Talk:FLCL/Archive 6

Can we get some N.O. pictures?

We need some pictures demonstrating N.O. The horn would be good; also, something emerging from Naota's head. -Litefantastic 22:18, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Psychology

I remember that there used to be a VERY good link in the link section that broke down every last little detail of the psycholgy and innuendo in Fooly Cooly. Does anybody have that link or something like it? 65.4.40.82 22:56, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kamon is not a Nazi

i think someone has to clarify that part, it looks like he puts those clothes on all the time. Kamon only dress up as a nazy when playing the sort of paintball game, like we were cowboys and indians when we were kids. It's just a joke, ok a VERY dark humour joke (today I sign my post, oh well, I really should sign up in the english wikipedia). --200.43.35.142 03:31, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

True. I'll make sure that's clarified. -Litefantastic 17:38, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The Japanese don't really regard historical symbols like the Nazi uniform with such seriousness as Europeans and Americans do. What would be scandallous in Europe can pass as a silly joke in Japan.

Cats

I feel that there should be something on the cats in Fooly Cooly. There's the Nandaba cat that Haruko seems to use to communicate with her superiors, and Ta-kun the cat which abandons Mamimi for a white female cat. 65.4.40.82 23:00, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That'd probably go in Items and Concepts of FLCL. Get yourself a user name and join the fight! -Litefantastic 23:57, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The name is NOT debated to be Medical Meccanical

Come'on, that was just a spelling error. Please don't put that on the page any more. If you had seen anime and japanese movies it should be obvious to you. Japanese people are horrible with english, that's all. 200.43.35.253 16:25, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mamimi is NOT "appear to be homeless"

I did an extensive explanation about this point in the backup talk page. I think you should remove that phrase or at least explain a little better on the character's page that she doesn't "live" under the bridge. 200.43.35.253 16:25, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's weird. I could have sworn both this term and the one directly above were weeded out some years ago. -Litefantastic 22:58, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes I know.

kids bludgeoning their parents to death with baseball bats

"unsourced statement - positing a string of kids bludgeoning their parents to death with baseball bats needs to be sourced" <--- in fact that's false. In chapter 4 commentary track Tsurumaki says he had the idea of having Naota hitting his father with the baseball bat "because" of that series of cases. People from the staff told him it would be problematic, and they changed it to this final script. 200.43.35.134 23:42, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone who knows more about this than I do should look into it - this complain has come up before. -Litefantastic 20:10, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who here saw Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom?

There's a scene near the end, where Indy, having survived massive troubles with minor damage, is staggering around going "water! water!" because he's thirsty, and then, without even breaking pace, goes "water! water!" because, as it turns out, there is a massive torrent of it coming toward him out of the cavern. I bring this up because that is exactly what is happening to us here with pictures.

Category:FLCL images currently has 27 pictures in it, not all of which are linked to by anything. There may be more floating around; I recently discovered a whole cache of FLCL pictures and added them to the category. Not to burst anyone's bubble, but we can't possibly need all of these, and I'm beginning to think we're veering dangerously close to violating the Fair Use policy we're operating under. I believer the following images could be sacrificed with little or no loss. To uploaders - wait, I've just realized none of the pictures in the "characters" section have been archived. Excuse me, I'll come back to this. Feel free to start without me (Hint: we most likely don't need all four pictures of Mamimi). -Litefantastic 00:37, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We currently have 39 FLCL pictures, or roughly one picture for every three and a half minutes of video in the series. This could be some kind of record. At any rate, we still don't have all the pictures we need, and it's time to start thinking about the ones we may not need. Feel free to add to or contest my nominations. -Litefantastic 22:53, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Need

Kamon in his uniform

Ah! I see we have that now - good work! -Litefantastic 23:11, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The horn in Naota's head

Got that! Naotahorn.JPG Blademaster313 03:25, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Back cover from King of Pirates

Well you could acquire such a phot from photobucket. If they have one avaible. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hellraise21 (talk • contribs).

Sacrifice(?)

Image:Handcowboy.JPG: Currently not linked to by anything, it's not entirely clear what this is supposed to be.

