Jump to content

Talk:Cristina Vee/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Notability

I'm a little concerned about notability, these roles are fairly minor. --Coredesat 12:17, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Consulted a Rozen Maiden character list, that might let this squeak by, but I'm still not sure. --Coredesat 12:18, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Cristina is doing main roles. And a lot more coming in the future. --Whatocean (talk) 15:24, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Other Activities Notable?

Hello. Do you think that Cristina's covers of many songs (anime or otherwise) deserve mention? Her MySpace page is a good source, although this may be original research. Since I just made this account, what can I do better? AussyLibrarian (talk) 03:49, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately no. List only professional work, please. --Whatocean (talk) 17:01, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

YouTube Account

It talks about her YouTube account briefly, but the subscription part is not up to date, she now has over 8,000 Subscribers. I would edit this myself, but it won't let me edit the main article...Moocowsrule (talk) 23:16, 8 August 2008 (UTC)Moocowsrule

I updated this information. GoldThong (talk) 21:57, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

New YouTube account

Should her new YouTube account be mentioned? Amazeedayzee (talk) 04:43, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

I think so. I mentioned it for you so you don't need to do it. Roxy2k7 (talk) 05:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Official page & malware?

Well I recently visited her "official" site with Chrome, and it said it's unsafe, but I proceeded. Then I got some nasty malware, maybe some kinda trojan or logger. It's okay to include a link to this site...? Apart from this, the website is outdated, the last messages was posted in 2007. Forgot to sign it. Now here it is. --Rev L. Snowfox (talk) 12:56, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Requested move 01 September 2014

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 16:16, 10 September 2014 (UTC)


Cristina Valenzuela → Cristina Vee – Cristina Vee is her stage name and most used name for her anime credits and her web page – AngusWOOF (talk) 20:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 21:30, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Gantz:O credit

Netflix has an English version of Gantz:O up. The credits show Vee as Yamasaki [1] (or cite AV media) but according to her twitter [2] "I'm credited as Yamasaki in Gantz: O on Netflix, but I'm not in the version that they have up on the site. Don't know who the actress is". And this tweet [3] where the follow-up discussion speculates there are two dubs.

So then the question becomes: 1) whether she recorded for Gantz:O at all? 2) If so, what was her character? 3) Is there another English dub version? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 03:00, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

There's this article that makes it appear there was another in-house English dub [4] but then is the version presented on Netflix a mix of the two? What will the final version be? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:11, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
AnimeDisneylover95, any ideas on this? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:38, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Facebook and Twitter not good sources????

I'm sorry kid tennis fan, but seriously!?!?!, you're telling us that we should no longer use Facebook and Twitter sources, just because they harmed Wikipedia standards like you did it with Cristina Vee and later the other voice actors! :(--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 03:17, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

