Talk:Touhou Wiki/Archive 10

From Touhou Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Re:Re:Colors/Colours

Further from Talk:Touhou Wiki/Archive 9#Re:Colors/Colours

From what Kiefmaster said, "and maybe we could allow for change of spelling based on how ZUN uses it", which I can agree with. ☢ Quwanti 22:48, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I am interested in what Momiji has to say about this. Code Slasher 17:00, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Zun's spelling is in no way coherent, consistent, or reliable for future use. See Flandre here, or everything else on that page for that matter. There's no guarantee that there'll be a good usage of English, or even a singular use of English. So my answer from here stands; use en_US. For the record, I don't like adding layers and layers of rules and whatnot, but I'll probably eventually be called Americentric at some point anyway. So there you go. Momiji 20:40, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
In closing, the proposal is dropped. - Kiefmaster99 21:41, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Wiki statuses

Hello everyone; I've been going through a review of all the other language wikis here and checking out their activity, with the possibility of weeding out dead/dying wikis and/or adding new ones. Here's a rundown of everything here in order of activity, and their respective statuses and possible improvements.

  • English (en) [edits]: Crazy active.
  • Chinese (zh) [edits]: KyoriAsh's replay updates artificially boost the article count, with the intention of attracting editors by halo effect. Has had issues attracting Chinese editors in the past, but that may be changing.
  • Russian (ru) [edits]: Essentially second place in article updates.
  • Spanish (es) [edits]: Lost a bit of traffic due to the move, but slowly gaining pace again. Also, a possible candidate for an adminship.
  • Polish (pl) [edits]: Previously a bit more active, but losing speed quickly.
  • Italian (it) [edits]: Initally slow, gained a small group of editors that disintegrated due to adminship drama. Under 50 articles.
  • Ukrainian (uk) [edits]: A handful of article edits this year, otherwise dominated by interwiki linking. Under 50 articles.
  • Portuguese (pt) [edits]: Mostly died post-move, but has picked up activity rapidly in the last month. Under 50 articles.
  • Swedish (sv) [edits]: Completely dominated by interwiki linking. Under 10 articles. Will probably depublicize it in the meantime so Kennyman can work on it in private.
  • French (fr) and German (de) wikis are their own projects and are not included in this, even though they are linked to from the frontpage.

This isn't an execution docket for dead wikis, but more of a call to arms to help out the less active wikis. If you're familiar with these other languages, and could possible contact Touhou communities in those regions for awareness, it'd help bring these wikis back to life. I don't exactly want to kill wikis off, since the whole purpose of this site is to bring all the different regional Touhou communities together (along with being a Touhou wiki :D). But completely withered wikis are a bit of a waste of resources. And I'm always looking at adding new wikis that could potentially become quite active.

Anyway, I'm currently in consideration of starting a Korean section to the site, and potentially others (Dutch?). If you have any opinions for/against any of these wikis, or think you can help with them, please chime in. Thanks! Momiji 22:02, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

For me a wiki is good active when it has at least 25 edits a day, but it seems it may be too high. Anyway, I have seen fora in Spanish, Polish and they were pretty active there. Another thing to note is that there actually excists a good Spanish fandom, but they just wont show up on the wiki (yet) (I am saying this due to, for example, touhou video's with Spanish subtitles). Maybe Nazeo can reach those people...
Other then that, I would like to see a Dutch wiki, but I have patience. ☢ Quwanti 22:41, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
I'll add that to the potential additions. Momiji 22:42, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Incubator is required before on to the list to prevent any inactive circumstances - KyoriAsh 22:53, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Ah, that seems good. I will contact the Dutch forum immediately. ☢ Quwanti 22:58, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Request for Comment: "No original research" rule for character pages

Concerning the previous discussion that took place here, there seems to have been several people favoring a "no original research" rule for character pages. The purpose of this RfC, thus, is to affirm that this is according to consensus.

To be unambiguous about this proposal, here is the comment by Deltasierra4, if people would like to give a "support" or "oppose" to this comment:

it's best if we preserve each character's page mainly with only facts about that character (e.g. what she does in a game, what's her appearance, and her character profiles from each game).

Comments? Votes?

  • Support If the character pages are to be 100% reliable, then original research (such as speculation, inferences, connecting two things that have not been connected in canon, everything fanon, etc.) should be separate from the main character pages.--Tosiaki 12:17, 21 March 2012 (UTC) Support withdrawn. Awaiting further opinions before giving a "support" or "oppose."--Tosiaki 17:03, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment First, we should probably define what OR is:
The term "original research" (OR) is used on Wikipedia to refer to material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published sources exist.[1] This includes any analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position not advanced by the sources. To demonstrate that you are not adding OR, you must be able to cite reliable, published sources that are directly related to the topic of the article, and directly support the material being presented.
The prohibition against OR means that all material added to articles must be attributable to a reliable published source... (Wikipedia)
The current status quo does not explicitly rule out "No Original Research". The relevant guidelines that we currently follow are:
General: Use material from official sources to write summaries and such. This includes but is not limited to Dialog, Scenario, Omake.txts, Print Works, Official Profiles, ZUN Interviews, and ZUN E-Mails. Keep any and all speculation off pages and inferences to a minimum.
Additional Information: For Fandom, be able to back up your claims. While it is plausible that character A may be crossed with character B from series C, if there isn't any/very little evidence that they are, it's not a fact.
Additional Information: Do not post any speculation unless it has already gained reputable status. Otherwise, it's just forcing your views onto other people.
It would make no sense for this to only affect Character pages without affecting pages of a similar class. This would include Locations.
This does place an unusual burden, and is weird considering we conduct OR with regards to translations in other parts of this website. - Kiefmaster99 14:06, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
We already ask that editors properly cite their sources of information. As for the non-canon info, we include it but we specifically delineate between it and canon. Momiji 15:37, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
OOooooh, that's what original research is? I thought original research was using sources outside the canon to infer things (such as saying "Prince Shoutoku historically did such and such, therefore Toyatsomimi must have as well." Truthfully, to disregard anything just because it isn't stated directly seems like it won't work for Touhou (or most media in general). For example, going by the strictest definition of "no analysis or synthesis of published material", we would be unallowed to include what IMHO are no-brainers like "That girl who's fire is in the shape of a phoenix was probably Mokou" or maybe even "Marisa is Reimu's friend." come to think about it (has that ever been explicitly directly stated anywhere instead of simply inferred from all their interactions?). To be honest, I can't think of a single fan wiki that doesn't allow at least some inference from analysis/synthesis of official sources. ...is there any other wiki that bars all analysis and synthesis of official works completely? Cause I know the One Piece Wiki, Super Mario Wiki, and Warhammer 40k Wiki sure as heck don't. TiamatRoar 16:12, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Well, that would still be OR, but in a sense is more speculative too (and is contestable). But yes, this would also remove other minor inferences, analyses, and syntheses such as "Her last name, "Knowledge", appears to be a reference to her amount of knowledge", as ZUN never explicitly stated it was. - Kiefmaster99 18:13, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Would it be better if instead a definition of the word "Knowledge" be included with a disclaimer that ZUN hasn't acknowledged that was the definition he had in mind? While that one seems a bit too trivial to the point of most people caring, if you were to extend a ban against a thing to its logical conclusion, I'm not sure that'd be a good thing. I was under the impression that lots of people liked such tidbits as Yuugi and Suika's names matching the four oni devas in Japan myth, even if ZUN never explicitly said he based their names off of those guys. I know the One Piece wiki goes out of its way to state what bird each female character was named after or what famous pirate many characters were named after despite Oda only confirming some of them, but also disclaims that Oda didn't outright state that was the reason he chose that name (except for cases where he did state as such, obviously). Certainly the Phoenix Wright wiki goes out of its way to explain the pun behind most of its series' characters' names, even if only some of those puns were ever outright explicitly stated to be the case by the developrs. If anything, my own issue with the Nicovideo stuff was that it seemed to go way overboard with pages upon pages of stuff where a simple paragraph explaining the meaning of the word or linking to wikipedia would have sufficed. TiamatRoar 18:34, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
"Appears" already serves that purpose. Though yes, for other names, I'm unsure if it's needed. For Suika and Yuugi, the relation is heavily implied based on other supporting detail (such as SC names), and would count as an inference (which would easily pass editor approval if challenged). It'd probably get a bit awkward to have to encounter that same disclaimer on every char page though. Change of tone may help serve to accomplish that (appears, probably, likely, etc).
This wiki is similar to Nicopedia, but the "speculation bar" is simply higher here than there. I can also echo TiatmatRoar's sentiments of going a bit overboard. - Kiefmaster99 18:45, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
I don't really understand what this would change from the status quo as listed above. Are you suggesting that every fact on the character pages should require a citation? How about just citing things that aren't from obvious sources (official profiles or articles focusing on that character), like a line of dialogue somewhere or a spell card or a manga chapter? I think people are generally doing it that way already.
If that status quo list is pretty much what you meant, I'm all for codifying it. Kapow 02:06, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
Clarification "No original research" actually means "no speculation whatsoever, regardless of how well-known it is," not just "speculation to a minimum." It also means "no fandom" rather than merely "for fandom, be able to back up your claims." Basically, it would be to limit the character pages (and presumably all pages dealing with canon) to what could be stated on Wikipedia.--Tosiaki 02:25, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
The status quo list says "Keep any and all speculation off pages", so no change there. Fanon goes in the Fanon section and only in the Fanon section, so no change there, either. If you're proposing we remove that from character pages, we'll need another place for it. Since that section is usually small (as opposed to, say, a theories/speculation section), I think it's easier for readers to find the fanon about a character on their page, rather than having a monolithic fanon page with a section for each character. Kapow 12:20, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
Comment It is true that currently, the page wikipedia:List of Touhou Project characters does not have that much information about the characters. However, that does not mean that more information could not be added to that page. If the information could be added there, it could be suggested that that could be a test as to whether the information could be added here as well.--Tosiaki 02:35, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
"No Original Research" does not mean "no fandom". It does however raise the bar on fandom to prevent most self-published facts from occurring, and forces all facts to be attributable to an external source (which then becomes a question of verifiability). Yukkuri is fanon, but is more easily citable. - Kiefmaster99 12:00, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia has standards of notability that we do not. You might see editors removing information from there due to lack of importance rather than canonicity. For that test to be reliable, we'd have to duplicate all of the character pages here onto that one wikipedia page, and they would definitely not like that. Kapow 12:20, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
Comment For the record, a whole lot of stuff was recently added to the wikipedia:List of Touhou Project characters under Reimu Hakurei and I bet that that section could be expanded even to have its own page (certainly Reimu and Marisa are notable enough characters to have their own pages on Wikipedia). Lack of notability on Wikipedia applies to things that are not well-known, but for something as well-known as Touhou, it would be appropriate to be more in-depth on Wikipedia, with the only reason that it is not more in-depth already is due to lack of contributions to that page on Wikipedia, not because it doesn't belong on Wikipedia.--Tosiaki 23:05, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
comment/oppose: Great, all day after working in a prep-up korean wiki I come back and see this =_=
Let me clarify something because it seems like you're seriously misunderstanding my statement that you're using to represent your opinion: I'm not suggesting that we keep it ONLY to facts, and I was not keeping anything like "no original research" in mind when I typed that up. I'm sorry but it seems like you're trying to change my statement into something that I've never had any thoughts about. I'll third what Tiamat has pretty much summed up at this point. So, in such a turn of events, I'll be the clown and "go against my own statement". --This message from DeltaSierra4 was delivered on 03:12, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
Oppose - Prevention of synthesis/analysis would deprive content from such pages, even minor inferences. One-fact Fanon would also either be cut or presented very ugly. - Kiefmaster99 12:34, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
Oppose Preventing analysis and synthesis of any and all available information in a series with as many vague inferences as Touhou would severely limit what we can do with the site, and would harm the easy access and dissemination of knowledge that everyone comes to us for. This is also true in the case of fandom ideas and I've even done a 180 in regards to "Theories" which I've come to understand and now believe has a place in some form. Whether it belongs on character pages, I don't know. I personally believe it should go there, as long as we make clear through the language that neither are established canon, although I much prefer the name "Official Speculation" instead.
It's a tricky proposition, but as one of the leaders in where fans get their information, we likely are the most used source of knowledge besides ZUN himself. It's unlikely that nowhere else but here would we be able to confirm what belongs. It's a wicked catch-22, but the point is we need to act as our own guardians and decide for ourselves what's most notable and verifiable. We're the most reliable Touhou outlet of any kind that there is since it's not like there are many who report on Touhou anything and the ones that do are using the same information as us.
And we have a responsibility to live up to that and make sure no false information makes it out, but just because some mistakes are made here and there it doesn't mean we should go to such an extreme as this. We simply are not Wikipedia and shouldn't try to be. We have a different purpose in regards to content and following such a rigid model as Wikipedia's is not conducive to sharing it. U❊T❊W 16:02, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Solution!