Mamimi.JPG: I currently know of four pictures of Mamimi (not counting group shots); this is probably the least useful.

Image:Kantivsarm.JPG: A little out of focus, not linked to by anything and not illustrative of any key moment in the series.

Image:HarukoCanti.JPG: By no means a bad picture; the only flaw here is that there's no way to display it in an article at a size that will show all the detail. Perhaps a higher-resolution version, cropped just to show the little crowd at the center?

I agree with these. I am the one who uploaded them, but I didn't see any real use for them at the time, and if there still isn't any, I say delete. I just uploaded an N.O. example picture as well. Should I fix the HarukoCanti image? Blademaster313 03:48, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd go for it. It'd look good on whatever episode it came out of, as well as the top of the characters' page. -Litefantastic 20:08, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations complete. -Litefantastic 21:06, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quick review

This has been in the trivia section for as long as I can remember:

There are examples of scenes in which Naota yells out "Tasuk--"; the Japanese audience, at first assuming that he will exclaim "Tasukete" (help!), may be surprised when he instead says "Tasuku," the name of Naota's older brother.

Is it Naota who says that, or Mamimi? -Litefantastic 01:38, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They both say somethiung along those lines in episode 5. I think Mamimi is saying Help Me Tasuku, which agrivates Noata and then he yells for his brother, Tasuku. (-Kid. 13:40, 8 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

In the Japanese script, when Naota calls out for his brother (or at least his strength), he yells out "onii-san", which is an honorific for an older brother (lit. "honored older brother", but not that formal by far. Yelling out "Bro!" would be a pretty good equivalent). If he yells "Tasuku" in the english script, it's most likely because yelling "Bro!" would be too short for the dub. Wilderns 18:31, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Leaving

I'm going on vacation tomorrow, and won't be back until Sunday or so. Good luck with the battle! -Litefantastic 01:38, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eyebrows

I think that the eyebrows Amarao stuck on Naota when he told him "cats should stick with other cats" could be a sort of symbol of them both being abondoned by Haruko, since when she showed up again, the eyebrows fell off of Naota. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.185.108.212 (talk • contribs)

True. And Amarao himself, for that matter, in the first episode where he shows up. —Yar Kramer 16:43, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But. Doesn't everyone notice the giant eyebrows, or is it only Naota and Haruko? If everyone notices them I would have to disagree. —Hyter 00:19, 28 December 2006 (GMT -06:00)

Brittle Bullet also suggests that the eyebrows keep the N-O thing from happening. It wasn't until after the eyebrows peeled off that Haruko used Amarao's head. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.172.193.82 (talk) 02:48, 5 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

It is also hinted that those eyebrows prevent something thatHaruko does (wheter its read minds, alter opoins, make you do whats she wants, or mentally effect you in any way). When he had them on he was "unifected" by her,(same with Amarao), when they came off he was "effected" by them.(This is more clealy shown in the manga then the anime, but if you watch it enough you may pick up on it.In fact in the manga iI think they even mention it or point it out, or at leats make it obvoise) I am not sure if you should put that up there or not, it does seem to be like "original research", then again it could be written that "it apears as though whena charcter has eyebrowns on they are unifected by Haruko's "powers".Prede 06:16, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'd say that's only because the anime operates on a highly metaphoric level. The fake eyebrows are the "pretended maturity" of Amaro, who is actually still insecure of himself. (As seen where he regresses to the emotional level of a bewildered child when he loses them.) With his mask of adulthood gone, he is once again only a toy in Haruko's hands. Wilderns 18:42, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If this is true, why doesn't Kitsurubami have Huge-eyebrow thingys? Or anyone else that Amaro knows? Aaron Pepin April 5, 2007

What is it you're asking about? There were a couple of points made above. Leebo ^T/C 16:45, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What I'm asking is, if he slaped some eyebrows on Naota to protect him from that N.O. thingy. If he likes Kitsurubami so much, why doesn't he just put the Nori eybrows on her? Isn't that one of the reasons why he has those giant eyebrows in the first place? To protect him from having stuff pop out of his head? It could happen to anyone!

