Talk:Otaku/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Otaku. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Japanese loan words

I think Japanese loan words need it's separate page.

Maybe. But would "Loanwords from language X in the English language" articles be worthy of creating? I ask this because it seems like a majority of words in any language is a loanword, so such a task may be too daunting. Although I think it is quite odd for "Japanese loanwords" to be a subcategory of this article. Soysauce, tofu, tycoon, and rikshas, and karaoke are examples of Japanese loanwords, and they are not related to otakus. I also see a problem with what qualifications a word would need to fit in this list. An otaku in an English speaking country is pretty much an enthusiast of Japanese culture, hence such a person could grab any Japanese word and use it. In that case, should we have a list of all words in the Japanese language? See also: gairaigo. --68.77.117.197 01:22, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Er..how did you figure 'soy sauce', 'tycoon', and 'rikshas' were Japanese words? They aren't even in Japanese syllables. Oct 31, 05

I think for here, we can stick with loanwords that are part of otaku jargon. --Paul Soth 01:51, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Couldn't an otaku use any word in the Japanese language? In which case, wouldn't the entire Japanese language be considered as part of otaku jargon? If the qualification is simply "any Japanese word an otaku likes," then the criteria is a very subjective one. Basically a quality control issue - a similar issue plagues Jargon file, IMHO. --68.77.117.197 02:16, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Right, before we split hairs any more on the issue, let's figure out the boundaries then. Otakuisms are mostly words that are used for flavor (such as simple words or exclamations: "Hai,""Baka,""Sugoi"), terms for items and subjects that do not have proper equivalents in English, or are used to specify that the origins or style of an object or subject is Japanese in nature. For instance, when the word "manga" is used, it is inferred that the speaker is referring to comics from Japan, or the term "manga style," meaning that a comic borrows style and technique from Japanese comics. --Paul Soth 04:16, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Don't misspell its. lysdexia 13:50, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Er..how did you figure 'soy sauce', 'tycoon', and 'rikshas' were Japanese words? They aren't even in Japanese syllables. that's because they're older loanwords and the writing was modified to be more english at the time they entered the language. soy sauce comes from shoyu (the sauce was added), tycoon comes from taikun (by now something of an archaic word in the japanese language, meaning literaly grand lord, i.e. somebody extremely wealthy) and rickshaw is an abreviation of jinrikisha, literaly man-powered vehicle. 213.172.246.86 02:06, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I've moved this section to its own article: List of common loan words in non-Japanese otaku culture. --nihon 22:40, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Otaku etymology

The previous editor dropped all of the following. I would have just dropped the last 2 sentences. Is the text incorrect or incomplete in some way? What's there now doesn't look any more complete. --Koyaanis Qatsi

Otaku are a Japanese cultural subgroup. The name has something of a double meaning. Outside of Japan, the word implies particular obsessiveness or geekiness. In Japan, the word has connotations of creep or stalker, though it retains its roots in extreme obsession or geekiness. For a better understanding, watch Otaku no Video

I await your edits, Max :)

Well, the information that was present is essentially incorrect as it is more of an opinion. Otaku doesn't have a negative connonation as far as I'm concerned, and I've never really heard it used that way. But, as always, I could be wrong. --Jzcool

Some people even call themself Otaku and are proud of it. :) --Taw

Ok then. Just wondering. --Koyaanis Qatsi

Well, in Japan it would be bad to be called "otaku", so shouldn't we mention this? As I was told, it implies just serious obsessiveness. My Japanese friends have corrorated this. I think its kind of like "Baka", in the sense that westerners don't realize how different the word is used in the country of origin to how its translation is used here. --Alan D

corroborated lysdexia 13:50, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I wrote "American otaku culture" and someone changed it to "Otaku culture outside Japan". I chose that phrasing because I'm not familiar with the otaku culture (in the English sense of the word) outside of the USA. Can someone confirm that it's the same elsewhere? -- zw

