User talk:Dandy Sephy/Archive

Proposed deletion of ~refrain~ The songs were inspired by Evangelion
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article ~refrain~ The songs were inspired by Evangelion, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 06:18, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Cats
Quicky note. When adding the cats to the articles, make sure to use (no underscores). Right now you're doing, and someone is having to come behind you to correct them and me thinks they might be getting a little frustrated :P --  Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 19:48, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I did notice after a while (I rebooted and simply copied the part of the link to the cat), but as it all worked I carried on. Taken on board, but I've done most of the changes with underscores, and I've done 90+ entrys... Taken on board Dandy Sephy (talk) 19:52, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, it works with the underscores, but technically its bad code and either another editor or a bot will eventually have to correct them. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 19:53, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I corrected a handfull of them (with the edit summary "boo to wikilink underscores!" which, in retrospect, doesn't sound quite as funny as I'd hoped), and Sesshomaru also got one of them (maybe more, I was only checking/correcting those that were on my watchlist). — Dino guy  1000  20:10, 27 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Cheers Guys Dandy Sephy (talk) 20:12, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Ranma 1/2 episodes
Actually, there was a mislabelling. From the 65th to the 88th episodes, "Friends" was the one used; it so happened that in the 65th to the 72th episodes, "Friends" was mislabelled as "Present," only to be corrected in the 73rd. I know this because I have all seven seasons of the show. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 15:21, 13 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, that makes sense. It may be worth noting this on the page Dandy Sephy (talk) 15:24, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Refrain inspired by evangelion.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Refrain inspired by evangelion.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 07:32, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 11:30, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

List of Rurouni Kenshin episodes
While your enthusiasm is appreciated, your splitting of List of Rurouni Kenshin episodes into season lists should have been discussed first, and it should have been done by someone more experienced in editing. You did it completely wrong and it must now be corrected. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 00:19, 13 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I looked at several existing pages that were done the same same way, and afaik I didn't do any different. of course, that doesnt account for likely inconsistency (of which there is plenty in the project), and I didn't see any formal suggestions saying it had to be done this way or that way. Certainly if there was any doubt I would have asked, for much the reason you suggest (i.e. experience). Would you care to elaborate?Dandy Sephy (talk) 00:26, 13 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I can only presume you looked at badly done pages, rather than well done ones. The article names are off, you didn't use transcludes to avoid having to maintain two lists, you didn't bother with proper leads, and you didn't even bother to fill in the missing info (Japanese titles, airdates, etc) which are easily available. I'm now fixing all four lists so you can see how it should have been done. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 00:30, 13 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually, one of the ones I used was naruto which is FL. The article names simply aren't consistent at all List of Lupin III Part II season 1 episodes as an example. Granted I was the one who did the move on that, but I used the existing name format that was already in use on the previous page location. For the missing info, I didn't have it to hand and was planning to add it later. As for the leads, noted but I wasn't finished with the pages and was going to adapt the lead from the main page. Dandy Sephy (talk) 00:38, 13 October 2008 (UTC)


 * On second look the main naruto page isn't FL *cringe* Dandy Sephy (talk) 00:41, 13 October 2008 (UTC)


 * An irony, for sure, as I think all of its sublists are LOL. For naming, the proper name per the naming conventions set is "List of series episodes" for the main list. For seasonal sublists, add (season X) at the end of the title. The rare exception are series with named seasons, like Sailor Moon and Dragon Ball. In which case they still follow "List of series episodes" but using the series name for each season (i.e. List of Dragon Ball Z episodes and List of Sailor Moon R episodes) That isn't to say we don't have quite a few lists with the wrong names, but that doesn't mean we keep replicating the issue ;) -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 19:41, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

As for the lack of formal suggestions or documentation, that's at least partly my fault. I'm the one who developed the current iteration of the sublist template (Collectonian originally developed it, IIRC... at Template:Japanese episode list/Dragon Ball, right?), but never wrote any documentation for it. I'll have to sit down at some point and write up a guide on how to split episode lists into sublists and properly use the sublist template to avoid duplicity and redundancy (and duplication! ^_^) between the main list and sublists. As for Naruto, I'm aware that it doesn't transclude the subpages, and have raised this issue (as well as splitting the sublists into individual seasons) on the talk page. Sephiroth stated that it's on his to-do list, and he'll get it done whenever he gets to it. — Dino guy  1000  19:25, 14 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Since all of the DB pages are now using the sublist, should I go ahead and have the DB one deleted? -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 19:43, 14 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Hmm... according to Whatlinkshere, List of Dragon Ball episodes still transcludes it, even after I purged the server cache of the article and the template. I dunno, maybe it's some obscure caching issue anyways... I'd say it would probably be better off just redirected, as opposed to deleting outright, though. — Dino guy  1000  23:18, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it was doing that for me too, but seems like its finally gone. I'll redirect it to the new one :) -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 03:39, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * All right, that's good. — Dino guy  1000  17:00, 15 October 2008 (UTC)