As far as I know, it can't happen to everyone. Remember how it didn't work with Kamon (Naota's dad)? Only certain people have N.O. capabilities, and even then, their capabilities vary in how much can be pulled through. Leebo ^T/C 18:51, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Who knows? She could have one. Aparently 80 billion people or something have N.O. channels. I would be caustios if I were him, and give all my employees wierd eyebrow-things. I can ask the creators, but I'm sure they are busy. Probebly they didn't want her to be walking around with takky eyebrow-things and make her an un-likable characer. That's my theory.

Where are you getting the 80 billion people figure? I don't remember hearing it in the show, and there aren't even 80 billion people on Earth... Leebo ^T/C 17:08, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check this out This explains several billion people have N.O. channels. And that is beyond the point. But it does say that is more than the amount of people on earth. But the eyebrows guy said it in one episode. I don't know which. I need to video tape some episodes do I can show you when he said that but FLCL isn't coming on air any time soon! Aaron Pepin

Closing out the AID

I'd like to thank all of you who stopped by for the Article Improvemnent Drive, and although I believe we still have quite a ways to go, I also think we've made an immense amount of progress. -Litefantastic 21:40, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another run at GA

Since the editing frenzy has pretty much died down, I'm going to renominate us for Good Article. From there, we can make the last few crucial improvements and modifications to boost us to FA! -Litefantastic 18:51, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure it's ready for GA? I'm not sure we've covered everything from the peer review (not that we need to, just that it would help). I'm especially concerned about the intro and references. The intro just needs a little more summary info - not just a plot summary. I would take a stab at it but I won't have time to give it serious attention for a few days. I'm not sure what to do about references; most of this material can be taken directly from watching the show. There are things like "a common mistake viewers make" which should probably be referenced, but I wouldn't know where to start with that. Either way, I think a GA review will bring these items up. On the other hand, we have made significant improvement over the past week, so kudos! -- Laura S | talk to me 19:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The points you make are good ones. The intro actually looks pretty good to me, and I'm not sure about references. I haven't been able to find coverage of FLCL in any print magazine. Does anybody know of one? -Litefantastic 14:46, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly incorrect edit?

I don't think that the statement in this edit is correct; can anyone confirm this? -- Laura S | talk to me 19:46, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find any evidence that this statement is true, so if no one speaks up about it, I think it should be deleted. Blademaster313 20:24, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FLCL's not supposed to MEAN anything. Everytime people think they translate it's just rough or vague or amigiuous or whatever the word is. Furi Kura or other words that sound like it mean something but I just don't think FLCL is supposed to mean anything. (-Kid. 12:31, 14 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Regarding good article nomination

The article violates several of the good article criteria, and as such has been failed. A detailed analysis below:

First of all, the article fails criterion 3a, in that it is an article on a Japanese work that does not cover its reception in Japan. Thus far its English language reception is the only thing discussed, though it is detailed only lightly. Also, it discusses something about "Adult Swim" in the final paragraph of the Reception section; an element of mere trivia - it has nothing to do with the show's reception. The article also fails criterion 3a due to the Story section not actually discussing show's narrative - it seems more like a discription of the characters, in fact. In addition to these, the Production section being a small bulleted list of trivia is also in violation of criterion 3a - the production of this show is, far and away, one of the more major aspects of the show, and it needs to be covered in detail. One final little thing here is the "Cultural" subsection - once again, the elements regarding the Japanese reception are left entirely undiscussed.

To a lesser extent, it also fails criterion 3b. Some elements of non-notable trivia are present, though not nearly as big of an issue as the lack of broad coverage.