Here's one of a household of two Canadian otaku telling you so :) - Montréalais

I added some information on the etymological history of the word, that I think clarifies the meaning of the bad connotations of the word. The paragraph ("The word is derived from ...") probably could be merged with the preceding paragraph. My primary source was [1] --hb

I've expanded (and, I think, corrected) the etymology, by removing the apparently spurious stuff about photographers - I can't find any references to support that, feel free to put it back if you can - and adding references to Nakamori Akio, who deserves some credit for apparently coining the word. My sources were the etymology in Sanseido's デイリー新語辞典 and the article on Nakamori at [2].

I think that the explanation is the best i've read yet. you might want to include references to the word mania as used in japan. frankly, making a lot of distinction between the varieties of non-japanese otaku useage is futile as it is, outside of japan, almost perfectly synonymous with geek, except by geeks who want to really emphasize that they are into manga and anime.

as far as the average response to the word in japan, i have had about 19 times out of 20 the following reaction/explanation:

"they wear black shirts, live at home until way longer than normal watching anime and reading manga and playing geimu, smell bad, are unkempt and often have pot bellies and carry around paper bags with books or manga inside."

honestly, this is the answer i got, while in japan, time after time. i think that's pretty empirically convincing that there is a bad connotation, even bordering on the stalker kind of theme. also, it should be pointed out that manga, if not anime and gaming, is a huge pastime among the general population that you could hardly call otaku, at least not in japan. Plasticlax

i'm not entirely convinced this proves anything. i speak the language fluently and have spent quite some time in japan as well, so i can confirm the word is not entirely neutral. however, if you are a foreigner in japan, then unless you show a great deal of knowledge of the culture AND are on extremely friendly terms with the people you speak with, most of them are likely to tell you whatever they figure will please you. a sort of stereotype-on-demand, if you will. (you might wanna do a little reading on nihonjinron for more - nihonjinron is not what i am talking about, but it does explain the mechanisms behind it) i would presume they simply asumed you had a negative stance on the subject and pretty much gave you a general description of a stereotype stalker/hikikomori/generally asocial person. you might as well have asked them if the sun was green.213.172.246.86 02:06, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Just thought I would chime in with an anecdote. I live in Japan, and am married to a Japanese national, and I can verify that the term has decidedly negative vibes. I'm not sure about it being immediately associated with stalker-esque behavior, but it is commonly used to denote someone as creepy. I'm reasonably certain that my spouse and friends haven't been feeding me a line for years.205.206.239.158 11:52, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Otaku terminology and loanwords

Well, in any event, otaku is becoming more and more of a loanword itself in American English, and like most loanwords, the original meaning gets skewered or flat out ignored. The way I think, if you're going to argue with people that they're not using the word otaku 'right,' you might as well be chastising people who use the word "kamikaze" refer to suicide attackers, and not in reference to a divine wind.

In any event, perhaps it might be worth a mention the struggle between those who are proud to be fans against the cynical, overly self-conscious fans who endlessly argue about if the word should retain the negative connotations in its use in English.

Also, there's a article for Fanji, which repeats some of the stuff here. Honestly, I've never even seen that term before. Everyone I've ever come across calls them "otakuisms." --Paul Soth 03:26, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Agreed, as I was the one who wrote the "otakuisms" part (though more often I've heard "otakuese"); still, "otakuisms" is more common than "fanji", which sounds like a neologism.--Mitsukai 17:45, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

What's with all the annoying -u endings? And does hentai really mean transformation (a noun) and still all of those adjectives? lysdexia 13:50, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Well, Japanese only has 5 vowels, and with the exception of n, every word will end in a vowel, so expect a lot of u endings. Hentai means literally a "changed form," or basically, a perversion of the original form, hence the meaning. Dracil 02:38, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Akibake -> Akiba-kei (アキバ系)--Outis 12:14, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