 * A guide would be good as there are several pages that need doing, and several that need re-doing properly List of Lupin III Part II episodes is (definately) FL but does it the way I tried doing it, and List of Ranma ½ episodes was done a few weeks ago in the same (incorrect) way. I don't want to try it gain until I have something in front of me to follow, just in case. Unless someone beats me to it I'm going to correct the Lupin sublist page names at the weekend when I've got more time for editing now I know the proper format. Is it worth doing a "correction" drive for page names and "proper" list formats to bring as many articles into line a possible? Also, did you ever look at that lead for Rurouni Kenshin collectonian? :p Dandy Sephy (talk) 03:26, 15 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I think a guide would be good as well. For fixing the names, that can just be part of the overall clean up drive :P Okay...remind me...what was I supposed to do on the RK lead? *brain dead* --  Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 03:39, 15 October 2008 (UTC)


 * To See if it was in a state worthy for removing the tag for improving it (it may or may not be suitable for GA if the lead checks out). You said you'd check it after work then obviously forgot as it was almost a week ago! :p Dandy Sephy (talk) 03:44, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * LOL, some days I'm doing good to remember my name :P Taking a quick look now, its not quite ready yet. The lead should summarize the article, and right now it just has a two sentence summary of the reception section. It also has a glaring bit of missing info...it jumps from the manga serialization to the OVAs without mentioning the anime series LOL The video game should also be briefly mentioned. If you want to give it a whirl, take a look at Tokyo Mew Mews lead, which is a current FAC. Otherwise poke me if I don't give it some tweaking this week. -- Collectonian  (talk ·' contribs) 03:54, 15 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I'll see what I can do about a guide, than. The major thing that's kept me from writing one up before now is that I'm not sure where to put it... I suppose it should just go on Template:Japanese episode list/doc, though... — Dino guy  1000  17:00, 15 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Have a look... I think it could probably be improved and clarified, but it's a start, at least. On that note, I really need to go through the whole page, cleaning up the documentation to reflect current practice and explain stuff better. — Dino guy  1000  17:26, 15 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Looks like a great start to me, and agreed on the whole documentation needing updating. Might also be good to have a section on using RTitle to deal with series that have different English dub and sub titles. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 17:39, 15 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Definitely, since the current documentation suggests using JapaneseTitle (!!!) to the same effect. — Dino guy  1000  18:18, 15 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Looks good, I could certainly follow it. Dandy Sephy (talk) 02:36, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Assessment
I'm sorry, but I don't follow. Your initial edit showed no offense. I posted "I want to make clear that I have no reason to think, nor do I think, Dandy Sephy is acting from animus" a few minutes later, because I did want to make that clear. Why would you think twenty minutes later that I'm accusing you of animus? =/

My reference to being non-controversial was in response to Godraise. I was using your opinion as an example of why I believed that was wrong. arimareiji (talk) 22:26, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Re:Vandal
Revert. Warn (see WP:UWT). If vandal does it again, revert, warn with higher template. Rinse and repeat until vandal vandalizes past final warning and then report to WP:AIV. — sephiroth bcr  ( converse ) 21:05, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

User:Dandy Sephy/Rurouni Kenshin season 1 episodes sandbox
Your subpage linked above is in at least one article-space category (Category:Lists of anime episodes); please remove or disable the category links, per WP:CAT. —tan³ tx 08:21, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Good catch! I've blanked the page as I'm finished with it now and completely forgot about it! Dandy Sephy (talk) 08:39, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Galaxy Express 999
I'm all done with the GE999 episodes page for now. Its all yours! Quiddity99 (talk) 18:02, 26 December 2008 (UTC)Quiddity99
 * Cheers, nice updates :) Dandy Sephy (talk) 18:07, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Kenshin chapters
Thanks. I tried to do them several months ago, but it was hard for me. Now Im more used to write summaries. I first read Ruroken some years ago, so I know quite well the events of the volumes. What only caused me problems was remembering the names of certain warriors or techniques. I think vol 26 needs some expansion. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 23:56, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Kiss (magazine)
I am not going to develop it myself. Someone who knows Japanese will be translating it from the ja version if you kindly allow it please. This takes time and does not happen overnight. -- Cat chi? 01:03, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Thats fair enough, but there is absolutely no point starting an article with one line. Either the article should be started with more detail with a full translation following, or the article should be started after the translation. There is abolutely no point in starting an article where the only content is "Kiss is a japanese manga magazine published by Kodansha". Theres nothing to suggest the content is coming, and there is no reason to believe it will. If the page isn't updated with suitable content within 24hours, it will be nominated for Afd as suggested by the closing admin. In it's current state it's unlikely to survive the afd. Do you actually have someone doing the translation or is this just assumption? If someone is actually doing it, I suggest you ask them to reply here with details of how long it will take Dandy Sephy (talk) 02:28, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Futaba Channel
Hi there. You were a participant in the AfD discussion for Futaba Channel, which I closed as "delete." I have decided to relist the article at AfD; the discussion is here. Your further input is welcome. Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  18:17, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