博麗 (はくれい)  霊夢 (れいむ)
Reimu Hakurei
haku͍ɽee ɺeemɯ (♫)

Conglomeration
Reimu Hakurei
Reimu Hakurei in Ten Desires

Category - PC Game
Species

Human

Abilities

Ability to the extent of flying in the air
Ability to the extent of manipulating auras
Ability as the Miko of Hakurei

Age

Presumably mid-teens[1]

Occupation

Shrine Maiden

Location

Hakurei Shrine

Music Themes

<toggledisplay showtext="Show Music Themes" hidetext="Hide Music Themes">

</toggledisplay>

Appearances
Official Game

<toggledisplay showtext="Show Official Game appearances" hidetext="Hide Official Game appearances">

</toggledisplay>

Print Works

<toggledisplay showtext="Show Print Work appearances" hidetext="Hide Print Work appearances">

</toggledisplay>

Music CDs

<toggledisplay showtext="Show Music CD appearances" hidetext="Hide Music CD appearances">

</toggledisplay>

Music CDs

<toggledisplay showtext="Show Miscellaneous Works" hidetext="Hide Miscellaneous Works">

</toggledisplay>

Other

<toggledisplay showtext="Show other appearances" hidetext="Hide other appearances">

</toggledisplay>

More Info
Nicopedia

<toggledisplay showtext="Show Nicopedia" hidetext="Hide Nicopedia">

  • Reimu has appeared in Graffiti Kingdom, a PlayStation 2 game.
  • PC-98 Reimu needed to have her turtle, Genji before she was able to fly by herself </toggledisplay>
Speculation

<toggledisplay showtext="Show Speculation" hidetext="Hide Speculation">

  • The Shrine Maiden at the end of Dolls in Pseudo Paradise could be Reimu, as she has her title of "Shrine Maiden of Paradise", among other things</toggledisplay>
Fandom

<toggledisplay showtext="Show Fandom" hidetext="Hide Fandom">

  • A running gag is Reimu never seems to get donations for her donation box and this causes her to solicit her donations</toggledisplay>
  1. ZUN's E-mails. Reimu is around mid-teen height.
  2. Although it is a stage 1 theme, ZUN's comments in th4_02.txt state that it is her theme.

Hi guys, I have come up with a solution to all our problems!

I have been watching the events that has been unfolding on the wiki and every night I went to bed thinking "How do I make everyone right?" And then, I had an epiphany while I was chatting with the people of IRC.

I have made new policies which are not detrimental to the wiki at all and will please everyone!

In addition, I made something nifty that pretty much accomplishes almost if not all, major concerns on the wiki.

So, here they are!

Name Translations When debating how a name should be spelled, and both sides have sufficient evidence, the name should be made as a redirect so this would clear any stalemates. If the sources include known canon works that have "misspellings" (ex PMISS, etc), then it is automatically placed under a "Redirect"

Generally, it's best to have experience in the name being translated (in this case Japanese <-> English)

"Speculation" Aha, there has been much talk of this. The pecking order goes like this;

  1. if it is explicitly stated in an Official source that is canon, then the point goes to that person.
  2. If the point is proven by Nicopedia, then it goes under there.
  3. For things relating to powers, theories, corollaries and otherwise not explicitly proven by ZUN (the man himself), then they go into Conceptuals.
  4. And lastly, if the point isn't able to be backed, then whatever action has been taken (usually addition) is nullified.

Fair eh?

Also, the thing must be put under question by an editor, let's not make more work than necessary, eh guys?

Now I would like to talk about that fancy box to your right.

That is the conglomeration of every idea I have come across thus far on the wiki.

This should cover almost, if not all ideas the users has had.

(Suggestions are always welcomed)

With this, we can get things moving again, yay! (=w=) d

♥★♦ 01:06, 23 March 2012 (UTC)


I say we just ditch the idea of a conceptuals page cause otherwise we'd have to move all the no-brainers like the four oni devas things to there. That just leaves the nicopedia page and... whatever else. Hell, I'm not sure ZUN ever technically explicitly stated Kaguya was based off of Kaguya Hime, even. TiamatRoar 04:10, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Are you saying it's a no-brainer that Kasen is one of the four devas? I thought that was still uncertain? If you can't clearly infer it from canon, it's not actual canon, just speculation about canon. As for Kaguya, since it's clear that much of Touhou is based directly on pre-existing mythology, the fact that ZUN chose to name someone after a mythological character or creature should definitely be considered canon information. He doesn't pick names out of a hat, after all. Kapow 12:51, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah, but that's the beauty of it.

No one has suggested for those to be moved yet, so they can stay where they are.

What I have posted are for future contested pages (and yes, I'll make a hidden category literally called Contested as to improve Editor input) so your "No-brainer" stuff are still safe. If they are in the future, then we fall back to the guidelines (which I've elaborated more due to questions) and we'll go on from there! :3

If you have anything else you wanna ask, (and the community in general) just go right on ahead and ask!