There are an astonishing number of sources to Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. Removing the improve ref tag is not appropriate. Legacypac (talk) 04:07, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
It seems that you are either agreeing with what I wrote ("that we should no longer use Facebook and Twitter sources, just because they harmed Wikipedia standards") or disagreeing with it?--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 04:11, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
The Facebook/Twitter posts and resume information from Cristina are there to identify roles she considers notable to her career, and are acceptable as a reliable source about themselves per WP:SELFPUB. I've removed the Facebook ones that are redundantly covered by her Facebook photo album and stuffed that source in the upper right corner. However, the individual entries should and will be backed up by other primaries such as cite episodes, cite video games, or secondary news sources such as cast announcements which confirm actual credits. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 05:49, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
I've commented out the Facebook and Tweets as well. The entries should still stay there because of notability, but they should then be cited with game and show credits. The unsourced credits that she has not acknowledged or have very little notability should be removed. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 06:33, 14 November 2015 (UTC), updated 16:10, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
I had taken Twitter to WP:RSN before and the consensus was that so long as it is a verified account, tweets are reliable sources. You will have to look through the archives about the conditions with using Facebook as a source. But neither are defacto unreliable sources. —Farix (t | c) 13:24, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
If that's how you are going to do this with this "New Guidline" as of yesterday, well guess what I want to go on a STRIKE!!!!--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 14:32, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Now hold on there AnimeDisneylover95, just because what TheFarix said is true doesn't mean you have to go on a strike, look dude, I know it seems bad to you, but look on the bright side, it'll make much easier to find sources, so just do us all a favor, and just let this go, ok good buddy! :-) Norozco1 (talk) 22:06, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
I don't get where you are coming from AnimeDisneylover95. I gave you the grounds on which Twitter can be used as a source and AngusWOOF linked to guidelines on when Facebook can be used as a source. These aren't "new guidelines as of yesterday" but have been around for quite some time. Both Beyond My Ken and Kind Tennis Fan are flat out wrong in their claims that Facebook and Twitter are defacto unreliable sources. They may be used under certain conditions as distributed at WP:SPS, however, Wikipedia prefers an alternative non-self-published reliable sourced. —Farix (t | c) 14:56, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry for my rant, it's just I didn't like how Kind Tennis Fan and Beyond My Ken just made something up by saying that Twitter and Facebook sources aren't aloud on Wikipedia, yet those source can still be used if the actor/actress confirms they are involved in this project so sorry for my outburst.--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 03:43, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Nobody "made anything up", ADL95, and no one is "flat out wrong", Farix, please be more accurate in your comments. Tweets and Facebook posts are generally not allowed to be used on Wikipedia, because they are not generally not considered to be reliable. The loophole is that they can be used under certain specific circumstances:
Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves, usually in articles about themselves or their activities, without the self-published source requirement that they be published experts in the field, so long as:
  1. the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim;
  2. it does not involve claims about third parties;
  3. it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the source;
  4. there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity;
  5. the article is not based primarily on such sources.
This policy also applies to pages on social networking websites such as Twitter, Tumblr, and Facebook. (WP:TWITTER)
So your take-away from this, ALD95, should not be that you can use tweets whenever you want to, it should be that they can be used in a very narrow set of circumstances. This is not a new rule, incidentally -- and, to my mind, the loophole is much too broad and puts us in a situation where we would be required to accept what the tweeter says about themselves, even if they're exaggerating or even lying. I'd be in favor of tightening it up some more. BMK (talk) 04:15, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
And as I think about it, the number of refs which are tweets and Facebook posts might very well violate #5 "the article is not based primarily on such sources." It seems to me that the Cristina Vee article could well be considered to be primarily based on self-published sources. BMK (talk) 04:27, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
I don't believe the majority of the references are self-published. The only section that might have more than usual is the video game section as I have been discovering that she has voiced in a bunch of Japanese video games localized by Atlus / NIS America / Bang Zoom, where they just don't list English voice credits at all. Blanket tagging such articles this would be unproductive, since tagging should be for cases where the article can actually be improved in the section per Wikipedia:Tagging_pages_for_problems#Over-tagging (particularly "Unhelpful tags"), whereas finding appropriate cite video games and cite episodes for the shows is currently in process and would best serve the article. Also even if the tweets were removed/commented out, the article would still be around for the shows in which she stars in and has been notable for by secondary reliable sources that are clearly independent of the subject. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 10:09, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but this conversation and the direction to which it points—that the article is fine, and needs no tags warning readers of likely unreliable information—defies standards applied broadly throughout the encyclopedia. See new comment of today, below. Le Prof User:Leprof_7272 73.210.155.96 (talk) 05:41, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Your point is valid. There are way too many self-pub tweets and Facebook posts where she is announcing what specific role she has in the video game or show, and those aren't really needed. I've removed them from the filmography lists. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 06:43, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Twitter and Facebook removal's

I can't believe this is the same situation as last time, only this time Leprof 7272 is diminishing and considering Facebook posts and Tweets as Unreliable sources. What is the matter with all of you. Don't you realize that every online article and end credits from a video game or a certain TV show may not credit or even mention the voice actors, that why the tweets and Facebook post were placed here!!!!!!--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 00:04, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Brava, bravo to editors here

…for an article for an individual in the entertainment industry that is generally very well done with regard to sourcing. The only reason that the tag appears—and relative to other articles, this one is indeed excellent, but still in need of one last improvement—regards the appearance of non-third party (self-published) sources as the only source for certain biographical facts. Once these ten or so reported facts are independently sourced, the tag can come down.