regarding User talk:Goodraise
Just wanted to let you know that I've started it: List of Ranma ½ characters. It's a lot more work than I expected, but I'll keep expanding it, even if at a slow pace. Anyways, happy merging... :) -- Goodraise (talk) 17:06, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Good start! I'm tempted to start reading the manga once I finish Lone Wolf and Cub (vol 16 of 28 - 300 pages each !), if so I'll be sure to add lots of refs :p Most of the merges will probably be given time for proving notability, although I can't see anything being done to improve them, it's only fair. Theres still 2 or 3 I can safely bold merge though (Tofu and Jusenkyo guide probably being the two easiest). From what I can gather, the previous editers have long since lost faith in wikipedia since the characters started (rightly) being tagged for notability and have moved copied stuff over to wikia, but still monitor the pages judging by the talk page for the main article. I'll start the ball rolling at the weekend Dandy Sephy (talk) 04:46, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Urusai/Urusei
Sephy, are you kidding me??? The japanese word has multiple meanings. It is partially the name of an mange/anime series, as well as a common phrase. What is the problem with my additon??(LonerXL (talk) 21:39, 11 February 2009 (UTC))
 * I stand by the nomination. Being partially the name of an anime/manga is irrelevant, it doesn't make a description of a word necessary, especially when the word is properly explained in Urusei Yatsura. Urasai might be a common word, but Uresei is just a slang variation of it, and wikipedia is not a dictionary WP:DICT Dandy Sephy (talk) 21:43, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

????? Ummm.... sure... OK. I jusr redirected. Whatever floats your boat, and makes you feel powerful Sephy. LOL(LonerXL (talk) 22:07, 11 February 2009 (UTC))


 * No need for that attitude, although the redirect was a good idea (there really is no need for the page even as a redirect, but it will do as a compromise) Dandy Sephy (talk) 22:09, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Love Hina Advance
Haha wow, I had no idea people were following the fate of this article so closely. I'd support such a redirect too; a minor game like Love Hina Advance simply doesn't have the information to back up an entire article.  Aaron  ►  06:45, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Samurai X trust and Betrayal
I have provided a link to my claim that I have checked many times over to be valid. It is a user based site and Samurai X has been at the top of the list for some time. I see no reason not to add the content I have added. I care very deeply for the series which is why I wanted to expand on its known reception. Can you please explain why you removed my addition? I have not been editing for long, perhaps I missed something.Wanabedamned (talk) 21:29, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Anime source is not a valid Reliable Source, it is also a WP:Copyvio site, which means it is unsuitable for use on wikipedia. I agree that you have provided an accurate link to your claim, but the site itself is the issue here. If you wish to discuss it further please take it to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga‎