♥★♦ 23:39, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not a can of Conceptuals either, but I suppose the ball is rolling on that one already. Nothing I can do, but no matter how contested this stuff is I just don't see a need for it and a minor misstep is no reason to quarantine it all and make things more difficult than it needs to be. The distinction was always made between what's canon and not and that's fine. But if it stays, it should at least be available under the character article for example Reimu Hakurei/Conceptuals and not what's bound to be an annoyingly huge list. Simply put I had no problem with previous policy and see no reason to change it now.
As far as the infobox is concerned, I see no purpose to the Show/Hide function. Just a link would suffice. Gallery also seems out of place under that section and should be linked to Reimu Hakurei/Gallery, as well, not the other way around. Would gallery also still have a subsection on the character page with sample images and the link to the full page? That seems to make more sense and would be how most wikis do it. U❊T❊W 00:36, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
"Conceptuals" is not even a English word (conceptual is an adjective, not a noun) and should not be used here, I would suggest "Speculation" or "Theories". I also think "Potpourri" should be "More Info" or something similar. I've changed the example infobox to reflect this.
Also, I agree about the show/hide parts, examples have no business being in the infobox. There's no way to objectively decide which examples are the best, so it would be hard to tell people not to keep adding their own, and it's just a duplication and a distraction from the link which leads to the actual content. Kapow 12:51, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Changes have been implemented as far as the switching of Reimu Hakurei/(stuff).

To the first thing you've said I agree, one small argument shouldn't have the stuff get thrown into Conceptuals; that would be madness!!! I'm talking when there is like 3 vs 3 and not much momentum is being gained.

If the distinction really can be made clearly, then great, it can be kept where it is (easy solution). Again, the policy is really meant for disputes, not so much far as actual implementation. You might even say it's a guideline.

The suggestion for Conceptuals/Reimu Hakurei to Reimu Hakurei/Conceptuals (and Galleries 2) was a derp on my part, and I've changed it.

For your concern about the infobox, the show/hide function is to give a small summary before the User delves into it. I've given a elaborated summary so you would see how that is. If you wish for Gallery to have a subsection I don't see why not, and this means I'll get rid of it in the Infobox (avoid repetition) Originally, it would've have some sample images before the User continues to the Gallery page, but we'll go with what you said.

Any other concerns guys? :3

♥★♦ 00:59, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

I right now have no opinion as to whether or not speculations should go in there, but if speculations would go there, I think that inclusion within Nicopedia qualifies it as well-known speculaton especially since it is one of the most well-known sources for information relating to Touhou characters, and where lively discussion about the characters takes place. The exception is really questionable stuff from Nicopedia, such as the claim that the Hakkero might have been stolen from Sakuya (which I actually didn't bother adding in yet), a claim that was not repeated in other sources, but most stuff from Nicopedia is not like that claim.
I would also like to make the suggestion that if fanon is to be included on the character pages (I also have no opinion if fanon is to be included), that it should be able to be talked about anywhere on the character page outside of the character box, as long as it relates to what is canon and is always indicated as "by fans" or "in fanon" or something like that. I know that there is a "fanon" section, but if fanon is to be included, it would not make sense to enforce a strict separation of where it is talked about, given how fanon and canon are very much interrelated. Of course, if it gets as long as two paragraphs, then it should be moved to "fanon," but single sentences like "she is called Yuyu-sama by fans" should be okay in the introduction, and sentences like "although in fanon, ..., in canon, it is actually the opposite" and things like that should be okay elsewhere, if we were to talk about fanon.--Tosiaki 23:05, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Whelp, then do you want me to merge Conceptauls with Nicopedia for "speculations"? You do bring up a good reference to the "Hakkero might have been stolen from Sakuya" type, that stuff is much like Tvropes "WMG" (aka Wild Mass Guess) and we then go into another subcategory! (Yay!) At that point, do the fans wish to have it in the following ways

  • Have things that are really questionable your "Hakkero" reference comes to mind be included with the stuff that are legit like "Sakuya relationship with Eirin" or theories such as "Kaguya used her powers of eternity to have Mokou locked in eternal hatred of her" if at all? (If we do, do we still use Concpetuals or make a whole new category?)
  • Toss it all in Nicopedia (indiscriminately for "questionable stuff" that is)
  • Some third thing you (you guys) have in mind

While we ponder about that, I'll address the second piece. Should we make a page entirely dedicated to fandom and just have it linked to the Character's Infobox (while keeping a small summary) I'm a bit against having it as a subsection again, but I'll get over it if sufficient people think it should come back

I've also put the fan thing in for you to see how it would look.!

Lot's of choices to make folks, choose what you want to your hearts content! :D ♥★♦ 23:29, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