Secondly, the Style section fails criterion 2d for discussing the complex themes of the show without the use of a single reference. The section is positively filled with original research; for example, The stranger elements reflect an overall awkwardness, and often incorporate extremely heavy (yet often vague) Freudian imagery; fans with some knowledge of psychology often have a field day picking psychological symbols out of the seemingly irrational action of FLCL. - who are these fans? Who thinks it reflects an overall awkwardness? Who says there is Freudian imagery? The entire section is going to need a huge amount of rewriting and citing sources to kill the original research that is currently so deeply embedded in it. An even better example of the original research here is the following:

Despite its often startling and heavy-handed moments, FLCL actually features an immense dedication to detail. It parodies slightly nostalgic Japanese culture itself, by switching styles to traditional kabuki at one point, presenting discontinued brands of drinks, Japanese style bread, and nostalgic 3-wheeled automobiles that were prominent in post-war Japan. In fact, almost all of the devices and products used in the series are real, and can be identified with sufficient examination. - sounds more like a review than an encyclopedia entry.

As a side effect of the massive amounts of original research here, the article also fails criterion 4b - when dealing with a show that has this many different interpretations, it is absolutely necessary to not assert a viewpoint as factual. This is another reason more references are required.

The Releases section needs citations - a lot of them. A few examples:

FLCL was originally released in Japan as an OVA anime on six DVDs.

The story was also released as a two-volume manga by artist Hajime Ueda, and a two-volume novel serialization by Yoji Enokido, who also wrote the script for the show.

All were released in Japan starting in 2000.

The manga is a much darker and more violent take on the story [...] - rewriting and citation necessary. It is the editor's opinion that it is a "much darker and more violent take on the story," and it needs to be rewritten and cited to clearly be the opinion of a reliable, outside source.

[...] while the novels are a more straight adaptation. - again, an opinion in need of rewriting and citation (something along the lines of "while the novels are commonly thought of as a more direct adaption[5]").

And that's in the first paragraph of the section alone. The entire article suffers from a lack of citations, however, which happens to be a violation of criterion 2a.

Moving on, another guideline the article violates which is not directly discussed in the good article criteria, but instead grouped together in good article criterion 1c, is as follows:

Wikipedia:Lead section - the lead has two paragraphs. One deals with the definition of what the article discusses, while the other deals solely with plot elements. No mention is made of the reception, themes or controversies (may or may not apply - my knowledge of the subject matter is limited). Put bluntly, the lead section does not "[stand] alone as a concise overview of the article."

Now, on to probably the article's worst violation, which is strangely not discussed in the good article criteria, but will come into play in just about every case (particularly in FAC): the images. Copyrighted images (such as the ones in the article) each require a very detailed and specific fair use rationale (see an article like Sunset Blvd. for an idea of the ideal rationale). In addition, they must be used sparingly, and only when absolutely necessary to convey a point discussed in the illustrated section's prose. The use of some of this article's images in this article is purely decorative; for example, "Haruko simply doesn't care" - why is this here? It adds nothing to the section. Same goes for "Some of the cast, in 'Brittle Bullet'" - the image is so low quality, and the characters shown are so unclear, that the image becomes nearly useless on top of being decoration. The image of the horn coming out of Naota's head should be fine, however.

In the Style section, I see even more violation of the rules on images. "Haruko, waving to Naota, whom she has just run over." - how does this illustrate the show's unique style? "Mamimi's blithe exterior hides her true feelings," as well, should go - this element is not discussed in the section it illustrate, nor is it necessary to depict in the first place; just inserting "Mamimi's blithe exterior hides her true feelings" somewhere in the prose would be enough. I can understand "The visual style changes with the shot" in the section, but the prose needs to be more specific in its discussion of this image. Finally, the album cover is completely unnecessary - being as bland as it is, it is not necessary to depict it in order to illustrate something that cannot be conveyed through prose alone (on a completely different note, a "Soundtrack" section would be preferable to the insertion of soundtrack details in the Style section). On the subject of the image used in production, it is not particularly necessary. If there was some more detailed discussion of the use of manga, it would be more arguable, but as it is it could be cut without loss.

The article does have other issues that will need to be addressed eventually, but I believe I've given you guys an idea of what needs to be done for this article to reach good article status. Good luck, and thanks for your work so far. JimmyBlackwing 19:19, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. We'll try again later. -Litefantastic 02:13, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sign here!