Thanks for the response. I do feel the need to take it up with "Anime and Manga". It should be an acceptable site in my eyes, but maybe you can cure me of my continued misunderstanding. Anime-Source's user based reviews seem to be identical to ANN's user based reviews, so I don't see how one can be considered a Reliable Source while the other isn't. They both rely on community support. As for violating copyrights I'm not sure I understand how Anime-Source does this. It doesn't provide video clips or music clips of any series. It doesn't provide direct downloads or torrents of these shows. I'm sure there is some foolishly simple reason it can't be allowed I'm just not seeing the difference between Anime-Source and ANN as of yet. Do you think you can explain any further?Wanabedamned (talk) 21:29, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Anime News Network is a proven reliable site (see Wp:Anime), Anime Source is not. You don't need to provide the actual episode etc to violate copyright. ANN doesn't rely on Community support, it's a well respected site that is know for it's accurate news reporting. Again, Anime Source is not. ANN's user based reviews are not RS, but ANN's own reviews are. The two sites work very differently. All of Anime-Sources reviews seem to be by the users (or at least, thats the impression given by your link), ANN's user reviews are clearly marked, and the chart is also clearly marked as being based on user scores. ANN makes no claim about this making it the most popular. I agree the use of the ANN link could be discussed, but this doesn't mean that Anime Source will be useable, because as I say, ANN has a proven track record and Anime Source already fails two guidelines/policies Dandy Sephy (talk) 03:50, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * ANN link has now also been removed Dandy Sephy (talk) 03:56, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * (EC) Jumping in :) The biggest difference: Anime-Source distributes illegal fansubs which is against Wikipedia policy. It will NEVER be an acceptable link because of this. That is why AnimeNFO is blacklisted (along with several other such sites) and that is why you got a very large warning message on your talk page (that I recommend you make a point of reading before reverting people's undoing for your edits). Beyond that, ANN itself is a consdiered a reliable source. It has industry support and its staff are considered experts/reliable voices in the industry. That said, you are correct in that the ANN link here is not appropriate and I have removed it. ANN user reviews/ratings are not reliable sources and not appropriate for articles either. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 03:58, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the responses. I do understand now. A main problem I was having was realizing that Anime-Source distributes illegal fansubs which is just not a service I ever took notice of cause I never used the site for anything, but reviews. The big problem I was having was with the complete oddity that sprouted from accepting one sites user reviews and not accepting anothers which I'm also glad was cleared up. May I suggest that in the future any warnings that you initially issue me come with more specific answers instead of a link simply saying something violates copyrights. I don't think I'd be asking a lot for the additional 2 words "Illegal Fansubbing".Wanabedamned (talk) 21:29, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Ref Check
Hey, if you have a minute, can you check your Anime Encyc and let me know if it has the air dates for .hack//Sign on TV Tokyo at April 4, 2002 and September 25, 2002? If so, what page(s) is the listing on so I can fix the hack article cite :) -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 00:31, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * No airdates :( Dandy Sephy (talk) 03:45, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Pooh...guess I'll have to hunt deeper online then. Thanks :) -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 03:53, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll try and remember to do wolfs rain at some point! I was majorly shattered yesterday due to only having 3 hours sleep Dandy Sephy (talk) 03:58, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Copyright Violation
Hi... I recieved a note from you earlier today to not add the site Anime source to any more articles as it is in violation of WP:copyvio. However after reading that article, as well as several related articles, I only found that the material involved would only be the text used in the Wikipedia article, not the source of the info. I would not post that website onto anymore articles for now, but could you point to me where it states that information sources that infringe copyright cannot be used? Thanks. Du5k (talk) 11:52, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It's my understanding that sites offering links to copyrighted materials (in this case to fansubs) are as susceptible to copyvio as just copying text. After all, such content is a copyright violation. However, perhaps there is another page that applys (possibly external links) Even so, Anime Source isn't considered "reliable" anyway, so would still be removed. Another editor has also removed the link on other pages too. Dandy Sephy (talk) 13:42, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:COPYRIGHT is the page that discusses not linking to sites that are in violation of copyrights. For the purposes of anime, this does include any site that distributes/promotes fansubs and scanslations (some of the major ones are blacklisted to prevent linking). -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 14:22, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I see. Thanks alot. Du5k (talk) 23:45, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Slayers broadcast
I'm the dude who added the broadcast section, and I think a section devoted to the broadcast of The Slayers is a good idea. And what do you mean IMDB is not a reliable source? It's the most reliable site I can think of! Nothing is more reliable than IMDB! NOTHING!!! and what do you mean by that's not the way to do it? and another thing, I have trouble providing citications (I'm new to Wikipedia) If you want proof that my theory is correct, go to IMDB, type in "The Slayers", and click on the correct series, and go to the trivia section. sorry if I'm bothering you I'm usually not this pushy, but this section is my pet project, and I think it is very important. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.207.123.153 (talk) 17:40, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * IMDB's information is largely user edited, there is little if any editorial control. It's been disproven as a reliable source for wikipedia many times. Even then, the information is incrediably vague compared to what is expected. Good examples of what the section should look like can be found at Fullmetal Alchemist, Love Hina, Rurouni Kenshin and Tokyo Mew Mew. If you have reliable sources, you can use Cite Web to present them in the article. Dandy Sephy (talk) 17:57, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'll do additional research on that topic and see if I can find anything. I do believe what you are saying about IMDB not being a reliable source, especially toward anime, where they can forget to list credits for some people, and they treat the slayers as if there is only one season, and neglect to mention the other four seasons. Thanks for the examples too!--99.207.123.153 (talk) 19:01, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Good timing, I have just added details of the first series VHS releases to the page. Dandy Sephy (talk) 19:05, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Sweet! I have found more info online that talks about the Slayers broadcast in the US. They have stated on Anime News Network, that a possible broadcast on Fox was a reality. I have also read on forums that mention a subbed broadcast on the International Channel. P.S. I like the info you put in about the VHS releases. I love looking at images of old anime VHS tapes. Let me know if you find anymore information about them.--173.102.77.221 (talk) 21:09, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Rollback
I have granted rollback rights to your account; the reason for this is that after a review of some of your contributions, I believe I can trust you to use rollback correctly by using it for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see New admin school/Rollback and Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 18:21, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Discussion at List of Gin Tama chapters
I started a discussion at Talk:List of Gin Tama chapters. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 21:56, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok. I'll try to do that.Tintor2 (talk) 15:59, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