Note also, to my quick reading, with the DOB sourced only to two tweets, and these on different days, we cannot pick one date, without it being WP:OR. We cannot write things because we personally know something to be true. If two sources are at odds, and they report different things, we either resolve the matter with a better, reliable further source, or we report the uncertainty of the fact. When we have a good source for the DOB, for one date, we can remove the "10 or 11" uncertainty. But as long as the sources express uncertainty, we express uncertainty. (If information from the tweets was omitted that can be quoted, that points to just one date, that is another editorial addition that can be used to narrow the date range.) I will eventually add a better source tag, until an independent statement of DOB appears. Cheers, Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 13:44, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Unfortunately, on closer inspection, I find a few further issues that will mean the article will have to remain with an article tag for some time. First, there are dead links, which came up after I found one accidentally, then checked the whole of the article using the Checklinks tool. There were four of these, and they are marked for repair. (Doing the careful work to decide if repair is worthwhile, and so to repair or replace, is beyond the time I have today.)
Next, it appears that is further [self-published source?] content in the article, that is masked by failure to state author/responsibility in various other citations. For instance, any biography that accompanies a speaker's or celebrity's appearance at a conference is provided to the conference by the speaker. Hence it is self-published information, and is no more in compliance with [third-party source needed] requirements of WP:VERIFY than something appearing at the person's webpages, FB, Twitter, etc. The same indirect self-publication status is true of bio pages at the title subject's speakers bureau, agent, etc. webpages. There are fifteen appearances of the sacanime.com self-written bio that are cited alone, and this citation appears several times as the only source of a fact's information. Hence, there are further statements originating from the title subject only, that are in the article, and so the article needs these better sources (and verification/fact-checking in the process). Overstatements/padding in resumes is a widespread, well-known phenomenon, and a reason underlying WP policies on these matters. Bottom line, such Vee-written bios and the statements derived from them are not fully trustworthy as sources/encyclopedic content.
Here are the examples found thus far, of the autobiographies at public appearance webpages (conferences, expos, etc.):
* sacanime.com (15 citations)
  • pacificmediaexpo.info (4 citations)

Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 15:25, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Again, the article is well done relative to the majority of entertainment articles, kudos to the regular editors here. If these last improvements appear, it might even be ready for a GA (good article) review. Cheers, Le Prof. Leprof 7272 (talk) 14:38, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Regarding DOB, notice she tweets "early birthday wishes" for the 10th and a regular birthday acknowledgement on the 11th, so this means 11. If a better tweet like "today is my birthday" would be even better. As for the sourcing in the upper right corner, that's where I place the agent pubs like resume. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:53, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
I'm adding some other tweets regarding birthday but this should help for the July 11 one as a WP:CALC AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:04, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Bravo Angus. Any chance of an independent publication? EW or an anime interview or such? Or a biography written up, even in a hometown newspaper? These are ostensibly fact checked, and independent… Cheers, Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 15:23, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Those are harder to come by, but tweets from her verified account about details such as her birthday (month and day) and where she currently lives should be good. I'll work on the convention announcement ones. Some are repeated in the local newspapers for the conventions. Do you need the tweets posted on the July 10 to calculate tomorrow, or will leaving them here be good enough? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:31, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Please do not use back-and-forth reverts to communicate what is still wrong with the edit. Continue discussing on talk pages, here or at mine. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:32, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

The back and forth reverts were used as a way go getting your attention, without interfering with your "in use" period. I have left a series of messages at your Talk page, unanswered, to warn you that with elimination of third party source (agency representing, third party), in favour of a tweet (self-published), and in removing indications from Tweets that they re self-published sources (tweets supporting DOB and residence), that you are shifting the article toward self-published work. This makes me uncomfortable, and there are other editors and admins who will be even more comfortable than I am, to be sure. Please take care. Self-published is likely fine to further support third party-sourced statements, where you began with this, but unlikely as standalone sourcing for key biographical facts. A discussion is ongoing at WP:VERIFY (Verifiability) about this, where some clarification is being generally sought. Cheers, and thank again for your commitment to quality a this very good article. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 18:40, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
@AngusWOOF: Did you examine the two back and forth reversions, and take the points about what my be contentious? Deleting the third party source, and visibly masking the self-published nature of the tweets, and the need for a [better source needed] in may of those cases? Rsvp here> Leprof 7272 (talk) 18:45, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
@AngusWOOF: And you should change the "under construction" hat to "in use", if you a re still editing, or no one will know when you are done. As for newspapers—twenty, no. But one news citation alongside each twitter-only-sourced putative fact will go along way to setting the correct course for the article, and preventing objections from purists who reasonably want the aim to be no/min. self-published content and an eventual accurate, reliable encyclopedia article. Cheers. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 19:04, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Per WP:BLPSELFPUB #5, "the article is not based primarily on such sources.", The self-pub sections now are concerning her birth month and day (already discussed above, subject does not object), birth place (not an extraordinary claim, older tweet confirms she was born in the US), current residence (not an extraordinary claim as it is on her web page and her tweets). The convention-published information that would have been linked to self-pub is for the most part gone, references to resumes gone. Other filmography entries can be added with secondary source confirmation. Keeping them out doesn't wreck the biography section. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:32, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