In order to better co-ordinate where we go from here, please sign your name under each and any of the following you own (or have ready access to) and are willing to provide information about. This will allow us to make a better structured attack on the remaining pockets of vagueness in the article:

The FLCL DVDs (English)

Blademaster313 (I have the episodes themselves on my computer, not the DVDs.)

FLCLFan (I have all 3 DVDs)

The pamphlets that came with said DVDs

The FLCL DVDs (Japanese)

The FLCL manga (English)

Tyler (I have both volumes of the English manga.)

Any of the albums

Tyler (I have the second and third of the three albums.)

The FLCL novels (Japanese only)

Any piece of print media discussing or reviewing FLCL

Thanks, and good luck -Litefantastic 01:54, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I think we actually have enough information on the subject page; our main task at this late stage is enhancing it. We need to cite everything (feel free to dig up things just so you can cite them) and it would be good if we can have more material in the receptain section. I'm beginning to think the trivia section should be done away with completely, but I could be dissuaded. -Litefantastic 01:36, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed that in 'trivia' it said that "Many of the important characters are left-handed due to the director's belief that southpaws have more outgoing personalities than right-handed individuals. " needed a citation, but I just watched the first episode with DVD commentary and he confirms this right at the beginning. I don't really know how to cite stuff or anything since this is my 1st wikipedia edit, but I thought I'd mention it. I have the DVDs and pamplets if needed. CharredCoal 12:40, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What does Fooly Cooly Mean

This has been bugging the living daylights out of me would somebody just tell me.--Jack Cox 03:42, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't mean anything. —Yar Kramer 17:03, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. In the series, it's some kind of ultimate sexual innuendo - ultimate because nobody can understand what it means. -17:12, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

It's probably the "sound" of groping someone's breasts. That's never really confirmed anywhere, so I don't think it can be added to the article, but that's what it implies. --SeizureDog 19:32, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're guessing, aren't you? -Litefantastic 19:40, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No. I did some research on it like a year ago and found a site that discussed it. My memory is sketchy though, so I can't explain well. But given the context of the discussion in the anime, relation to similar onomatopoeia words in Japanese, and the sheer amount of sexual undertones in the anime, it's a very likely answer. --SeizureDog 20:21, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not the same site I found before, but here's one that supports what I was saying:

"Q: What does FLCL mean?

A: First off, FLCL stands for "Fooly Cooly" - but in Japanese it's called "Furi Kuri" because there is no L or C sounds. "Furi Kuri" has been translated in many different ways, the most common interpreted meaning is "fondling a woman's breasts". Throughout the series the term "Fooly Cooly" is used as an expression for having sex. The mysterious title of the series could also be interpreted as a metaphor for the confusing and unknown territory of sex from adolescence point of view. “Fooly Cooly” could also be referring to how Naota attempts to act cool and mature, only making things more awkward."

http://www.flclw.com/faq.htm --SeizureDog 20:25, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in actuality "Fooly Cooly" is an effort to transliterate Furi Kuri into English. "Furi Kuri" is a word without meaning, and not even Naota knows what it means, as is revealed in Furi Kura (FLCLimax).

Hurray, a nice reference to use.

Found a lovely little interview with Kazuya Tsurumaki here. It contains some juicey tidbits we can add to the article, such as the origin of the title (but sadly, not the meaning) and that the series is a metaphor of the history of Gainax. Just rememeber to cite this stuff too ;) --SeizureDog 20:40, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also found 5 pages worth of information that was printed in Pulp, which, being a magazine, makes for good reference. Includes another interview.--SeizureDog 20:48, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful, have at it. I'm too burned out just now, what with school and everything. Somewhere there had to be an actual magazine that talked about this - Kudos on finding it. -Litefantastic 20:15, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm uncomfortable doing much more than minor edits away from my home computer. And I moved recently and haven't set up internet yet so...yeah. Things such as citations require a lot of copy and pasting for me, and being on a computer I'm not used to feels weird to do much. I would/will do it once I have everything set up though. --SeizureDog 03:51, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The glorious return of the Status Table