I am not sure if you understand what the Nicopedia pages are for, but the Nicopedia pages are purely for translations of the Nicopedia pages - nothing should be added to those pages that were not on the Nicopedia pages.
Also, moving stuff to another page is good if the character pages were no more than 4 paragraphs long, since the character pages would then be more like a directory with a list of links, but if we are not going to do that, then moving anything into pages like "Conceptuals" is pretty much the same thing as deleting it, since most people won't bother going to pages like that. Saying that you are "against having it as a subsection" is pretty much the same thing as saying that you would like to have it deleted if we are not going to the adopt the "very short character pages" approach.
Also, the claim that the Hakkero might have been stolen from Sakuya is not a "wild mass guess" - it is probably not a speculative claim, but rather simply a joke inserted by somebody and left in there by later editors for humor, not anything serious. The Nicopedia sometimes makes random jokes like that, and it is easy to tell when they are joking.--Tosiaki 00:13, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
It's... probably best that random nicopedia jokes stay on Nicopedia (and, if we end up having them, the nicopedia translation pages here). ....as an aside, do we have permission to translate Nicopedia's stuff? I recall when wikis didn't exist and I wrote up a giant street fighter plot guide that people of various languages asked me for permission first before translating them (which I of course granted, but it left me with the impression that asking first was proper etiquette. Then again, I suppose it's not like we asked ZUN if it was okay if we posted up translated versions of his work either. Well, at any rate, maybe we should just keep nicopedia's stuff on a separate page and anything from the nicopedia stuff that can actually be reasonably substantiated with canon sources can then be copy and pasted to where it would be appropriate. As for speculation, I kinda prefer what I did with Maribel's relationship to Yukari, which is basically list anything explicitly and indisputedly mentioned in canon that could be reasonably connected to any speculation about the issue without listing how to interpret that info (thus leaving it up to the reader to draw conclusions). It should be noted that in Maribel's case, we pretty much have confirmation from ZUN himself that something exists there. Really, as I stated before when saying which characters should have theory sections several weeks (months?) back, the only other major speculation I can think of where ZUN confirmed something exists is Sakuya. TiamatRoar 04:00, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
The other four characters (Yuyuko, Flandre, Kasen, Tewi) weren't really "theories" as they were an examination of things in canon or explanations of references that did not make definite conclusions at some portions - which is why it was probably a bad idea to have lumped them all into a "theory" section as if they were actually theories, because they weren't. For example, for Tewi, it could have simply said, "with one of ZUN's comments, Rabbit Sign 'White Rabbit of Inaba,' Owing Sign 'Vulnerary of Oonamuchi-sama,' 'Ancient Duper,' her living in the Tall Grass Cluster, and the implication that she is a god, she has many elements that she shares with the legendary White Rabbit of Inaba," but if that is all it stated, without explaining anything, then it would be less than informative.
One thing that I do know about Nicopedia is that other than random jokes like the one I mentioned before, they only mention speculations that have substantial backing, not random speculations that have no significance in the fanbase or canon (in several pages, they have instructions on the page instructing people to remove things if they think that the fanon or speculation is not significant). Therefore, while certain things require {{citation needed}}, there usually is something in canon that backs it up, even if it is not clear where it comes from. That is why I say that if the character pages are going to include any speculation, then being mentioned in Nicopedia should mean that it is significant enough, as long as it was not a random joke.
Nicopedia is not in CC or any other kind of such license, but since there are several other websites and blogs that mirror Nicopedia, so I do not think there should be any trouble in this regards.--Tosiaki 04:33, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
I allowed Tosi to do the Nicopedia translations in their own separate section, not embedded with the rest of the factual content on the site, to allow him to do his translation work in a specially sanctioned area while I evaluate the legality of such.
I think what's kind've happening is a division of what was though of as "non-canonical" into straight fanon stuff and the 'examination' stuff. I'm not sure I really consider the examination stuff to be so much "fanon" as it is inferences to the real-world inspiration for stuff in Touhou. I'd definitely give that sort've information more weight over straight fanon stuff, as far as inclusion in articles goes. How that'd all be split up is up to discussion. It was suggested before that if we split 'strictly non-canon' things into subpages, no one would ever look at them. But if the article itself is lengthened to discuss the in-depth 'examination' stuff, moving the fanon stuff to a subpage might be feasible. Then again, we're also back to picking the right terms for article sections. English is suffering.
Putting non-canon information on subpages should be fine, if people don't want to click through to them they probably would have skimmed over that section anyway. Just have a section header for each one with a line like "See: Reimu Hakurei/Speculation" linking to it, like how Wikipedia links to full lists of characters. I guess you could also use the show/hide thing and keep everything on one page, but that seems harder to maintain. Kapow 12:51, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
If you are suggesting that the character pages should mainly be copies of Wikipedia pages, with everything else moved to subpages, I have no problem with that, although it does not seem to be a popular idea with other people as of now. In case you missed my earlier reply regarding Wikipedia, I shall repeat it here:
Wikipedia actually can have detailed information about the characters since Touhou Project is a very notable work and the only reason why it does not have such detailed information now is because it was never added to Wikipedia in the first place, not because people would remove it. Recently, a lot of stuff was added to wikipedia:List of Touhou Project characters under Reimu Hakurei, and Reimu and Marisa are definitely notable enough to have their own pages on Wikipedia.--としあき 15:36, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
As far as inclusion of content in comparison to Wikipedia, I really do want us to be as inclusive and descriptive as possible, and with the proper delineations too, without sealing away our flexibility with ofuda (rules). Wikipedia really isn't meant to describe 'absolutely everything' about a topic, but the general idea, and then link to more detailed references. So I think that this sort've depth not only is improper for Wikipedia, but putting it on Wikipedia in the first place defeats the purpose of having a 'wiki for Touhou'. Anyway, that's all for my random rambling for now. Momiji 21:19, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
I consider Nicopedia to be two things. One, a wiki and fansite such as ourselves and two, to be fairly representative of what happens in the Japanese community. For content to be added to the main section, as for any other site, any speculation or inferences may be screened by us; any content worth adding to the main character pages should be able to stand up by itself upon independent analysis. For fanon-related content, I would consider citing them as sufficient. If the idea is limited to the Japanese fandom, we should note it as such.
Given that the NOR policy is leaning towards oppose, I question the relevance of Wikipedia. Suppose the content were duplicated on Wikipedia; we learn nothing as our policy permits more information than theirs. - Kiefmaster99 22:18, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
It is a wiki, but I don't see how it can be considered a fansite, as it documents things from politics to words like "ktkr" and ふつくしい to individual video series and uploaders on Nicovideo. It does document things that happen in the Japanese community, but it primarily documents the original work for everything, mentioning its occurrence Nicovideo just a little. Take, for example, its entry on mario, which primarily explains things related to the original work. Given how notable the Nicovideo Encyclopedia is, for a speculation or inference to be mentioned there should make it notable enough as a "speculation within the fanbase" as long as it is not a random joke. I also stated earlier that if fanon is to be included on the character pages, that it would not make sense to enforce a strict separation between mentions of fanon and canon, since they are interrelated and it would be otherwise impossible to make comparative statements like "in fanon, ..., but in canon, ..."--としあき 11:31, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
Referring to canon in the fanon section, like to explain the origin of something or to show how it differs from canon, should be fine. Fanon is based on canon, not the other way around, so that separation only works one way. Kapow 12:51, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
I do not quite see how it would be a problem to talk about fanon briefly in other sections as long as it is clearly indicated as fanon. For example, statements like "although in fanon, she has developed various personalities like ..., but in canon, her personality developed as..." do not really belong in the "fanon" section since it is more talking about canon rather than fanon. This is especially necessary when warning "although in fanon, there is this..., in canon, it is different" and then explaining the canon - in order to do that, it would be necessary to at least mention fanon in other sections. Statements like "in canon..., and this is usually interpreted in fanon as..." would probably make more sense integrated into the rest of the article text rather than as stand-alone statements in the "fanon" section. Moreover, brief statements of the most important fanon, like fan-nicknames in the introductions shouldn't be of any harm as long as it is clearly indicated as "she is called... by fans."--としあき 15:11, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
That is because, as Momiji has said, we specifically delineate between fanon and canon. Specific to this wiki, for some reason we have always shoved fanon into its own space. I support this because, as much as fanon has a very large spot in Touhou (which is why the fanon section exists and is large to begin with), it simply does not belong in canon-based sections. This is a question of relevancy. "Although in fanon, she has developed various personalities like ..., but in canon," is an unnecessary comparison when talking about canon.
In sharp contrast, the fanon section is specifically created to house fanon-based information. That solves the whole comparative issue since we can host all of it there. In that section, comparisons to canon descriptions are okay, so long as they are not overdone.
The only appropriate other section fanon would be okay to be under is general information, and only because it serves to summarize the page, including fanon. Although if we are summarizing fanon, I would be open to the idea of paragraphing fanon too. - Kiefmaster99 17:44, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
"Delineate between fanon and canon" does not necessarily mean separation - merely that they are clearly indicated as whether they are fanon or canon.
I would question whether or not the comparison you quoted is unnecessary because of the prominence of fanon in Touhou - more often than not, people have preconceived notions of characters from fanon that need to be dispelled first in order to clearly explain everything.としあき 18:03, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
By delineate, since the primary way we have always delineated b/w fanon and canon was by separating into sections, I interpreted it as just that. I also clarified this on IRC with Momiji.
I still think it's unnecessary. What people will see is what they will get: pure descriptions with no regard to fanon treatment. If people have preconceptions, they can try to verify it against what we provide. If it matches, then it does. If it contradicts, they will realize. If there is no direct contradiction, then they will figure that out as well. If a preconception is known well enough, it will be addressed separately in Fanon. You also risk annoying readers who do not wish to see fanon cruft in the in-canon sections. - Kiefmaster99 19:09, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
The question is, does it annoy people? We currently have no data on this, since we have never tried it before (at least, not in any form other than the former "fun facts" section), and moreover, it has so far not annoyed anyone on Nicovideo Encyclopedia or Pixiv Encyclopedia. The place to go to for canon uninterrupted by fanon would be Wikipedia (the Japanese version of Wikipedia has almost the same content as Nicovideo Encyclopedia for Touhou-related information except without fanon parts), and most fan wikis that I see integrate at least a little fanon information into the rest.としあき 19:25, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
Editor opinion leans towards a policy supporting exclusion of fanon cruft from in-canon sections. While I will not support including any fanon in the in-canon sections, you may attempt to solicit opinion from other editors.- Kiefmaster99 21:24, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
Given how it has not been tried, I think that it is best to at least give this a trial-run before coming to a judgment as to whether it is positive or negative.--としあき 09:29, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
It boils down to opinion. I just happen to be on the side that finds it negative, and have already decided so based on previous edits I have read. If enough editors think otherwise, sure. - Kiefmaster99 09:45, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
Even if we havn't tried it, I still see it as negative. I see it as troublesome to everytime say "by fans", "in fanon" or "among fanon" all over the pages from top to bottom. Also, I oppose having fanon and trivial info on a seperate page. I see this as very unnatural and as said before, their maybe some not choosing to go to seperate pages just to look at info referring to the same char. However, I don't mind if fanon (not trivial) info was chosen to be on seperate pages. Tony64 (Talk/Con.) 13:10, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
I think that what is being misunderstood is that I am not talking about integrating all fanon information into the page, but only the brief and important things, as well as when in comparisons - with the rest going in the "fanon" section. That is to say, I am talking about sparingly referring to fanon, not talking about fanon all the way through the page.--としあき 13:23, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
Right, I forgot that it encompassed other stuff. In that sense, it operates more like a wikified version of TVTropes or KnowYourMeme, for the lack of a better English comparison. I concur with Kapow's comments, with one addenum - in the rare instance that canon is partially derived from fanon (daiyousei, etc.), it should stick in the main section. - Kiefmaster99 13:07, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Not really sure where to put this.

I was halfway through fixing the redlinks for the music (as seen from the popularity poll list) by making new redirects when it occurred to me that it'd be better to just find the old pages and move them to the new destinations, fixing links to the old pages along the way. Can someone with powers delete all the pages I just created so I can do that to the ones I made new pages for? Assuming that's the right thing to do, anyway, tell me if it isn't. - 04:05, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

It'd be helpful if you posted said links here so the Admin has a easier time in doing so. Thanks in advance!

♥★♦ 04:08, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Not sure how moving affects this or if it's what you intend, but it's better to keep redirects from the older titles. U❊T❊W 05:32, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
So just keep doing what I'm doing? - 05:42, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Regarding Translation Changes

I'm not entirely sure where to put this, but I figured this would be the best place, since it refers to the wiki as a whole.

I've noticed a lot of translation changes being made on what I feel are clear, established terms and concepts in the Touhou series. Ghosts to Bourei and Phantoms to Yuurei. Changing Utsuho's "Foot of Fusion" into the "Foot of Decomposition". Modifications to several song titles, such as "Beloved Tomboyish Girl" to "Tomboyish Girl in Love", or "Bloom Nobly, Cherry Blossoms of Sumizome" to "Bloom Nobly, Ink-black Cherry Blossom". The addition of "to the extent of" to most, if not all, power descriptions.

I run a Touhou music channel dedicated to providing English translations for everything that's uploaded so that people can more easily search for Touhou arrangements without having to use Japanese in their searches. I also staff at what I believe is the only existing Touhou MUCK, which can often be the first resource for people new to the Touhou series as they roleplay in the setting. We've linked to this wiki as a reliable source of information on the Touhou series so that we can also have our own wiki on the server for players to post their profiles and such. However, the recent translation changes make both of those positions difficult.