WikiBirthday
I saw from here that it's been exactly one year since you joined the project. Happy WikiBirthday! Keep up the good work, r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 05:29, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Re: Queens Blade episode list
Thanks for the tips! This is my first time creating an episode list for anything. Having trouble finding "reliable" release date sources in English... ANN and MyAnimeList was all I could find. On the AT-X website here http://www.at-x.com/program/index.html the release dates are shown pretty clearly. However I cannot link to the tables directly! It is the full schedule. I can link to the program itself: http://www.at-x.com/program_detail/index.html/2373/week which as you can see just notes the start date (2009年4月2日（木）スタート) and then says it runs every Thursday and Sunday... What should I do in the event of not being able to directly link to the episode guides? Its generated from that drop down combo box. Any tips? Will be expanding the lead in after I finish the summaries (and actually finish watching the series...) Dex1337 (talk) 12:00, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm yes, it's not a very helpful site, and the official anime site isn't any better. It doesn't need to be done right now, just keep it in mind. Dandy Sephy (talk) 12:09, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * If I am watching a show and the episode list doesn't exist, I will make sure to write one (its pretty easy after all). Thanks for the encouragement Dex1337 (talk) 01:50, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

About Viz's release of Gin Tama
Hi Dandy Sephy. I was wondering something about Viz's release of Gin Tama. Is the character Sarutobi Ayame (the ninja in love with Gintoki) commonly called Sachan as in the Japanese version? By the way, does Kyuubei Yagyu use macron or two u? Thanks.Tintor2 (talk) 13:52, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll have to get back to you. I got the first 8volumes last week, but I've only read the 1st one so far - and that was with adding the references as I went along. I'll let you know when I get that far. Dandy Sephy (talk) 15:06, 10 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I think I'm giving you spoiler ^_^.Tintor2 (talk) 16:46, 10 July 2009 (UTC)


 * No worries there, I've seen the first 90-odd anime episodes anyway. A week ago I'd have no idea who Kyuubei was in the series, so you timed it well :p Dandy Sephy (talk) 16:55, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't know about Kyuubei, but Viz use "Sa-chan". Dandy Sephy (talk) 21:20, 12 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah, thanks. Kyuubei does not appear until vol. 13.Tintor2 (talk) 23:21, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Fumoffu
Thank you for your input, Dandy, it is very much appreciated. I'll be working on this article for a long time and I prefer a large number of small changes rather than huge changes once or twice. I understand you don't have time to work on this article but I'm open to any suggestions you might have and try to improve it to the best of my ability. I'll provide references at a later time. My focus for today was the language - as it was aweful - and I'm not yet finished. However, I do not agree with the fact you took down the "To coincide with seasonal change, the last three episodes feature chracter animatons in an autumn setting, as opposed to a summer setting in the rest of the series." - it was present in the article before and it is simply a fact. OutOfTimer (talk) 02:20, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