Name	Status	Needs
Episodes
Fooly Cooly	Whole, needs light to moderate rewriting	Needs to be rewritten in the useful but topically inappropriate journalist's hourglass layout.
FireStarter	Whole	Needs to be shortened and prettified.
Marquis de Carabas (FLCL)	Whole	Light tinkering
Full Swing	Whole	Better wording, here and there
Brittle Bullet	Whole; needs polishing	Copyediting and a nice coat of wax
FLCLimax	Whole	Likewise
Albums
Addict (soundtrack)	Pretty much set	Could possibly be made longer
King of Pirates	Complete but too short	Needs an explanation on the radio dramas and the picture from the back of the album. The soundtracks are being ignored in this movement of ours.
FLCL No. 3	Unclear	Probably could use some light editorial work
Templates
Template:FLCL	Pretty good	None
Template:FLCL-ep	Finished!	None.
Other
FLCL	On its way	Needs to be better structured and have more international information. READ: Wikipedia:Peer review/FLCL/archive1
Characters of FLCL	Stalled	Someone to finish the template work I got sick of. Don't give me that look.
Items and Concepts of FLCL	A lot of work	Eternal sunshine of the spotless POV

As you can see, the episodes of the series have done well, but the albums have languished. Also, the lead article (your albatross and mine) really does need some info from the Japanese end of the stick in order to move much farther than here. Thank you, and goodnight. -Litefantastic 01:26, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The battle wages on

Although the fight to FA has slowed considerably, I've renominated FLCL for GA a third time, with the only major outstanding problem being that we still know nothing about the quality of the series' reception in Japan. I've asked them to specifically overlook this for GA purposes, but if we ever get as far as a push for FA we're going to have to go over this thing with a fine toothed comb. I'm also thinking of taking our cause to the Animanga COTW. Any questions? -Litefantastic 20:55, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Failed GA once again

Litefantastic says "I've renominated FLCL for GA a third time, with the only major outstanding problem being that we still know nothing about the quality of the series' reception in Japan." Actually, what he wrote was "Third time up to bat. I and the rest of the editing regulars have done massive amounts of work and fulfilled almost all of requests made of us for quality. I ask your forgiveness on our inability to better explain the subject's release in its home country of Japan, but argue that (since this is the English Wikipedia) it be overlooked for this stage of development."

Rather than make you wait on tenterhooks for weeks, I reviewed your article, and was very surprised at the article. Then, when I turned to this page to see why the article had failed before, I saw you'd been through peer reviews. zippedmartin said you had "no meaningful references". Icey said the article "Needs references!" When I see "fulfilled almost all of requests made of us for qualify", I would expect that you'd notice that both of those reviews came down on you, hard, for lack of references, and that you need to do something about it.

You don't get points for previous failures, and there is no "special olympics" for articles if the authors beg. You either meet Wikipedia standards and you don't. The GA criteria aren't all that demanding - they basically ask for a clearly-written, complete article that users can trust. References aren't optional. If users can't trust what they read, what's the point of coming to Wikipedia?

It's not Wikipedia policy to ensure that every fact is true. There's no way we can determine the truth. On the other hand, it is policy that every fact needs to be verifiable. If you want to say water is wet, you need to find a reliable source that says water is wet to back you up. If you can't find a reliable source to back you up, the presumption is that you've discovered a new and important truth. Wikipedia isn't the place for new and important truths. Take it to a trusted third party, let them determine whether your discovery is valid, and publish their determination; then you can use that to back up what you want to state: No original research is the policy.

If you can't pass the three basic policies for encyclopedic content - V/RS/NOR - then you don't have a Good Article. You don't even have acceptable content.

That's not the only criteria required of a Good Article. A GA needs to be well written, factually accurate and verifiable, broad in its coverage, follow the neutral point of view policy, stable (basically, is not the subject of ongoing edit wars) and should be illustrated, if possible.