@Leprof 7272: I'm not amused--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 00:06, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Article fails general standards of encyclopedic content

This article is currently little more than a fan-piece, in large part replicating self-published information from the title subject, directly and indirectly—directly, from her Facebook and tweets, indirectly, through the biographical information supplied by her or her agents, to various agencies. Attempt to persuade yourself all you wish, this is not encyclopedic writing. Encyclopedic articles rise above the perspectives of individual publications by aggregating the consensus of information from a variety of independent, third-party sources—per WP:VERIFY, with secondary sourced preferred. This article fails to rise even to a bare minimum standard of independent sourcing. It is a shambles. And to argue otherwise is to argue in support of an article that can never be good here (that is, a GA article). So, defend the status quo, and keep it a fan article, or begin researching the title subject, and replace all the self-published, non-third party material and sources with real verifiable encyclopedic references.

And stop reading the WP sourcing policies and guidelines to mean what you wish them to mean, to allow this to continue, and read them for both what they actually say, and for the "spirit of the law", which is to demand information flow to the encyclopedia, on BLP subjects, from unbiased third-parties. It is better, for the encyclopedia, and for the reputation of the article, to have one good, independent, third-party source for each fact the article presents, than to have a long list of hearsay sources not acceptable for BLP articles.

Bottom line, this is not an acceptable sourced article, and the arguments for the adequacy of its sourcing would not persuade in a sixth form composition class, let alone as here. Le Prof User:Leprof_7272 73.210.155.96 (talk) 05:41, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

I'm removing the self-published tweets and Facebook posts from the filmography. I agree those won't help. There are still secondary sources from newspapers and other articles though to show that she is a notable voice actress. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 06:14, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your efforts on behalf of article quality. I concur with the edit. Please note, I have not raised any question of notability here, or questioned any particular fact. (But as an academic and trained editor, any purported fact, here or anywhere at the encyclopedia, solely supported by FB and Tw must be considered suspect vis-a-vis valid, reliable historical information.) Le Prof User:Leprof_7272 73.210.155.96 (talk) 12:54, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Le Prof this is totally unacceptable on having to Tell EVERY ADMIN that we should remove tweets and Facebook posts as useless sources!!!--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 12:07, 18 March 2017 (UTC)--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 12:07, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Please do not misrepresent my statements, Anime, or exaggerate any matter, or change the subject. I am telling no one what to do, admin or editor. I am using my voice here, to raise questions, and contribute to consensus, as is allowed, and indeed invited by WP policy. And I am asking us to live by our guidelines and policies, so that each article is held to a uniform standard—and so that individual editors, overly interested in a particular article, do not make up the rules, each time, for each different article.
Otherwise, I will tell you, as a professional in the business of analyzing content for communication—for a wide variety of reasons, apart from very stringent controls and application toward very specific aims, Facebook posts and a Twitter feeds are indeed very limited sources. And when it comes to hard biographical facts, near to useless. All that can be said about a Facebook post and a Twitter feed is that "Person X stated YYY on their Facebook/Twitter feed." It is self-reported information, nothing more. No biographer, no journalist worth their salt, uses them as anything more than a suggestion or starting point.
One exception is when the tweet itself becomes news, as has become the rampant case since the last American election. But this he-said-it-so-it-becomes-news is immaterial to the current discussion. Le Prof User:Leprof_7272 73.210.155.96 (talk) 12:35, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
@Leprof 7272: It seem you're the one who's "bias" on not having Facebook posts and Tweets allowed on the voice actors pages. I mean really, what is wrong with having Facebook posts and Tweets on the pages, don't you realize that every online article in the web and end credits from a video game or a certain TV show (mostly an English dub version of an anime) may not credit or better yet even mention the voice actors and the roles they play in, that why the tweets and Facebook post were placed here!!!!!!--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 00:10, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Fix width tables on mobile view

Using fixed percentage width tables on mobile view is problematic, since the width of the browser window is much more narrow. I have fixed this problem for a second time. Frietjes (talk) 13:45, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

now fixed for a third time. if you want to specify a width, use 'min-width' and not 'width'. Frietjes (talk) 13:48, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
I just liked the blue borders as a background!!--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 13:53, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
I got the blue borders idea originally from FA article Nancy Cartwright. If there's a better scheme to make the borders, please let us know. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:41, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Her ethnicity in the categories is listed and its not fair