In many cases, these are changes to things that have been established for years and, though my opinion may be off because I do not understand Japanese myself, worked perfectly well. These changes both make this wiki as a resource incredibly confusing to both new Touhou fans and long-lasting Touhou fans, since if they copy and paste a song title into YouTube to look for arrangements of the theme, for example, they might come up with no perfect matches or different titles for the same thing. Meanwhile, old fans have to figure out whether to stop using terms that have been in use for about a decade or conflict with the wiki and go with terms they've been using. For example, in the case of the TouhouMUCK, if a player wants to look up information on Phantoms to have something to reference for their character, they now can't do that because the term is Yuurei. If someone copied one of the song title translations into YouTube, they might get lowered results because the English translation has changed. The conflict between "Solar Sect of Mystic Wisdom" and "Sun Worship of Gnosis" was bad enough, but now we have that for at least five or six other songs as well.

The issues with the "Foot of Decomposion" and "to the extent of" are relatively minor, but still, as someone who is an English minor, very frustrating. As still stated in Utsuho's game profile, the Yatagarasu had the power to split and fuse atoms, also known as nuclear fission and nuclear fusion. Even if "Foot of Decomposition" is, for whatever reason, a more literal translation, it seems much more reasonable to name it the "Foot of Fission" for both simplicity's sake and for just plain sounding right next to the "Foot of Fusion". "To the extent of," meanwhile, adds absolutely nothing to clarify the description of powers and only serves to make them take up more space and sound needlessly awkward.

Again, since I don't understand a single character of Japanese, maybe I'm missing something. However, I don't think it can be denied that, since this wiki is the main source of information for Touhou, these changes are complicating matters rather than helping them. "If it's not broken, then don't fix it," and all that. Especially in the case of a series with a group of fans as increasingly expansive as Touhou's, which has been going on strong for several years. Squidtentacle 00:11, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

When there is something broken, though, it should get fixed, such as using incorrect words like "phantoms," as we have always been running under a philosophy of having more accurate translations, not just sticking with the old ones because they are popular, especially when certain translations have caused confusion in the past. Perhaps we can have a separate page on deprecated translations so as to make it easier to find things on YouTube etc. that have used old translations for years (like "Bloom Nobly, Cherry Blossoms of the Sumizome," since the new translation does seem to be less frequently used)―I know that Quwanti has been keeping a list of certain translation changes. However, I would not suppose that to freeze all translations in place due to their popularity is the best way to go.--としあき 00:37, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
I do agree that with certain changes, especially changes to song titles, makes it somewhat more difficult to search for things. Perhaps it is about time that Quwanti's list gets moved to an appropriate place and perhaps have a link to it from the main page, or something, so that newcomers can understand some of the deprecated translations out there in existence.--としあき 00:48, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Please be careful when doing deep changes like article or file renaming, as many things are interlinked across the different wikis. If you do stuff like this, it's your responsibility to fix the resulting breaks. Thanks. Momiji 01:09, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
With regards to translations, the general rule of thumb we follow is:
"More correct translations should be preferred over incorrect "established" names."
Unfortunately, yes, changes in translation do occur. The side effect of such changes is a shift (or rift) in fandom usage, as this wiki is essentially the de facto translation authority for the majority. If a change is made here, everybody else will follow it. Do this too many times, and you're going to piss off the fanbase. Change it to something nonsensical, and watch them rage.
That being said, perhaps a balancing test could be implemented - if a change in translation does not significantly improve the meaning, we could reject it. Significant is of course a subjective term. We have to be able to change translations that are wrong/can be improved quite a bit (UNL, Hall of Dreams Great Mausoleum), but at the same time, I can think of changes made here that are very minor (Septette for a Dead Princess, Fantastic Tales of Tohno). Regarding HoDGM, I'm a bit surprised no one brought up the fact that our TL contradicted gensokyo.org's patch by a mile. Most searches will thankfully accommodate minor changes, but I can't say the same for major ones.
The best solution is to not make errors in the first place. Failing that, it's better to tackle this problem sooner rather than later. A translation made many years ago that is too well-established is likely to see some resistance from fans, just for the sole reason that it is established. The sooner it is changed, the less painful it will be years down the road.
At least on this wiki, searching outdated terms will lead to redirects. Too bad it doesn't apply to the web.
Individual editors here will have to weight the pros (slight improvement in translation) vs the cons (change; fans having to relearn the term). - Kiefmaster99 03:29, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I kind of agree that there has been a little too much changing as far as terminology goes. A great deal of this has to do with the fact of more knowledgable/experienced translators are working on stuff, and previously incorrect translations should be fixed, like with Cirno's theme song title. However, things like changing the whole ability descriptor and certain terms needs much more discussion by both people who understand the original Japanese intent as well as the meaning of the English translation. I think the ability thing, despite it happening entirely on the wiki, was not properly handled and people tried changing pages for a subject still being fine-tuned, which caused a lot of confusion. It might be best to take it to forums (that will provide constructive critisism), explain the Japanese intent and let them work out some kind of solution. It takes more time, but with the community effort, it will make things more solid overall, I think. I still don't agree with the change from Ghosts and Phantoms to the Japanese terms. Maybe that needs a similiar debate process. NForza 03:41, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, this was the kind of problem I was worried about when the translation changes started taking place... Even for technical stuff like "Septette for a" vs "Septette for the" and the "Flight of the Bamboo Cutter" case. Things were changing too much, and I was in doubt that the fanbase would be able to catch up with all these changes. While Quwanti's list of translation changes could help on handling this problem, it still doesn't change the fact that the fanbase will have to adapt to the new translation, which doesn't always go that well as expected. Besides, the fact that we had to make a list of all these changes indicates just how many changes were being made -- just how many changes that the fanbase had to catch up with were being made.
I would have to second on Kief's solution of adopting translation changes that would significantly improve the translation instead of making changes wherever a translation issue is brought up. As I'm looking through everything that's listed on Quwanti's page I feel that some of these made little or no difference in meaning and yet the wordings were changed significantly. As for NForza's suggestion, that'd be good too: Take the debate to MoTK or somewhere so that the fanbase gets to know what's going on and so that we can get some feedback on the translation issue: The most stressful part about these translation changes taking place on this wiki was that not enough feedback was provided for changes. --This message from DeltaSierra4 was delivered on 04:01, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Some more comments from me. I would agree that change of terms also need a similar debate process as with any change in translation. I know that the French Touhou Wiki compiles all of its used terms on one page, and has an associated Talk page. While they mostly follow similar usage as us, I know that they do differ on some usages such as Spirited Away and Flower-viewing Event (they use the Japanese term instead; might be a language thing). Unlike us, they also have to deal with English terms too, and they (and I) do have discussion over some terms like SDM.
As with discussion off-site, I'm not exactly a big fan since not only do Talk pages function as discussion space, but they also serve as an archive and record-keeping of arguments. I only ask that if you do choose to pursue an off-site talk, that a summary of the discussion is posted here. - Kiefmaster99 04:12, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Since I have no intent on ever going to MoTK, I would also favor having discussions on-site. Perhaps advertising discussions going on here could invite more participation.--としあき 07:47, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
There's a limit to how many people we can make come over here and register to participate in these discussions, and even though we "advertise" about these discussions on other websites, that would still motivate only a handfull of users who would be willing to register to participate in the discussion here. Don't worry, we wouldn't want to be asking them for things like "What word should we use for this translation?" - instead, it would be a good idea just to get a response from them to see whether the proposed new translation (suggestion of which would be made by an editor on this wiki) is doing its job or not. And who knows? There's a chance that somebody from the forums not on this wiki might propose an even better solution. --This message from DeltaSierra4 was delivered on 23:04, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Conversely, we'd be asking our users to have to register on other websites, and it wouldn't be fair for them. It's up to other editors who frequent other fansites to bring up issues should they arise. - Kiefmaster99 21:51, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I do believe there should be a page where it tells you which japanese word should be translated into which english word (and how the bgm title should be translated). Basically, A page where the democratic result of "what every translator agreed upon" are listed. Its disucssion page (the "talk" tab?) would be a focal point for debates rather than having them scattered all across the "major topics" or "encyclopedia section" (if someone is raging...just send'em over to this page). It could be simple as a table (japanese on the left and english on the right) so all the translator can refer to it as a template while translating. For example:

ghostly things
霊     spirit
幽霊 ghost
亡霊 phantom
soul
幽鬼 spectre

It would certainly save time for translators who has to research which english word is the most popular translation upon other wiki translators. Tren 20:06, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Hm, it never came to mind that switching ghost and phantom around would have solved the problem more easily... Yuurei is overly translated as ghost since it's clealy used as such in most cases, and since bourei is rarly used, it would have made that easier (Aside from that, switching the English around would probably have resulted in less of a conflict than changing it to romaji). Anyway...I agree to that idea, but all the guidelines should be well planned before it's officially set. --Hikaruxz 20:28, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Also, there are synonyms like 動物 and . I've also seen spirit being used alot as well, so there would be more words that are synonyms of eachother. So are you going to discuss specific definitions for every single word, or group them up when possible. Of course synonym problems are not exactly bad since most people who don't know Japanese won't bother to cheak and see that two words in the same chapter ended up meaning the same (When I mean chapter, I see it mostly in the print works). Edit:Correct me if im wrong on that last part since I only see it whenever my friend talks about it in school which doesn't correspond with the chapter I read directly from the book. --Hikaruxz 21:02, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
There is a problem with the "spirit" one: it is 精霊.--としあき 21:22, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
Of course there are words that can be translated into multiple words. 動物..獣..animals...beasts...They both work. I'm talking about technical terms. Although ,even by standard japanese definition, 亡霊 and 幽霊 may have similar meaning....within gensokyo, the two are completely differernt entities, each with specific characteristics that clearly splits them apart. The two distinct word needs two distinct translation. On another note, if we were to make such a page, we can also debate/agree upon which word should Not be translated (ex 鬼=Oni ..isntead of Ogres). also...answering the question above, I believe 精霊 are "elementals". I've only seen Patchouli use that term within touhou. 精霊使い are commonly translated into "elementalist" in other fantasy games as well. Tren 02:33, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Not quite correct. It was a term used by ZUN in his e-mails and in one of his blog posts, presumably talking about the "hairball-like" generic enemies.--としあき 04:43, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Correcting above statement. The "hairball-like" generic enemies are 毛玉. I'm assuming the blog-post you saw is "あれ(通称毛玉)は精霊レベルのものなので、顔はありませんよ...ちなみに、パチェは精霊魔法系の使い手..." "精霊は、殆ど人格を持っていません。自然そのものなので喋れない場合が殆どです。". Maybe the hairballs Are elementals...it's not clear. Either way, the two quotes made by Zun further proves that 精霊 = elementals. Tren 17:19, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Hmm... after investigating the Japanese Wikipedia page on this, it does seem to be an acceptable way of putting it.--としあき 18:38, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Frankly, while it's a concern, I don't think it's anything we should worry ourselves about. In short, it's not our problem. While we are a wiki for the fans, letting ourselves become cornered by long-standing, nonetheless popular inaccuracies is how we've arrived here, tending to these established mistakes that now need attention. I would argue that much of it is indeed broken and needs fixing, in much the same way "UNL" was broken.
If people feel strongly enough about the changes, they know they can come here to disagree. Failing that, enough of us likely have some involvement in other communities already that allow us to see what they think of these changes as they come along and bring that up here if need be. However, it's not our job to go wherever to feel them out and see what they think. But honestly, I think if they can't be bothered to come here and easily register in order to voice their opinions then that's their fault. Our job is merely to try and get it correct, no matter how many don't like it. I think we have been hasty in some of our translation changes recently, during which they could've been discussed more and additional solutions found, so that's something that could change. But keeping the status quo just because it sounds cooler or we're more comfortable with it since it's what is established isn't the solution. U❊T❊W 04:45, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
I can agree on that. I found tons of translation errors in Bohemian Archive in Japanese Red even going through a single page of it, so I think that there is more than a few stuff that needs changing. I haven't been doing much translation revising lately due to other stuff, but it is clear that there is a need for revisions on a lot of things.--としあき 04:55, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
I wasn't advocating getting user input for all facets, just that one about the abilities in particular since no one else on here was able to come to a consensus. However, inaccuracies do need to be revised no matter how long they've been established, just like the title for Cirno's theme. Also, I have been revising BAiJR's pages when I have free time (going down the list, just finished Letty's), although I might not have as much of it in the coming weeks. NForza 10:11, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Well, that's fine, I guess. Something like this debate warrants that. I was mostly just concerned about where the line was to be drawn. For example, why not Fantasy Heaven, too, or any other particularly contentious translation quagmire, is what I was thinking this could lead to. U❊T❊W 10:26, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
Translations will never be 100% accurate. In this case, I think the English terms are close enough that we can come up with a set of conventional translations (like the list above) and explain the exact details of the original term on the page for that term. Youmu's profile will say she's "half-phantom", and "phantom" will link to the Phantom page which explains exactly what it means in this context. This way, people who aren't interested in the exact meaning of "yuurei" can still read Youmu's profile and get the gist of it without having to look up a Japanese word (and no, "yuurei" is certainly not a loanword).
There are some cases where a Japanese term must be left untranslated, but this should be considered a last resort. We don't have an English term for "youkai" (much broader than "monster", which is already vague and often metaphorical), or "sennin" ("hermit" is ridiculously inadequate), so using the closest English word there would not convey the same concept to the English reader. We do have one for "bourei", it means "ghost". The Japanese have different ideas about what ghosts are like, but that is beyond the scope of the word itself.
We need to draw the line on non-translation of Japanese words in a sensible and consistent way, so that it is only done when truly necessary. Kapow 21:58, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi there, after hearing about some of the translation changes that's been going on, I thought I'd take a peek at whats going on here. I can say over the last few days, it's been a bit of a trip trying to figure out what's going on and I'd like to make a few complaints and suggestions.

1st problem I ran into I voiced in the IRC chat is that trying to figure out why what was changed for whatever reason was very difficult to say the least. My example stems from trying to track down the reason for the change to Yuyuko's PCB theme from "Bloom Nobly, Cherry Blossoms of Sumizome ~ Border of Life" to "Bloom Nobly, Ink-black Cherry Blossoms ~ Border of Life". There was a discussion about this on the Talk page for the PCB music page, but the discussion on there ended in 2010. It didn't help matters when the remixes page still has the old translation for some reason and that had no clues itself, and while it appears to be related to Daikaitei, it really isn't. Pretty much the only way I found out what was by visiting the IRC and accidentally clicking the Talk page on the "View History" page of the PCB music page. The infamous Ability discussion is also strewn around in at least 4 different talk pages that I know of.

2nd problem is I have concerns about certain changes, such as the complete change from "Ghost" and the like to "Buurei" and "Yuurei". While it's more accurate, it's also creating another level of jargon and I'm not all too sure anymore if I can refer to Yuyuko as a Ghost or a Yuurei. I do like how on Yuyuko's page it shows the ghost and lists it as a sub-type, but then the two pages of ghost sub-types don't even link to each other, so they are sorta the same but not...?

The Ability issue also stems into this in a way. While trying to keep to the awkwardness that ZUN made, it doesn't seem like it's been considered very much that maybe it isn't going to translate all that well into English that others not familiar with the series can understand. I think a good way to handle it would be with the pun made in the "Hang in there, Kogasa-san!" that led to the term of "Sanaelate". While it's not as accurate as trying to translate it straight from the Kanji("I'll never forgive you!"), it helps keep the pun in a way we could understand and it's general meaning was left intact(Sanae and forgive sounding the same in Japanese.). I'm not asking for something like rice balls being replaced with a hoggie (lookin at you 4kids), but making a term that's awkward for the sake of 100% accuracy I don't think will help a random English speaker understand what's going on.

3rd problem is all these changes being made aren't very uniform at all. The Yuyuko theme having both names is one example, another is Youmu doesn't seem to have that sub-type notation. I know I can change these (and intend to once everything settles down and I have a better feel for what's going on) but very few of the changes that are happening are very uniform and adds another level of confusion. I know I can clean up after these, but I can't really catch everything myself, ya know?

All of these link down to a concern I have that changes are being made more for accuracy alone, and not really considering the outside parties whose trying to use this as a reference. I'm not petitioning for a complete reversion of the site but more asking that we try and be more thoughtful with the changes being made. Firestorm29

Without being around for some time, I guess it can be confusing when things were changed in the past. The discussion regarding the ghosts is taking place at Talk:Yuurei so feel free to continue the discussion there.
Also, regarding Sanaelate. Wow, that is actually quite a clever way to translate this. Anyways, I am not exactly sure how that applies to the abilities thing; could you clarify?--としあき 08:40, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
I was thinking that the separate discussions should be consolidated in a certain place (like the Talk page of the page affected) to make it easier to know what was going on. I do realize that may be easier said than done.
Well, the concept I was trying to get at is that trying to keep to the Kanji as close as possible and make it sound awkward may mess with the meaning more than a single English word or a few like a suggestion I saw that works like "Signature Ability" or "Capabilties", which aren't consistent with the kanji or how odd it sounds, but it's easier for some random English person to understand. I've seen a fe arguments that the English translation needs to be odd sounding without thinking about how those outside not familiar with what we are would read it as. Firestorm29
I would say "approximate ability" is better. The important thing to get across is that the ability is not absolute nor even definitive.--としあき 09:18, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
That maybe true, it maybe not, but that's not what I was trying to say right now. I just wanted to try and touch on the idea getting the concept right and understandable rather than offer my own ideas on how to translate right now. Firestorm29
Indeed. In any case, would you say "approximate ability" is easy enough to understand?--としあき 09:36, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
I kinda like the Signature Ability idea, more because it runs similar to like a wrestler's signature move. Kinda like how one of Chris Jericho's special move was a submission move(Liontamer, Walls of Jericho), but he was capable of much more than that in terms of his ability to wrestle. It might be universal enough to get the concept through of a theme they like, but it isn't all they can do.
If you think that that is what the abilities are about, then it just shows that "signature ability" is not a good choice, since that is not what the abilities are about at all. It is more about "this is sorta the range of what this character can do (saying nothing about whether the character can actually do it or not)," not "it is this character's special." "Approximate ability" may sound more unimpressive, but then again, it is supposed to be unimpressive.--としあき 10:05, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
Signature Ability being specials movies wasn't exactly what I was trying to state, more like something they're known for but it's not all they can do. Miko's signature ability is listening many conversations but isn't limited to simply that, as she is really good at Taoist techniques, like what her spellcards would imply. Firestorm29
The problem is that their abilities are not mainly what they are known for in many cases; it is actually a lot more mundane than that. Their abilities are actually more like very vague statements of what the character might be able to (approximately), not anything "impressive" or "anything they are known for."--としあき 10:36, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