You have other shortcomings, but being excellent in several areas is often enough to get you past slight deficiencies in other areas. Nothing can make up for *serious* deficiencies, though - and your lack of citations are a serious deficiency. ClairSamoht - Help make Wikipedia the most authoritative source of information in the world 01:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that was cold, but thanks. I understand your points, and I understand that there isn't a grading curve. My request was that a certain group of flaws be overlooked, which didn't strike me as entirely unreasonable because I was striving for "good", not "featured." I'm going to excise the trivia section now, and we'll see what's left after that. -Litefantastic 05:56, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That "certain group of flaws" didn't make any difference. You have a considerable way to go before you even hit acceptable.

zippedmartin said you had no meaningful references.
Icey told you that you need references.
Now, I told you that you need references.

Your response? You delete the trivia section. Is there a problem here with reading comprehension? Please note:

There are NO sources cited in the introduction.
There are NO sources cited in "Story"
There are NO sources cited in "Style"
There are NO sources cited in "Language"
There are NO sources cited in "Music"
There are NO sources cited in "Episodes"
There are NO sources cited in "Releases"

You need references

I don't know how else to put it. This is not an exercise in creative writing. If you can't find a reliable source that backs up your statements, they ought not be in the article. The first three paragraphs of "Reception" are the only acceptable content in the entire article. ClairSamoht - Help make Wikipedia the most authoritative source of information in the world 12:13, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Manga details

Would it possible to create a separate section for the FLCL manga? It is barely mentioned and rushed as a summary under releases. For that matter could someone create separate character profiles to hilight the difference between the manga and the anime. I've read the manga and I am still confused by it. Basically could information about the FLCL manga be expanded? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.64.23.64 (talk • contribs) .

I would have to agree here. I recently bought and read the manga, and it definitely has darker tones to it compared to the anime. I'm a bit apprehensive to take on the job due to the fact that I've never done so and that the manga is hard to follow. I do find that I'm having an easier time following it now that I am reading it a second time though. Tyler 05:16, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At the very least, the ending should be mentioned. OMG KITTIES. I still don't really get what happened there. --SeizureDog 22:21, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would assume that the ending implies that Naota went off in search of Haruko. Just a few pages before Haruko tells Naota that, "I'll leave you this hyper flight Vespa." and "With enough practice you'll be able to fly it into outer space too." implying that he was given the means to search for her once she left the planet. On the next page it shows Naota trying to ride the Vespa and he mentions that "[his] finger nails are coming off." possibly meaning that he is moving at such a speed that he could leave orbit. You can also see that the tips of his fingers are bloody in a panel on the next page. In the very last panel of the manga you can see a tiny dust cloud behind the old lady. The old lady is standing on the strip that he was practicing using the Vespa, this could imply that he had achieved flight with the Vespa. As for all the cats, I'm unsure of their meaning at the moment. But I'm going through my second read through of the manga and it is beginning to make more sense now, so I may be able to find what their symbolism is. Tyler 17:47, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, all this lovely symbolism doesn't mean anything if we can't figure out how to source it -_- --SeizureDog 17:56, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One thing I wonder is if Wikipedia accepts analytical essay type entries. I'm rather used to that. If that instance is allowed, then I could just source the manga itself. Tyler 23:58, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OR. --Gwern (contribs) 01:28 4 December 2006 (GMT)

Of Mice and "Chu"

The article asserts that the mice suits some characters wear are solely a pun on "mouth to mouth". I would add to this. Japanese mice are thought to say "chu", instead of "squeak". "Chu" is also the noise someone makes when kissing. Naota's friend Gaku teases him about Haruko's attention by always saying "chu, chu" with lips twitching as to kiss. Thus, I think the mouse costumes are a play on this "chu". Note Haruko's lips in the flashback right after she emerges in the mouse suit in this episode - she's has a "chu" face. So, the "mouse" pun only accentuates the "chu" usage that's already there, rather than being the genesis of the mouse imagery.

(Another example of "chu" used as a mouse identifier can be seen in "Chu Chu Rocket", the SEGA videogame featuring mice). Also see another wikipedia article for "chu" in FLC en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Characters_of_FLCL . Perhaps the use of cats in FLCL can be related to "chu" activity, but I have no theory on that beyond the obvious "cat and mouse" imagery seen in this episode, and the cat ears in the episode prior. One would also have to include Haruko's relationship with Miu Miu, the family cat. I think this could be a point of analysis, after this article is made more complete.