In addition, I'd be happy if you could tell me - as an experienced user - how much work in your opinion must still be done to take the cleanup and merge flags down? Thanks. OutOfTimer (talk) 02:59, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Eva stuff
I'm sorry if I was gruff the other day: I came back after a long period of inactivity and got very frustrated at all the work to do (on top of that the inactivity is due to multiple real-life problems that weren't exactly giving me a sunny disposition either). Things are a bit more stable now. Sorry, frustration of big project (I've been angry about wiki-OR standards ever since they deleted the episode guide we wrote up)...need to try to focus on being productive (the last big thing was did was sort out the "how do we phrase Kaworu's sexuality?" thing which I think we finished up fairly well). My suggestion would (I guess) be to start on the Asuka article and try to get that to standards then build from there as a paradigm. I dunno.--Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici (talk) 00:58, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries, I made sure to give you the polite reply. Character articles are the last thing to do if you ask me, with rebuild 2.0 a long way from a good fansubbing, theres going to be too much being added, changed and removed, and its going to be difficult to keep track if you are avoiding spoilers like me (I've already removed the page from my watchlist). I know exactly which page needs doing first, and will "announce" it once I finish off preventing an article from losing its GA status (far more important then my own personal projects). However the eva taskforce needs MASSIVE improvements, because frankly it seems clear to me that there is no focus, and as I said before, a massive lack of knowledge in editing practices, and how to create a proper page. Currently all the eva pages are crap at best (the rebuild 1.0 article probably being the best, but it still needs quite a few changes). As dinoguy has stated, there are a lot of technical issues with the pages, which I'm hoping to try and show you so you can fix them yourself as well. I also suggest considering the value of using the book being used as a source on several articles. If its that "bad", why is it being used? I'm sure there are alternate sources that can be used. Dandy Sephy (talk) 02:12, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Well the "if the book is bad why is it used in this article as a reference at all?" thing has been a major headache; basically a problem with anime fandom is that many "experts" (people actually writing printed books) may have made mistakes; the number of "anime experts" was too small to reach an "objective consensus" (sort of like wikipedia).....the result being that a crazy person like Sean McCoy could become a self-proclaimed "Eva expert" when he has no idea what he's talking about; but that's panels stuff; as for books, Drazen's "article" on Eva is....a 12 page section of a larger book in which he basically restates "Eva is complex"; i.e. things directly answered in the theatrical pamphlets he doesn't know. The problem was that many of the guidebooks didn't come out for many years in English, and in the intervening time fans got used to making some very wacky/outlandish interpretations; the result is that I personally think the Drazen article in which he mentions Kaworu Nagisa, Shinji, and homosexuality, is utterly unusable as a citation.  I don't think its a "good" source at all, made obvious errors (not on opinions, I mean established facts about the show; that's a warning sign).  Anyway we got into a big argument over "should we remove this or not?" but Folken and others kind of thought the Drazen article should stay because it was a citable opinion from a printed book.  We sort of agreed to disagree by at least stressing "this is Drazen's opinion".  But it results in things getting very slanted. If you check project Archive 2, look where I review the Susan Napier article on the show; if you actually get the article and sit down and read it....it's utter gibberish.  She basically just re-stated "this is what Eva is about", and the most glaring issue was that she devoted literally one sentence to the finale movie, just to say that she personally was so disgusted at how violent it was that it was assuredly "revenge on the fans" and should be ignored in favor of the "real" TV ending (despite the fact that production art, storyboards, cast interviews, etc. confirm that the TV ending was the result of a budget crisis, it's basically scenes from End of Eva shown out of context, End of Eva was the real ending, etc.)...............further, an interesting question:  In the past two years I've started running Eva panels at anime cons, and apparently people thought I knew what I was talking about because now I'm running Eva panels at Anime Boston, one of the 10 biggest national-level cons.  Meanwhile "Sean McCoy" is this infamously crazy guy who runs Eva panels at Fanime in California (it's as if he didn't even watch the show but considers himself an expert; he managed to dupe ADV into letting him due commentary on the DVDs, which is now regarded as infamously wrong).....if he's an "Eva expert" at what point do I become an Eva expert?  ****Keep in mind that I've been making it a point to stay "objective" and not push my own positions on wikipedia (helped by the fact that my "position" is basically to tell everyone "these are factual, citable statements the series creators said about the show, and we should read these before we start making crazy theories about the show; we need to be grounded in evidence"...I dunno.  My point is that I've realized that many "expert articles on Eva" are actually glaringly wrong, and they're only considered "experts" because its 6 or more years old and we've grown accustomed to treating these as "the official word" on the series; i.e. how the commentary on the End of Eva movie DVD is infamously non-informative). But the funny thing is just that Napier's article was uninformative, and Draven's was simply nonsensical personal opinion; how can I say they're a "bad source"?--Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici (talk) 20:42, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * That was certainly more excessive in detail then I was looking for. I'll have a look at the specific quotes, but at the end of the day, someone publishing a book means theres an element of expectation that they know what they are talking about. However theres a good chance that much of the claims will simply be removed from the articles for being nonsense, but I need to have a proper look. One thing that absolutely needs to happen is the removing of entire paragraphs being quote as references, it makes the references hard to follow, and vastly increases the text and file size. Such references, if kept need to be using a template to show the book details and page number and not repeat chunks of a book or article. Thats something I'll explain on the project page soon. Dandy Sephy (talk) 20:52, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Restore your stamina for Lupin III
For you, the objective is so close and the road seems so long but take care, you aren't alone. --KrebMarkt 15:51, 26 July 2009 (UTC) mmmmm cookie. Thanks. Dandy Sephy (talk) 16:58, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Better than cookie
Hi,

Check this. Spring special Cheer !