Why should that happen for other latino actors and her? 2001:569:7671:F100:6806:57DC:A814:F459 (talk) 01:42, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Please read WP:DEFINING and WP:CATDEF on whether reliable sources commonly and consistently define her by her ethnicity, which it doesn't really, so it should not be included. The only way we know her ethnicity is from an AMA log, but it's not like news articles are commonly describing her by her ethnicity. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:53, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
As an example that explores a voice actor's ethnicity/background see this article on Xanthe Huynh [5] AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:07, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Edit war

This is not an endorsement of this particular article version. Any editor except for the two current edit warriors may modify it. --NeilN talk to me 03:39, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Neil! Best, House1090 (talk) 03:45, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

"Various voices" is too vague for inclusion

I wish not to edit war with any of the members here, but it would appear that a particular user that goes by AnimeDisneylover95 has a major issue with excluding non-credible roles. Listing additional voices when they are in the official credits are fine, but if we're including them based on just a single tweet (which is the only source available), then that isn't eligible for inclusion, in my opinion. I'm not saying that we should exclude tweets in general. But if the role is not named, and "various voices" is the best description you could come up with, then it's quite frankly pointless to include. MizukaS (talk) 17:05, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

MizukaS Please check out the old discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Anime_and_manga/Archive_69#Inclusion_of_additional_voices_in_anime_voice_actor_articles. I think the result was that it was okay to list as long as it was properly sourced. Grouping them as "Various characters" or "others" was acceptable too. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:38, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Nowhere was it ever said that the category "various voices" was considered acceptable for inclusion in that discussion. And even the "include" votes stated the conditions of the inclusion of additional voices (such as official credits and the like). If it's a single tweet without an official credits list, then I honestly don't see the eligibility at all. I suggest reopening the discussion for a clearer, more thorough consensus. MizukaS (talk) 18:51, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
If the actor has a role in the show but the actor's name and role has not come up yet in an episode, then I would leave the space blank. This seems to work for upcoming films. If the actor's name does not appear in any of the closing credits, then add Uncredited to the Notes. The "various voices" are for the cases where the actor's name and role appears in a bunch of miscellaneous characters or additional voices. In that discussion, there wasn't any consensus to remove "additional voices" if it was credited properly. I use "others" if the actor already has voices a number of main characters in the series. So my question then becomes whether you are concerned about what to list in the Role column or about how to source the entry? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:09, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Well, that's not my idea of a proper citation if the only thing you have to go by is a tweet for miscellaneous characters, with no visuals indicating whom, no less. A named role (or a visual of a role) changes everything. See Xanthe Huynh's tweet for comparison. "Girl A" is an extra too, but we clearly know the specific character Xanthe provided the voice for. It also helps that said role has also been officially listed in the credits roll. See the difference? As opposed to the "credit" I've removed, that's much clearer and closer to what the encyclopedia is working to include. I don't really approve of the idea of including vague credits that are otherwise not cited anywhere else. MizukaS (talk) 20:17, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
MizukaS I still find it Ironic and funny that after a year we finishe closing this discussion regarding Additional voices I see you continue to bring up this issue again. Please let it go!!--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 19:18, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
What do you mean bring it up again? I just joined Wikipedia recently. I wasn't involved in any "additional voices" discussions before. I do, however, have a personal perspective on the matter. It's definitely not "additional voices -> delete"; it's more so its legitimacy. The "credit" (if you could even call it that) I removed was "I was in X show!". What voice did she provide? Is the same "credit" listed anywhere else? That's not credibility. Tweets are only cited for named roles, nothing else. Actually, looking at it again, we can't even ascertain if she provided a voice in it at all. Could be a crew role for all we know. Could you prove it?
On top of that, based on what I've read, I don't think there is a clear consensus on the eligibility of the inclusion of additional voices. When are they eligible for inclusion? Is a single vague tweet enough? Or is a credits roll/official cast announcement necessary? I propose that you stop edit warring until there is a clear consensus regarding the matter. Right now, I'm not seeing any of it.
PS: If a vague tweet like that is good enough for inclusion regarding additional voices, then that's a very slippery slope. It will encourage other users that being completely vague about the role with no visuals or anything else to speak of is eligible for inclusion. That's what you're advocating for, ADL, but I, for one, do not wish to see that scenario become reality.
PS2: ADL, you need to understand the fact that other users have different opinions on the same topic. It looks to me that you do not wish to have an open discussion about the matter at all. In which case, I suggest that you don't talk at all if you refuse to discuss civilly. And it goes without saying that you shouldn't be tampering with the page as you please if you refuse to have a civil discussion. Being "sick" of dealing with a particular subject doesn't grant you the right to ignore other people's opinions. In fact, that just means you shouldn't get involved. MizukaS (talk) 20:03, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
PS: A Tweet made and confirmed by the actor on Twitterthat they're involved is considered RELEVANT and RELIABLE. Stop twisting the facts that Tweets on twitter are not "reliable sources". In fact, where else does it mention that she was involved on this show other than Twitter. Just This one. Besides it wouldn't make sense to just hide it and keep it hidden all because of a tweet and their is NO other reliable sources besides this one!!
When did I ever say that we should remove all the Twitter citations? I'm just advocating to get rid of the vague ones that concern additional voices. MizukaS (talk) 21:08, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
PS2: And No offense on what you said to me but it is "YOU" who is refusing to discuss civilly over a simple. And it goes without saying that you shouldn't be tampering with the page as you please if you refuse to have a civil discussion. In fact, I say it is YOU who shouldn't get involved especially since you are against the idea of having "Additional voices" or "Various Voices" on the table regardless if it has been cited with a source (e.g. Tweet, Official Credits, BTVA check mark, etc..)--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 20:41, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
So are you resorting to bending my own words back at me now? Have you ever given anybody here a chance to even discuss? Based on what I've read, I'd say not. To be blunt, you have your own idea of what's worth including, and you force it down everyone else's throats. That's not very nice. In fact, that's rude. Plus, you're capitalizing a lot of your words in your response, so I think you should chill out. MizukaS (talk) 21:08, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