To address translation consistency issues. Whenever a translation gets changed, this means that we as editors need to go change every entry, which also means that some work may be behind. Always consider the music origin pages to be the current TL, and not other remix pages, IaMP and SWR included. For doujin music pages, I don't know how to change the mouseovers. - Kiefmaster99 08:49, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

The mouseovers are done via the songsource.js, but you might want to ask WGH about that. Other then that, a translation is often only applied to those part, at many doujin albums a song which uses the same title as the original is still using an outdated translation. (Can't a bot fix those problems?) ☢ Quwanti 09:23, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
Ah, thanks. I've been trying to find it but manual searching has failed me. EDIT: Goddamnit it's protected. - Kiefmaster99 10:29, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Re: Using "Touhou" or "(literal translation)"

Further from Talk:Touhou Wiki/Archive 9#Using "Touhou" or "(literal translation)"
It seems unfortunate that I have to bring this up now two months after changes were made. However, I do not think that there was adequate consultation on whether changes should be made and any other problems. I mentioned the following earlier:
"If the variations of Eastern/of the East/Oriental/etc are a problem, then we can just unify all translations to lead with 'Eastern'." (Emphasis added)
This "if" was not discussed thoroughly at all, and I never explicitly supported using "Eastern" over all equivalents - only over "Touhou". The other problem I have with leading with "Eastern" is that it's bad if it's preceding other adjectives, because then nine times out of ten, the adjective order is violated (which is just plain bad English). Compare "Eastern Mystical Dream" vs "Mystical Eastern Dream".
There is a counterpoint, and that is that "Touhou" is supposed to be relatively separate from the rest of the title.
I thus have some questions I'd like to pose:
1. Are the Japanese titles grammatically acceptable in all cases?
If so, should we reword it to be grammatically acceptable?
If not, should we defy English convention anyways?
2. Should we change all instances of "Oriental" to "Eastern"? - Kiefmaster99 19:34, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
Personally, I think "Oriental" is fine. It sounds nicer than "Eastern", at least.
And maybe it's just me, but I don't see the difference between "Eastern Mystical Dream" and "Mystical Eastern Dream". It's two adjectives, in this case, and it doesn't really matter which one is placed first. The second, admittedly, sounds better to me. Squidtentacle 21:15, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
We can choose either "oriental" or "eastern" but the usage needs to be consistent (it should be either one or the other), and they should always be the beginning of the title, since it should be permissible to chop off the word "eastern" and consider the rest to be an abbreviated version of the title. For example, 妖々夢 needs to be able to stand on its own, and so it shall be "Mystical Dream." The 東方 portion should be considered an addition to it.--としあき 00:58, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
I am unable to answer question 1 as of now without further information. I am however not quite thrilled about changing several entries from Oriental to Eastern just because a synonym was used, unless the title is also being changed for a different reason anyways. I find such changes to be rather pointless on multiple titles.
...or at least normally that would be the case. After taking another look at the music titles affected, it actually wouldn't be so bad. The two most well-known entries, "Mystic Oriental Dream ~ Ancient Temple" (PCB) and "Mystic Oriental Love Consultation" (brought back in SWR) have to undergo revisions anyways from "Mystic" to "Mystical". That leaves "Oriental Sky of Scarlet Perception" as the next well-known one, and with all the other entries relatively less-known, there's less resistance to changing those. - Kiefmaster99 04:14, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
東方 could be either, but seems to skew more toward Eastern. Also, not that I or most seem to mind, but Oriental may be considered objectionable by a few. That in mind, Eastern. However, because I like how it sounds in titles, and the general image it conveys in regards to a locale like Gensokyo, I prefer Oriental. U❊T❊W 08:24, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Well, I personally chose "eastern" over "oriental" because I would be one of those who consider it objectionable, and don't really like the word "oriental" that much.--としあき 12:18, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
At least where I live, "oriental" only starts becoming objectionable when it starts being used to refer to other people. Though personally, I don't care too much (my decision to stick with "eastern" was pretty arbitrary). - Kiefmaster99 20:59, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
I was the one that spearheaded "Mystical" over "Mystic" because there can be no doubt that "Mystical" is an adjective, whereas "Mystic" may be, in fact, a mystic. Also, think of "Touhou" and "Seihou". One term should mean "eastern", the other term "western". Finally, in my opinion, the first adjective listed in a list of adjectives is the most important adjective, although technically any of the adjectives or all of the adjectives can be chopped off, though the succeeding noun loses some of its meaning and/or emphasis. That's why they are adjectives. Code Slasher 21:12, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
While true, mystic, at least when compounded with other adjectives (or even by itself since it can serve as an adjective), slants it towards it being an adjective. Using "mystical" does help somewhat I guess. - Kiefmaster99 21:32, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Well, it is not just that the beginning 東方 actually "can be chopped off" but that it actually was chopped off in usages within the former Gensou Bulletin Board (example), and furthermore 妖々夢 was actually the name of one of the themes (to be more precise, the title screen theme).--としあき 04:32, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
No precedent exists for "choppability". All canon titles that use both 東方○○○ and ○○○ (Suimusou, Hisouten) start with nouns in their English translations, so choppability does not pose a problem for them. The issue is whether it would make sense to go "Mystical Eastern Dream" -> "Mystical Dream" anyways.
Currently, consensus leans towards 1. use Eastern over Oriental 2. change all titles 3. defy conventional English adjective ordering by leading with Eastern, which was the way changes were made. - Kiefmaster99 06:36, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Well, 東方妖々夢, if read together, is clearly a "mystical dream" that is eastern, not an "eastern dream" that is mystical, which is why it would make sense to start with "eastern." The same goes with every other title that goes in this style.--としあき 06:47, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Mystical is a mere adjective. The dream is "mystical" and "eastern", which is why it will read very awkwardly normally. - Kiefmaster99 06:50, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
In actuality, though it should not be interpreted as two adjectives ("mystical" and "eastern") both modifying "dream," but rather as a single adjective ("eastern") modifying 妖々夢, and although its translation ("mystical dream") did introduce an additional adjective, "mystical dream" should be thought of as a single unit (in other words, "Mystical Dream" should be thought of as a proper noun in itself, not simply as a "dream" modified as "mystical").--としあき 06:59, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Then I guess it depends on whether this kind of exception should be granted to all 東方○○○ titles. Given ZUN's intentional use of this style, perhaps it does.
On a related note, "Trojan Green Asteroid" makes me want to hurt somebody. There had better be some significance in "green". - Kiefmaster99 07:07, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Meh, think of トロヤ群の密林 (Trojan Asteroid Jungle). Maybe there's your green.

Erg... I just thought of something. It seems like it would make more sense to say "Touhou Judgement in the Sixtieth Year ~ Fate of Sixty Years" or "Oriental Judgement in the Sixtieth Year ~ Fate of Sixty Years" than "Eastern Judgement in the Sixtieth Year ~ Fate of Sixty Years". It seems more plausible to say that the judgement is "of, or referring to, Touhou" or "from the Far East" than to say "from a eastward direction". Code Slasher 02:45, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't like sticking with Touhou regardless, for reasons mentioned previously. The word "eastern" in pretty much every context has to be taken as "from the (Far) East" or "Oriental" (contrast with Seihou) so this small caveat would apply to every instance.
I did suspect that the jungle had some importance, but the ordering still irks me. And on that note, I would begin to assume the Jupiter Trojans for being a 'jungle', or group of asteroids. - Kiefmaster99 04:38, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm sending a work order for a banner that is open for anyone to complete. This would reflect the stature of Touhou Wiki.net, so to be blunt about it, it must look good. The reason for the request is there are a lot of sites which require Touhou Wiki.net to have a banner representing us and this would certainly fit the bill. I can guarantee at least 3 different places that demand for such a banner, and I expect more as I carry out my work. Make em good, and please make them externally hosted (use Dropbox, Tinyurl, Photobucket, Imgur, etc.) Thank you. ♥★♦ 04:48, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

A banner is easy enough to make, but I think it'd be more appropriate if we have someone make a new Alice logo. It could be similar to the current one, but we can be sure we're able to use it. I think the current logo image just came from Pixiv. Momiji 05:37, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
According to the full image it's likely associated with Moedan or its site in some way and not from Pixiv. Of course, that still doesn't affect anything about the need to change. U❊T❊W 08:51, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Did some source tracking: Danbooru link (NSFW) (I knew it was from that image with a chalkboard on it!)
No artist is listed, but looking at the Gelbooru tags tells me the artist is Haniwa. (Beat me to it) - Kiefmaster99 08:53, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Further research shows that Gelbooru is the only booru with that tag; as well, I am unable to locate that image on pixiv. It is an unlockable wallpaper from the game Moedan. - Kiefmaster99 09:17, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
A tiny side note: that link above becomes "safe for work" if you use Firefox and Adblock Plus. Code Slasher 21:16, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Which would explain why I didn't see it, but that may not be the case for others.
After some further consultation on IRC, the general consensus is that, before we can continue making a banner, we need a new Alice logo. - Kiefmaster99 21:46, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Hmm... I don't understand. The Alice in that link looks different from the Alice in the Touhou Wiki banner. Code Slasher 23:30, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
The background was removed, and she was flipped horizontally. Momiji 04:37, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

But it looks even more different than that. For example, I don't see the glasses. Code Slasher 20:39, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

The glasses does not have any borders (or how they should be called anyway) so it is logical you don't see them on a small image ☢ Quwanti 20:48, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Take the wallpaper and shrink it to 22% on Paint. Frames should be barely visible. If that doesn't convince you I don't know what will. - Kiefmaster99 22:14, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Hah, thanks. Shrinking it to 22% worked. Code Slasher 21:17, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

In short, we need a new banner, but we can't really continue using the current logo because it's not ours. The current Alice logo was cropped from an unlockable wallpaper from the game Moedan published by D.N.A. Softwares, and possibly drawn by Haniwa according to one source. There are two solutions to this problem - we can either track down the authors for permission, or we can request replacement artwork from the fanbase.