Is it RS? Answer: here there: that the TV Drama links Van_Pelt_Library. If a librarian specialized in Japanese studies from an university think it's RS then people will have hard time to dismiss it.

See you at Love Hina GA review :p --KrebMarkt 09:07, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Excellent! Thank you! Now I have my article to focus on before anything else (time permitting)!. Dandy Sephy (talk) 15:23, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Reference library request
Hi. When you're feeling up to it, could you please look in your 1994-1997 issues of Animerica for Sailor Moon-related information? I figure those dates would probably be the most likely to have SM in them, although the 1999 one is a possibility as well. Please let me know when/how to pick up the information from you. Thanks. :-) --Malkinann (talk) 00:27, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure I do have an issue with Sailor Moon, but I'm very busy at the moment and don't have time to dig the issues out and go through them. It's unlikely I'll be able to do so for a few weeks. Dandy Sephy (talk) 15:20, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Cheers - just send me a message when you're ready. Glad to know that there is some SM information in amongst your magazines.  :-) --Malkinann (talk) 22:13, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Is it something specific you are after? Dandy Sephy (talk) 03:40, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Not as such - more trying to find out what's out there, so that I can incorporate it into the article and make the article more reflective of a broader range of 'the literature', you know what I mean? --Malkinann (talk) 01:11, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Ayaka Yukihiro
Do you have a specific reason for reverting the merger? The article is not good in any way, and it is unlikely to ever improve. The list entry is the best way to go with such an article. TTN (talk) 23:03, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually I completely support the merger, and just removed the articles from the WP:Anime cleAnup list due to the merger. I actually accidentally clicked the rollback button, and thought I had cancelled it in time, obviously not! My apologies! Dandy Sephy (talk) 23:12, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Ive undone the accidental rollback.Dandy Sephy (talk) 23:21, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Lupin III on French TV
Hello, For now, I will drop the matter in order for you to achieve your GA status, but I still happen to believe that I am right on this issue. It shows that although there were problems with the Leblanc estate, the series was not totally denied from the French public. It's incredible that Lupin III, inspired by one of the most famous characters in French literature, was re-named when broadcast on French TV! I have been more restrainted than you may think: I could point out that only a handful of the anime episodes have made their way on to the French market, as both TV broadcasts and as DVDs; and that none of the mangas appear to have been published in France. I cannot find a definitive source indicating these things which is why I haven't, but I am sure of the re-naming of the anime which is why I will be putting it in again &mdah; if not now then sometime in the future. My only regret is that we cannot find a consensus on this.--Marktreut (talk) 16:20, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm glad you have decide to listen to reason, although I'm dissapointed you seem intent on forcing the information in at some point. You've highlighted some of the problems that we are trying to explain to you, but you keep not seeing them. Sourcing is part of the issue, the insistence on re-adding sources which had already been ruled out was beyond stubborn. The other issue is really the constant attempt to prove a point, both by your edits and the information you are adding. Theres not a dispute over that the series was renamed, it's about how relevant it is. The truth of the matter is that Lupin has been renamed many times, I've counted 4 names that are't simply writing Lupin III in the local langauge, the french version is just one of them. By adding that the french version as renamed, you are trying to convey a point across. Simply saying "oh it changed name" isn't enough to make that fact relevant. We can't say it was because of the copyrights, because a)theres no reliable source for it and b)a reliable source says it's rumour and that they probably changed the name on their own decision, rather then being forced to or being worried by copyright. Shows are renamed all the time, and frankly it's never important unless its an english adaption - this is the english wiki after all.


 * I have two pieces of advice, the first is to not to attempt to readd any claims like this without discussion on the talk page (now or later, its the same). Find some decent sources and discuss them before adding them. You were reverted before for adding things without them being checked, and they turned out to be unreliable sources.


 * The other thing is more of a general comment. You seem to have a habit of getting into edit wars and arguements for trying to force your points across, even against editors with a history of writing quality articles and having a good idea of what they are talking about. I strongly suggest learning to be more patient and try to understand why people object to your edits, it's a waste of time and energy on all sides to argue over things in edit summarys and revert cycles. Try to convey your point in discussion before people revert you 3 times, you'll find people more receptive and understanding, and you'll learn how to better edit a page. You aren't expected to be an expert editor right away, but at least show you are willing to learn. If you can't reach a concensus, that just shows it's probably not a point that needs making. Dandy Sephy (talk) 04:00, 28 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I rather think that the question is who is not listening to reason, but we'll leave that for now. As a result of all this, I got in touch with a friend who is very knowledgeable about cartoons shown in France. He himself cannot find the reason why the name was changed and concluded that it was one of those obscure business deals made behind-the-scenes between the Leblanc estate and the producers of Lupin III, details of which remained confidential (which is not unusual in the business world).


