. Either way, the figures are real and they are coming with details being scarce currently. GogDog (talk) 04:14, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh wait, I was actually thinking of the Full Metal panic figures. I guess the Big O figures might just be a rumor after all. GogDog (talk) 11:58, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Moved from external links

 * Revoltech Toy Reviews from CollectionDX

I'm saving this link at it is a possible source on the toy line. I'm not sure just how CollectionDX stacks up under the reliable source guidelines. —Farix (t &#124; c) 21:11, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Product tables
In accordance with WP:NOTCATALOG, which is part of the What Wikipedia is not policy, I have removed the product tables from the list. They don't add anything to the article and act as a product catalog for the toyline. Simply because the retail price is not mention doesn't mean it dodges the point of it being a catalog. —Farix (t &#124; c) 22:54, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

The lists do add informations on the article, they give informations on the characters released in the line, just the same as the lists which say what manga series were released in which prepublication magazine or what movies a director did. Those lists are no more product tables that any discography, filmography or anything else like this. Please, put them back in place and stop removing them. Sup D (talk) 00:51, 10 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is NOT a sales catalog nor a mirror for the company's site nor is it anything remotely similar to a list of titles in a manga anthology, nor what movies a director does or any of those other unrelated examples. This is a company article, not its catalog, and this is an encyclopedia, not a fansite. The "information" is not relevant to this article at all. And please not that registering did NOT clear your 3RR record. If you revert again, both your new account and your IP will be reported to the administrators to be blocked. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 01:05, 10 January 2010 (UTC)


 * The product tables do not add anything to the understanding of the toy line. This is where your comparisons to list of works in biographies falls apart. When a person reads a biography containing a list of works, the list of words add to the understanding of the individual in the biography. However, that is not the same for an article on the toy line. In this case a product list is a distraction.The reader will be unable to see the forest (the toy line) because of all of the tree (the individual toys). This is where WP:NOT comes in because Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. —Farix (t &#124; c) 01:26, 10 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry but no. The toys that are in the line do help to understand the line itself and the exemples are perfectly related and prove that the lists do have to be there. The problem is not that those lists are here, the problem is that you don't want them to be here, probably because you don't care much about the subject so you don't mind informations to be incomplete, by refusing to let the lists be here, you're just proving one more time that Wikipedia is full of people who don't want to help or share any informations, nor completing the goal of Wikipedia but just want articles to be like they want them to be. An encyclopedia, what Wikipedia is supposed to be, is the sum of all the informations about everything, the more information it have, the more closest to its definition it is. Thoses lists do have their place here, if they're not, this article is incomplete, removing them is vandalism. Do what you want with the article if you don't want Wikipedia to be an encyclopedia or think about what the rule really means and try to complete articles instead of doing vandalism and continue to lead Wikipedia to be more and more unusefull. --Sup D (talk) 01:39, 10 January 2010 (UTC)


 * This list has been a resource for hundreds of people for YEARS now, why remove it now? What is the difference when it comes to lists of TV shows with descriptions, is that not a product list?  Or a list of manga issues, number by number?  This page has been a valuable reference for a long time. GogDog (talk) 15:23, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd suggest reading WP:OWN. It hasn't been a resource for hundreds" of people, and seems to mostly just be some personal website space a very small handful of SPAs, including yourself, that I suspect are all from a certain fansite. It gets few page hits, and the lists are clear violations of Wikipedia policy. As it is, I'm not seeing how this article is necessary at all. The toys do not appear to have real world notability as shown through significant coverage in reliable, third party sources. As it is, this article needs to be merged to Kaiyodo per WP:PRODUCT, without the huge list of lines. -- AnmaFinotera  (talk · contribs) 17:10, 10 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Sup D
 * "The toys that are in the line do help to understand the line itself"
 * How does a list of toys released add to the understand if the line for a general reader?
 * "...the exemples are perfectly related and prove that the lists do have to be there."
 * No they don't have to be here. And of a general reader, they get in the way instead of adding anything.
 * "the problem is that you don't want them to be here, probably because you don't care much about the subject so you don't mind informations to be incomplete"
 * Here, you are borderlining on assuming bad faith. You also didn't address the issue of WP:NOTCATALOG and WP:IINFO.
 * "you're just proving one more time that Wikipedia is full of people who don't want to help or share any informations"
 * Even more bad faith.
 * "Wikipedia is supposed to be, is the sum of all the informations about everything"
 * Actually, Wkipiedia is not about everything. It is specifically not an indiscriminate collection of information, which these product tables fall into.
 * "removing them is vandalism."
 * Again with the assumptions of bad faith. But perhaps you really should read WP:VANDALISM to see what vandalism really is. I'll give you a hint, it's not "edits I don't like".
 * GogDog : First, I would like to thank you for being much calmer than Sup D/94.111.102.175. However, I do want to clear up some of your misconceptions.
 * "This list has been a resource for hundreds of people for YEARS now, why remove it now?"
 * Just because a problem has existed for years doesn't mean it doesn't need to be fixed.
 * "What is the difference when it comes to lists of TV shows with descriptions, is that not a product list? Or a list of manga issues, number by number?"
 * Because a list of episodes or volume summaries are not in violation of WP:NOT. The summaries themselves also added to the understanding of the work, specifically its plot, while also including real world context.
 * "This page has been a valuable reference for a long time."
 * Unless it is as a checklist, I don't see how it would be much of a reference. But the checklist would be a violation of WP:IINFO. —Farix (t &#124; c) 21:21, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Can someone perhaps explain exactly which part of the cited policies they're referring to? So far, I'm not seeing anything that wouldn't also apply to all the "List of episodes of X" pages. The only references to catalogs is that prices shouldn't be included. I don't see how this precludes a list of what the Revoltech line consists of. Optimus Sledge (talk) 17:09, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Might as well delete the article now. It's worthless as is, and anyone who cared to maintain or contribute to it has no desire to do so anymore. GogDog (talk) 00:34, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Links
Is there any need to have TWO links to the same site?

And also, propose removing all other links other than the official site, when the big list of figures is gone, theres really no need for links to shops / blogs reviewing them, unless noted in the article.

EDIT: Removed, feel free to re-instate if there's a valid reason they were there.

Wallhead3004 (talk) 12:30, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Merge Suggestion
Seen as most of the page has now gone, would it be worth merging this with the Kaiyodo article, which does make brief mention of it?

Wallhead3004 (talk) 12:43, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Reinstated list
Doesn't seem like anyone seems to be watching this page anymore, but as per what I have said in the Kaiyodo article, I am not against a list of Revoltechs by any means, but Wikipedia is a democracy, this should surely be back up for debate before it is reinstated?

Anyway, if it is to stay as it is, fair enough, but if it is going to be barebones like before, I believe a merge would be the best option. (Wallhead3004 (talk) 14:42, 4 January 2011 (UTC))


 * I've restored the redirect. Whoever restored the article along with the tables did not comply with WP:NOT or establish the subject's notability. —Farix (t &#124; c) 17:51, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Farix, I'm somewhat confused as to why this interpretation of the rules only applies to the Revoltech article. Why does it not apply to other toyline, TV shows, etc? Optimus Sledge (talk) 01:05, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:CATALOG does apply to all articles. Just because there may be product lists on other articles doesn't mean that a product is appropriate here. (WP:OSE) —Farix (t &#124; c) 01:20, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No, but it sets a precedent. Also, what part of WP:CATALOG do you think the list violated? I cannot see how it applies. Optimus Sledge (talk) 21:50, 22 January 2011 (UTC)