If we are requesting artwork, then we need to plan how we are going to do so. Holding an open contest seems to be more preferable to closed commissioning-for-free. - Kiefmaster99 21:46, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

If one of us here can provide the artwork by making it ourselves, then perhaps that could be a solution. When an image is provided, we can then vote support or oppose and if enough of us support it rather than oppose it, then it can be used. Does that seem to be workable?--としあき 04:25, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Having "one of us" do the artwork gives us a very narrow pool to work from. Ideally, we want the best possible image we can get. - Kiefmaster99 06:41, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
I will continue to think of stuff that needs to be worked out, but can't contribute significantly until at least three days after. - Kiefmaster99 06:46, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, I think commissioning is out. For the contest, as I said, let's put out a preliminary announcement to create some buzz as soon as we can. Something simple like "We will be holding a contest for a new logo soon. Please stay tuned for details." Then in the meantime we can work out the specifics. U❊T❊W 04:49, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
There is a pro and con to both methods. Commissioning forces us to prejudge based on previous artwork, and gives us a more narrow pool to work from. While a contest broadens the pool, it may turn off some artists from participating if they know their work may never be used.
If we can get greater support for a contest (I'm in for it), then we can start advertising that aspect. Or at least that we are discussing replacing the Alice. - Kiefmaster99 05:15, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm asking logo permission from Haniwa via Twitter - KyoriAsh 08:22, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Some reply from Haniwa herself(himself?):
もえだんですね。ですので私1人で許可は出せませんがこの使用に限り私個人としては問題ありません source
So I may be asking DNA Software as well KyoriAsh 16:33, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
There has been no response from DNA Softwares. We're probably going to have to hold a contest then. - Kiefmaster99 (talk) 02:07, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Character categories?

I had an idea while poking through the Symposium article translations to give each character(official, mind you) a category page to themselves. This way, in addition to having an "official sources" list in each character profile, you can easily see and retrieve the articles on the wiki pertaining to that character. It would also make it easier to find changes across the wiki related to a specific character by going to their category and using Related Changes.

For example, in a "Kyouko Kasodani" category, we'd have 1) her profile page, 2) all four Ten Desires scenario translations, 3) her Symposium profile, 4) the Kyouko/Mystia punk rock band article, 5) a link to the Myouren Temple article, and 6) possibly a link to Wild and Horned Hermit(but see my other idea below first). Unofficial everything would not be included. On the other hand, for someone like Reimu, we'd omit links to the in-game dialogue translations and focus on the other things.

Just wondering if anyone likes this idea or not; I'm personally not sure if I like it, but I think it'll make more sense with my next idea. Darkslime 17:50, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't think it would work that good. For example, for the game dialogues translations, those are listed by character and not by stage, so what you'll get is tons of categories for one page. ☢ Quwanti 19:23, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
I do like the idea of tracking changes to pages related to a specific character. (Though I am also ambivalent about devoting an entire category to a single character.) To avoid somewhat the problem of too many categories for a page, I'd suggest making these categories hidden. Ibaraki Ibuki 20:07, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
I wasn't aware you could make the categories hidden. :O This could be a solution for the bloating problem that Quwanti brought up. --Darkslime 20:20, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, adding __HIDDENCAT__ on the category page, that category won't be listed then on any page. Now this shouldn't be a problem I think it can work out pretty good. I especially like the "related changes" thing. Also, if it is going to be implented, should normal readers be aware of this by, for example, add it somewhere on the page? ☢ Quwanti 21:39, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Most likely. We can probably put it in the infobox or under the official sources section, or under a "related articles" section or something. There's plenty of places we could put it, so I suggest we do so if they're going to be hidden. Darkslime 20:12, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

I made a test hidden category: Category:Kyouko KasodaniDarkslime 15:27, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Can't complain about it. It looks good. Except for "Wild and Horned Hermit" though. Even if it would be applied only to the second volume, you will get a ton of categories there as there are more chapters. I think for these comic books it would be better to only add the major characters of that book. ☢ Quwanti 15:49, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
If the categories are going to be hidden anyway, I think linking it to just the second volume(which was my plan) would be fine. The point of this is not to link the pages to the category, but rather the category to the pages. ― Darkslime 16:40, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Official manga pages

This has been a problem I've been wanting to bring up for a while. Manga pages currently have little to no important information about them - simply a list of links to where you can download each chapter. Legality aside(lol), these pages are not really befitting of an encyclopedia.

The first thing I propose for these pages is not only a description of the manga's setting, but a general story summary for the entire thing. It doesn't have to be long, but just look at the Oriental Sacred Place article - you can't even tell what it's about by reading the article.

The second thing is to have a brief summary for each chapter separately, and possibly a list of characters that appear in the chapter(along the lines of the JP Touhou Wiki).

These are my propositions. I think they'll make the manga pages a lot more informative, which they currently fail at doing miserably. Darkslime 17:54, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Deathsoul4 is busy with transcribing the pages of one of the books. Anyway, you're completely right about the amount of information (none) of those comic books. What I suggest is to create one artikle per volume (or subpage), and write summaries at those page. Of course it should be clearly visible on the main page. ☢ Quwanti 19:23, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
They are in dire need of summaries (er, work in general), so go for it. - Kiefmaster99 21:34, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

All right, I've restructured the Silent Sinner in Blue pages. The summary on the main pages is pretty short, so if someone wants to beef that up a bit, be my guest. Also, should we put volume-length summaries on the volume pages? ― Darkslime 15:04, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

I know talk pages aren't supposed to work like forums, but uh... nice work. Code Slasher 23:50, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Disambig pages

There are some disambiguation pages for entries where there are only two possible entries in existence, for example Nue and Miko. I think that instead, a redirect needs to be stated on the top of the character page. Most people who search Nue or Miko are looking for the character first, other uses second. This makes searching for the characters easier without harming searchability for the species/occupation. - Kiefmaster99 18:27, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Eh, I guess you're right, though I guess in my opinion it makes searching for Nue Houjuu a little more difficult. Sounds like a good idea. Code Slasher 03:29, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Ah, I should clarify something. Nue and Miko would redirect to Nue Houjuu and Toyosatomimi no Miko respectively. - Kiefmaster99 04:59, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Ah, now that, I fully support. Code Slasher 02:41, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Unused Page?

Perhaps the wiki can do with a special page for all unused contents in each game, categorized and ordered by game? Sure, could go on each individual game page or something I suppose, much like Rin Satsuki is mentioned somewhere in EoSD's game page, but probably would be nice to have something like this (for instance, I didn't even know that Flower of Past Days ~ Fairy of Flower was even an unused track from PCB until recently when I went and listened to each Music CD to hear them for the first time, and it's not mentioned anywhere on PCB's game page or music page at all). Thought I'd toss that suggestion out there, maybe even a big ol' Bugs/Glitches page in the same manner. What do you guys think?

I'm sure there was more I wanted to bring up in this topic too, but I can't think of it at the moment. Gotta love being up at late at night all the time! Xenomic (talk) 08:20, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Article renaming

I've move-protected Yuurei/Bourei and Eiki Shiki, Yamaxanadu for a period of a month.

I would like to reiterate the importance of stable article names, and the sane consensus of such. In the case of Shikieiki, the renaming was understandable but it was moved to a name that probably won't be accepted by a lot of people. The point of consensus over article names is to explain the concepts behind the potential new article name, and the pros and cons of the move. What is not acceptable is not accurately communicating the reasons behind the changes, and then experimenting with names on the live articles.

While some article's old names may not be correct, and new names may be awkward, please ensure the renaming process is done correctly in the first place, with discussion and full explanation over the potential new name's meaning, before making the article move. That way we can avoid article name flipping, which in my opinion is unacceptable. Thank you. Momiji (talk) 23:13, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Why did you protect Yuurei/Bourei? No one has moved it since the change TO those names a while ago. I know you say you wanted to keep them the same, but I thought that we had more or less come to a consensus to change it back to the original names. NForza (talk) 02:43, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
I suppose this protection is put until there would be a clear decision on the talk page how to name those pages. (Just to prevent unconsensual move or something). --Coyc (talk) 03:51, 1 June 2012 (UTC)