So what I understand is that her WP:TWITTER is acceptable since it's not an extraordinary claim, no reasonable doubt as to authenticity (Vee's twitter account is verified), and that the article isn't primarily based on such sources (Vee's general article has a good number of independent news articles). On articles where the actor is on the borderline of notability, like Amber Lee Connors, I comment out those self-published tweets and Facebook postings, because they vastly outnumber the independent sources needed to establish notability, and they are covered mostly by her resume anyway. So for Cristina Vee in Rock Lee, yes, she can have an entry for Rock Lee, but the tweet can definitely be later replaced by cite episode or news articles.

Now the question of what to fill in for her role. Since she did not specify a role, this should be left blank. The episode(s) should be watched. If credits show her as Girl A, then list "Girl A". If she is credited as Additional voices then list "Additional voices". If her role is Girl A but she is credited as Additional voices, put "Additional voices". In the Notes column, put the episode where she appeared. If the roles or the episodes get to be a significant number, then you can change over to "Various characters". If the credits are all in Japanese or doesn't list English voice actors (happens a lot for her Atlus video games), then leave blank, and put Uncredited in the Notes column.

If her name doesn't appear in the English voice acting credits where she specified and that there was a list provided where it could be reasonable that her name should be there, then yes, pull her entry. For example, if she said she voiced in Disney's Frozen, and you've looked through the cast list for Frozen and she's not listed anywhere, then remove it.

Hope that helps answer your concerns. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:26, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

The Rock Lee dub on Hulu doesn't list English credits, so this would have to be verified on home media or on some media that does list such credits. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:43, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

In other words, there is currently no way of ascertaining whether or not Cristina's name is in the English credits for Rock Lee. So it should be excluded for now. MizukaS (talk) 21:51, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
You'd have to check the home media since Viz's website points to the Hulu version [6] which doesn't have English credits. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:28, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
  • AnimeDisneylover95, do NOT be citing material in a BLP without reliable sources. You cannot seriously add an entry based on a tweet by the subject: it is ridiculous. Perhaps you can work more pleasurably on Wikia? Drmies (talk) 01:49, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Drmies, Where else was I supposed to look for I do not want to just have it removed all because of a Tweet. "You cannot seriously add an entry based on a tweet by the subject: it is ridiculous. Perhaps you can work more pleasurably on Wikia?" I'm sory but that's is being VERY unreasonable and just siding with MizukaS.--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 03:02, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
    • I accept your apology, and what I am siding with is WP:RS. Do not be using tweets to verify this kind of information. Drmies (talk) 03:04, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
    • In what way is that unreasonable, ADL? Are you saying that Drmies isn't allowed to have an opinion, and that yours is law? Up to this point, you've done nothing but scream at anyone that doesn't agree with you. Again, you need to accept the fact that this community is formed by people with different opinions. The sooner you realize this, the better. MizukaS (talk) 03:07, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

I think you both should look this over. Thoroughly. Best, House1090 (talk) 03:10, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