Too Much Trivia

In order to get rid of some of the trivia, I propose that we remove the ones that need citations. They are mostly "It is rumored" or something that is likely not to be proven. Tyler 20:36, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --SeizureDog 06:42, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. Tyler 04:59, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a way to make an example, I find this to be unacceptable trivia: "During episode 6 Mamimi uses a phone made by the fictional company "cyberdyine" the same fictional company that made the "Terminator" robots in the film Terminator." It uses not only poor grammar, but it is hardly related to the page. It also NEEDS to have a source. Please, please, please, all users before posting trivia post it in the discussion to be approved and provide your source. Remember, conclusions you make on your own are considered original research. You must cite reliable sources. You want to see this page rise to A, right? If so, then we must follow Wikipedia guidelines. Tyler 04:59, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unseen Irony

Naota seems to be very frustrated with his life, and in the opening episode is musing about how constrictive and boring Mabase is. This complaint is borne through to the final episode, despite many examples to the contrary. Is it not perhaps more likely that Naota's narration in the final episode is intended to be ironic, given what he's seen and done? Otherwise, it makes him look like a bit of an idiot, does it not? Kelvingreen 14:39, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He's still just a kid. (-Kid. 13:43, 8 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I think it means that things have returned to normal. With Haruko gone, it's as if the whole event hasn't even happened. But also, I think there is a hint of irony in it too. Wilderns 18:49, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ignored Guitar?

In this statement in the trivia section, Haruko's bass guitar is a left-handed Azureglo Rickenbacker 4001. Atomsk's is a 1961 Gibson EB-0. Naota's appears to be a 1967 Gibson Flying V., there is no mention of the guitar Naota uses in the final episode. Also, there is no mention of Commander Amarao's guitar either. (The one Haruko uses as a slingshot in episode 5) Chronamew981 03:41, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What's "the one Naota uses in the final episode"? Do you mean the double guitar that is formed from the two Gibsons; does such a real guitar exist? Are you referring to some other guitar he uses, because I don't remember another. Leebo ^T/C 03:49, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I could've sworn I read something about the double guitar somewhere before... Anyway, as far as I can tell from the time it's shown in Brittle Bullet, Commander Amarao's guitar is a black Flying V... could someone verify this? I'm not the best when it comes to guitars.Chronamew981 22:54, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is indeed a twin neck guitar, i also remember that Haruko goes "WoW! a Gibson something something", as i dont have the series here i cant check what model it was or if it actually exists. 12:21, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Haruko says that when Canti pulls out his Gibson EB-0.Chronamew981 21:57, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spoiler?

First off I'm gonna say I don't even like that people put the spoiler warnings in articles, but whatever. I'm asking, why does the spoiler warning title END right in basically the middle of the trivia section? There's things in the trivia section that are not spoilers and it just looks sloppy. If someone else sees that it's wrong could you fix it up, or if I'm just being stupid tell me why. lol sorry I can't fix it myself, I'd rather just bring it up and have someone who's good at that sort of stuff decide what to do with it. Now that I go back and look at it I realize that the "spoiler" goes through almost the whole article. I think we should just take out the 'warning.' But I don't want to bring up a topic that has probably been argued enough so, if anything please fix it up or tell me to shut up. (-Kid. 16:08, 19 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

For now, I just moved it down to the bottom of the trivia section. I'm all for a two-pronged ultimate solution: Limit all spoilers to the plot section and remove spoiler warnings from the article. If someone reads the plot section, they're looking for spoilers, so if we can keep the spoilers there, then we can remove the warnings altogether. Unfortunately, that's a massive rewrite basically. Leebo ^T/C 16:13, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that's that I figured too. It'd take a lot to have to re-write but thanks for clearing that up for me and fixin' it to make it look a little bit prettier. Thanks! ^.^;;; (-Kid. 15:57, 21 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]