Talk:Shodo Girls

Title
I'm not sure if the title should be "Shodō Girls" with a macron, or "Shodo Girls" without a macron. Usually we would put the macron in for titles that don't have a common name in English, but "Shodō Girls" is a kind of weird mix - the first word is Japanese with Hepburn romanization and the second word is English. But I think that if we took that line of thought to its logical conclusion, and made it "Shodō Gāruzu", it would just look strange. What do others think? —  Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 14:29, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Can the film's title at the Cannes film market count as its English name? (see this article).--Lionratz (talk) 05:40, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The two exclamation marks pretty obviously go against MOS:TM, so I don't think so. :) That site also doesn't look like it qualifies per our guidelines on reliable sources - if you look at the "About" page it's clear that it's basically just one person writing reviews. He may be a very clued-in guy, but unless he's also a respected film critic somewhere else, then we should probably file it as a "personal site". —  Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 06:20, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * If I am correct, this website actually sources from the article by Cinema Today, a reputed source for Japanese cinema. However, Cinema Today is in Japanese, so I think using this source is better (WP:NONENG). I really cannot find any similar English sources (probably since the film was not released in an English-speaking country)- even IMDB republishes this article. It is possible to seek a waiver, since the source is largely neutral and, to my knowledge, factual enough?


 * As for the title, I have no objections if this article can be located easily enough by readers. Lastly, since it is stated that the film has a wide release in Japan and has more than two unrelated news articles, is it possible to remove the notability template?--Lionratz (talk) 06:58, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I've removed it. Great work on finding the sources. I've nothing at all against using Japanese sources here - if anything, Japanese sources will probably be better. Oh yes, and this article inspired me to create an article on performance calligraphy, if you're interested. —  Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 17:43, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see you linked it in the article. I should have probably noticed that... —  Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 17:51, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * If you are interested, we could properly sent the two articles for a joint DYK. Thanks for you comments.--Lionratz (talk) 12:46, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Now that is an excellent idea. Let's do it. —  Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 14:21, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Shodō Performance Kōshien
I changed the link in the lede from Shodō Kōshien to Shodō Performance Kōshien. From the sources, I have gathered that there are two competitions - the International High School Shodō Exhibition (Japanese: 国際高校生選抜書展, Kokusai Kōkōsei Senbatsu Shoten; nicknamed "Sho no Kōshien"), and the Shodō Performance Kōshien. The International High School Shodō Exhibition is for traditional calligraphy, and the Shodō Performance Kōshien is for performance calligraphy. According to the eiga.com source it is the latter the film is based on. To mix things up a bit, according to the "Cinema Today" source the ''Zoom In!! Super TV programme called the Shodō Performance Kōshien the "Shodo Girls Koshien" in its broadcast, and that was what the Shodō Girls'' film was based on. Confusing... —  Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 14:40, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Citation problem
In the lead, the same name ("eiga.com") is used for two different citations. George Ponderevo (talk) 13:01, 8 May 2012 (UTC)


 * eiga.com is the website which publishes these articles. Since the two sources come from the same website but are different articles, I don't foresee any problem. Thanks for pointing out anyways.--Lionratz (talk) 13:26, 8 May 2012 (UTC)


 * There is a problem, because both are flagged as being citation #2, thereby hiding one of them. Click on the links to see for yourself. George Ponderevo (talk) 18:04, 9 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh, saw the problem now. Many apologies and thanks for pointing it out.--Lionratz (talk) 10:36, 10 May 2012 (UTC)