This is about as calm as I could manage when dealing with someone with uncontrolled bursts of anger. Also, the fact that I chose to start a discussion here indicates that I have every single intention of resolving this peacefully. Unfortunately, it would seem that my good intentions may have fallen on deaf ears. MizukaS (talk) 03:13, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
For the vast majority of your, Especially YOU MizukaS, Why is this issue on not allowing "Miscellanous/Additional voices on Actors" NOT allowed still being brought back up ever since it came to an agreement on that page:Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Anime_and_manga/Archive_69#Inclusion_of_additional_voices_in_anime_voice_actor_articles.
Now all I see is comments saying "Tweets being unreliable", "Additional voices not allowed on this page regardless of source (e.g. Official end credits, BTVA checkmark, Tweets) all because of WP:RS" It gets tiring OVER and OVER and OVER. On top of that it's the same situation why many people on the talk pages want to merge the WeinsteineEffect with the Me too (hashtag) in just one page, even though THAT'S a different issue than the one we're having. But seriously, this is getting very tiring especially when an issue that was resolved on the WikiProject Anime and manga since last June still continues to be brought back up again over because of a Tweet, when their is no other reliable site besides this one. Long story short, it doesn't make sense to "OMIT" additional voices and Tweets by actors' confirming their involvement on a project.--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 03:22, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
Firstly, I don't see that discussion as a clear and thorough consensus on what should be included in an article. Secondly, while you may have an opinion, you may not ignore any that opposes your own. That aspect of yours makes less sense than the act of removing irrelevant content. MizukaS (talk) 03:28, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
"That aspect of yours makes less sense than the act of removing irrelevant content" Frankly MS, YOU are the one who continues to not allowing "Additional voices" and "Tweets" when an actor is involved in something and saying that they're "irrelevant content". I'm sorry, but for someone who still continues to justify that they aren't allowed it doesn't mean that they should be removed from the list completel, better yet dismissed MS.--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 03:34, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
Could you prove what part Cristina played in the Rock Lee production? Is a crew role or a voice role based on that tweet? I've asked you the same question for more than two times now, and you still haven't given me a reply. If you can't prove it, then it shouldn't be in the article, period. MizukaS (talk) 03:41, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
It's from a tweet she replied to fan saying this: "@superange128 I forgot, just small parts here and there".

Secondly their is a reason why

  • This EFN note on "Streaming": "The title was dubbed in English for streaming, but has not translated the closing credits into English."
  • And This on "no english credits": "The title did not list any English voice actors in its closing credits." were included on the tables for Cristina Vee.

Even if those things are going to resolve this issue, which likely won't. I really don't think this issue should be fight over and bring back up again. It's just a "rinse and repeat" cycle I continue seeing. Besides me that need to chill out, I also think you should also chill out.--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 03:55, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

You are not confident that this issue will be resolved, yet you still want to put an end to this? Please make up your mind. I'd say start a new discussion to put an end to it. This time, it needs to conclude as an actual policy, instead of a vague consensus. MizukaS (talk) 04:01, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

New discussion on additional voices

I think it's necessary to start up a new discussion and end it as an actual policy so that we could truly put these conflicts to a rest. MizukaS (talk) 04:11, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Just posted an RFC here. MizukaS (talk) 04:33, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cristina Vee. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:10, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Rfc about the Sources in the Cristina Vee page

The RfC was closed early with no action because there is a concurrent discussion about the same topic at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga#When are additional voices eligible for inclusion in voice actor articles?.

Cunard (talk) 06:01, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Should "Tweets/Posts" via Twitter, Facebook and Instagram be used as sources for projects she's involved in? AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 04:40, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please comment in this RFC instead. This one is an unnecessary duplicate of the one at WT:ANIME. MizukaS (talk) 18:21, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Survey

  • No If a decent secondary source isn´t interested, neither is WP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:47, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes per WP:ABOUTSELF - as long as the tweet/facebook/instagram is in an open venue (allowing V for it being made), and not an exceptional claim, and is a clear statement that doesn't require parsing regarding actual meaning (e.g. - [7] is AOK). If this is being used for Filmography in Video Games - that A-OK - as long as this is not the main part of the article. It is definitely of interest to whomever is interested in reading this article.Icewhiz (talk) 16:07, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Threaded discussion

I still would like to have "minor roles", "additional voices", and especially the "Incidental roles be included with the following sources. Frankly it feels odd just removing additional voices on every voice actor page because usually some voice actor's websites, resumes, convention bios and to some degree Tweets and Facebook posts" will more often will feature "this actor has provided background voices in this film, show, game etc....". I feel that removing certain additional/background voices included for the anime voice actors all because of a "Tweet" or Facebook" post, I feel that seems to take it to the extreme. Besides, even if their is not other reliable source (e.g. actor's resume on website, ending credits for a specific film, TV episode and video game, convention bio, and article interviews with the voice actors) to back up the "Tweet" and "Facebook post" doesn't mean it should be removed or better yet eliminated.