 * "Find some decent sources and discuss them before adding them": I found plenty of decent sources, it's just a pity some took a different opinion of them. If we were to discuss things before putting the information in it could take ages. I mean, I've expanded whole articles on movies and such like without discussing them beforehand and they've remained fine. It's only in the last month or so that I have had the kind of grief that is going on right now. I've never been blocked before or had whole edits undone just like that. And I might add that I am the one who starts the discussions over the subjects.


 * "You seem to have a habit of getting into edit wars and arguments for trying to force your points across, even against editors with a history of writing quality articles and having a good idea of what they are talking about." I've been editing for over five years now and many of my edits, from the minor to the major, have lasted. I've also produced whole articles from scratch to which others have contributed without any objection from me. If I find something that is doubtful but not impossible, I put a tag next to it, hoping that someone else will, in time, come up with the evidence. What I find appealing about wikipedia is that it expands and evolves, but some seem to think that it should be narrowed and cast in stone.


 * What is really bizarre in this situation is that you have accepted that there were copyright issues between Monkey Punch and the Leblanc estate but will not accept that these issues were overcome at some stage, albeit short-lived. Equally weird is the fact that one simple sentence appears to indicate the end-of-the-world.


 * Wikipedia is getting increasingly paranoid, which is sad and dangerous. I've noticed that I was not the only one to be blocked over this issue of Lupin III: someone else was also blocked for "failure to assume good faith".--Marktreut (talk) 11:44, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * You didn't find decent sources, you found random fansites that used other random fansites for their info. either of which were reliable. And please don't make a point out of you being the one to start the discussion, it took multiple reverts for it to happen, so I can't really accept that you were being accomodating, more that you got fed up of being reverted. Talk of your previous editing history isn't really a factor here, there are something like 3 million pages on english wiki, only a small percentage of them are what can be called quality articles, and its entirely possible you only recently started making debatable edits or edits to pages that people weren't worried about. I'm not interested in your edits over 5 years, I'm only your recent edits, which don't really show someone of five years editing. If you think wikipedia is getting "paranoid", then don't edit. Tightening the reliability and accuracy of its information is not paranoid. This discussion is going nowhere, once again you are just ignoring the points being made, and it's just wasting peoples time. Dandy Sephy (talk) 14:56, 28 July 2009 (UTC)


 * And you are denying facts. A certain amount of good faith is needed on a site like this. Let me put it this way: I could go through every film, book and TV series on this site and put in the titles they were given when shown in France: Captain Harlock became "Albator"; The Sword in the Stone (film) became "Merlin l'enchanteur" ("Merlin the Magician") etc., but I won't because I don't think that that is relevant. On the other hand, I believe that a cartoon inspired by a famous French literary character but renamed when shown in France itself is a matter of interest.--Marktreut (talk) 01:00, 29 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Multiples comment:
 * First everyone agree that the name of Lupin III was changed into Edgard in its French localization this is a non issue.
 * Second the question of "Why it happened?" fundamentally there are nothing but rumors because everything was built around a non-event, something that could have happened and yet did not happen. Wikipedia should be accurate and not include rumors & speculations as facts. Wikipedia permit to mention the existence of rumors when there are RS to assert their existence but in no way it can account them as truth.
 * Third Wikipedia requires credible & reliable sources to assert informations it contains. That creates a gap between trustworthy websites and blogs but lacking credibility and those who can prove both. Why can i trust a given website? Who are them? What give them the right and the authority to emit an opinion on XYZ field? Answer like that is a fan dedicated website sounds rather poor.
 * Fourth There are countless renamed series in many countries so what make the French localization worth mention in the English article on Lupin III? Can you convince other editors that it's worth it?


 * @Dandy Sephy I apologize to jump into the dance but i could not help myself. --KrebMarkt 20:33, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
 * you put it better then I've managed, I'm getting tired of repeating the same points and being ignored. Dandy Sephy (talk) 21:39, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Definitely Earned This One!

 * yay, first barnstar! FAC is definately not on my radar just now, but we could certainly do with another! You are better placed then me to say how close it is. Presumably we should wait one month for the page to stabslize properly then peer review it. Dandy Sephy (talk) 01:35, 29 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I support that one too :)
 * Long overdue Barnstar and well deserved one. I think it was a good "rehearsal" for Love Hina future GA review. --KrebMarkt 06:13, 29 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Congratulations Dandy for keeping Lupin as a GA! It looks it improved a lot. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 22:53, 30 July 2009 (UTC)