This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime, manga, and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anime and mangaWikipedia:WikiProject Anime and mangaTemplate:WikiProject Anime and mangaanime and manga articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics articles
This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBTQ-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBTQ+ studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBTQ+ studiesLGBTQ+ studies articles
@Nbisbo: Would you mind explaining why you removed that content? We would like to know what about those sources wasn't reliable or why this aspect of the work, which has seen certain press lately, should not be mentioned in the article. My position, on which I have no strong opinion, is that it is relevant to mention what has changed between versions of the work and how that has been received. I certainly agree it should only be mentioned in relative proportion to its significance in the media, and I think as written it works. But I welcome alternative perspectives and would like to hear your thoughts. I don't want an WP:EDITWAR between the two of you; we need to give this topic, if indeed it belongs, its proper WP:WEIGHT, but if we don't actually explain ourselves we'll never arrive at what that should be. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist(Speak quickly)(Follow my trail)06:39, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The sources fail notably and are biased on one side. Not only that but the clams are not on any non-biased sites showing how small this issue is Nbisbo (talk) 03:24, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
it seems that this stuff came from the fan tler of the manga making a fuss (because they want it to be a BL story) that led to a hate mob. Sorry for the edit mess got mixed up on who was who and took the bad actor for zeke. Sorry Nbisbo (talk) 02:12, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Don Dick Donald: Why do you keep adding the sources? You did not address the point I made about them being blogs, and as for Bounding into Comics, consensus at WP:RS/N has determined the source's reliability so whether you think its "neutral" or not is irrelevant. Link20XX (talk) 17:05, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Again, you say they are biased for who knows what reason (probably personal or political), but they simply report what happened with the localization controversy, they don't insult and judge non-neutrally. They report facts. And again, you shouldn't even be here and take part in this, Nbisbo, you've been reported for vandalism and inappropriate behaviour against editor users insulting them post-edit. I'm not the one who want to start an edit war, I'm not doing anything wrong and I also explained why. I know how this is going to work, it's going to end only with one tired of keep talking (either being right or not) or until one gets blocked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Don Dick Donald (talk • contribs) 18:45, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Reliabile sources have called Bounding into Comics biased (here it's referred to as "A Comicsgate news-hub called Bounding Into Comics emerged, where progressive creators and critics are regularly accused of harassing or silencing conservatives", thus showing clear bias). The rest of the sources appear to be blogs run by non-experts, which are certainly not reliable. To be honest, I have no idea why you insist on putting these excessive citations on this when it's already verified by reliable sources. As for Nbisbo, I think they should be less ad hominem in their arguments (like "is politically moated [sic] to keep using bad sources" is a borderline personal attack without any further explanation). That said, I do agree that these citations are excessive and unreliable, even if I don't agree with all of their conduct. Link20XX (talk) 19:04, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