While Wikipedia and the Wikiproject will still continue to debate if Tweets and Facebook post are considered to be allowed "Till the cows come home." I just feel that they shouldn't be eliminated even if they are the first to mention them and NO other ending credits for a specific film, TV episode and video game, convention bio mention that specific information on the project that actor/actress was involved in.--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 04:40, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Ugh, how many discussions are you trying to have? There's one going at WT:ANIME on the same topic. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:06, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Agreed with Angus. This should be closed. Unnecessary RFC when the one at WT:ANIME is the only relevant discussion. MizukaS (talk) 17:04, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Trying to verify role in Godzilla: Planet of the Monsters

Here's a problem with her recent self-published tweet about being in Godzilla: Planet of the Monsters which was released on Netflix recently. She tweeted that she was in the film, but the Netflix credits in English do not show her name, either in the Main Cast section (6 actors with roles) or the Additional Cast section (11 actors, no roles). AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 23:28, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

MizukaS, can you find a tweet from Laura Post or someone on staff that can confirm Cristina Vee was indeed in the film? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 23:44, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

There's no problem with that. Just because the credits didn't list Cristina's name, that doesn't mean she isn't in it. What's problematic is that you think this is a concern, since you think self-pub sources are okay so long as the account is verified to be owned by the actor. There's been numerous cases where one could only verify roles through self-published sources, and this is one of them. MizukaS (talk) 00:56, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
It's a question more whether what she said would be an extraordinary claim. It certainly involves her peers, and Yuko appears to be a major character, but it would be helpful if there were an explanation why she wasn't credited. It's different if Vee were in the Netflix cast listing and was forgotten in the credit itself. Clicking Details on Netflix only brings up the Japanese cast. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:25, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Don't take this seriously, If Cristina Vee confirmed it herself 9=(especially when she thank Laura Post) and her Twitter account IS verified then we wouldn't have this issue. It's the same thing when she confirmed her role in Ajin even though they didn't included any English credits for this series.--AnimeDisneylover95 (talk) 18:32, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
Agreed. There are times that not every cast member is credited, and this is no exception. MizukaS (talk) 18:39, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
If it weren't a problem, then we wouldn't be having an RFC on that exact topic. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:26, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
The RFC is closing soon, and it's apparent that the consensus is that self-pub sources are acceptable as long as the account is verified. When the RFC closes, and it becomes actual policy, then we'll know how to handle these kinds of situations in the future. MizukaS (talk) 08:14, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Cover pics

TweetLvr, please get the new pictures approved by Commons. Make sure they are clear of copyright violations and that are not just swiped off her Twitter / Instagram feeds. You might be disappointed if they are removed within the month for duplicating content from her official sites. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:44, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

It looks like the files have been deleted. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:02, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

Live Action actress

Someone explain to me why they delete the term voice actress and put it simply as an actress and director as if Cristina Vee has participated in live action series and movies. 148.0.109.118 (talk) 23:28, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

148.0.109.118, no you're being redundant with "voice actress who provides voices". That's the problem with your attempts to "fix" the opening sentence. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:43, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
AngusWOOF, I do not see the news sources that prove that Cristina Vee has participated in live action or anything, just try to restore it to where it was and repeatedly you removed the sentence, having already from the beginning that it was redundant, a few months ago I left some comments on the edition histories so that you understand that she is a voice actress. By the way what about this, perhaps you are saying that I am not arranging the initial sentence of this actress having myself order the categories and eliminating the dubbing works that she started in the infobox of another article and one of them reversed it twice and I ignored. 148.0.109.118 (talk) 19:24, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
148.0.109.118, another option is to just split it into two sentences. "Cristina Vee is an American voice actress and director. She provides ...." AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:05, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
AngusWOOF, Do not worry, everything is already fixed but I tell you one thing and without threats, if you revert my editions we will not progress with the opening sentences and as I said before in several comments Cristina Vee is not involved in live action, besides I think I have read before both you and Sjones23 that it is redundant and it is not or if. 148.0.121.207 (talk) 19:34, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
She's primarily a voice actress but she has done a little bit of live-action work, including Haruhi Suzumiya, hosting on anime TV, IPL League of Legends, and a feature film. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:28, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cristina_Vee/Archive_1&oldid=1146165902"