_______________________________________________________________

Being obsessed with cartoons is just as bad as being obsessed with comics, videogames, celebrities, etc. You forget about yourself and start worshiping things that alienate you. You value yourself for what you posess of any given thing that is the object of your obsession. So, it's like Morgoth wanting to posess "Light". The desire destroys you and everything that's beautiful inside of you dies.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

i first came across the term in william gibsons idoru where he defines it as (im paraphrasing as i no longer have the book) some sort of technofetishist with an anarchicical bent, im wondering if maybe the origin was with electronics or computers instead of comics? (unlikely since comics were around long before i know) although its possible he was just wrong or imagined that the meaning would shift to be techno centric in the future. Also in the cyberpunk rpg it is used for children who live in the matrix, though this is probably taken straight from gibson, though it may predate idoru, im not sure.

so im wondering if a japanese person can clarify whether the term had or has technological implications (above others). Also maybe the cyberpunk definition as such is worthy of a mention.

It came out of photography circles, which is already discussed in the article. And no, the use of the word in Shadowrun doesn't need to be mentioned. It's too much of a minor detail. --Paul Soth 04:47, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Gibson's use is not a minor detail, and Shadowrun's use is? Just how many awards and thousands of production copies and participants does it take to be not a minor detail? Not to mention that SR 2-3 also significantly and influentially rewrote the meaning of the word, precisely as has already been discussed above as being legitimate for loanword definitions.

Consider also the use of 'otaku' in the (more or less) pejorative sense of creepy, asocial, immersed in an illusionary world, and then consider that it was Shadowrun that established the word 'Matrix' later used by the film. Consider also that SR's 'otaku' are described as "tribal", lacking in social skills, creepy, and above all preferring the world of the Matrix in preference to what most would consider 'real' life. (refs. 'Denver', 'Virtual Reality'). - Tenebris —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.112.27.188 (talk) 07:42, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Female otaku in Japan - "Otome"

I came across this article on the Mainichi Daily News website: http://mdn.mainichi-msn.co.jp/waiwai/archive/news/2005/06/20050620p2g00m0dm001000c.html

The gist of it is that female otaku, called "fujo" (腐女; "rotten girl"), are growing in numbers, but they're developing as a separate subculture from their male counterparts, and their main shopping district is Ikebukuro rather than Akihabara.

The term 'fujo' refers specifically to girls who have become fangirls via a man giving her romantic comics. The Japanese word for female otaku in general is 'otome.'

Otome explination: http://mdn.mainichi-msn.co.jp/waiwai/news/20060127p2g00m0dm016000c.html

Female otaku, a term now made redundant by otome, which roughly translates as "maiden," have created "Otome Road,"...

Fujo explination: http://mdn.mainichi-msn.co.jp/waiwai/archive/news/2005/06/20050620p2g00m0dm001000c.html

... girls who men have seduced through such stratagems [giving romantic manga] are referred to as "fujo," literally a spoiled or rotten girl.

Otome should be linked, and an article created to clarify otaku is male, otome is female.

Phresno 01:57, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

While female otaku are probably forming a subculture of their own, separate from male otaku (which is sad, really), I don't think the term "otome" is being widely used to refer to them. The only reference is Otome Road and the above article, but I think that in any case the term "fujo" is more widespread, and even then "female otaku" is really what is used mostly.

Unless I see more evidence of "otome" having been the primary term to refer to female otaku in Japan for at least the past year, I vote for its elimination from the article. —This unsigned comment was added by 200.84.207.64 (talk • contribs) .

I agree. Aside from Otome Road and Otome-kei this word just isn't used. Look over at Japanese wikipedia for crying out loud, it's not there. "Otome-kei" is interchangable with "Jyosei-muke". I haven't seen the word "otome" itself used to refer to female otaku. If our only source is a waiwai article, this seems like something we should drop... - Narfness 08:22, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

looking for term

does anyone know the term for extreme otakus? they never leave the house (except to buy stuff) and spend all day at the computer/internet?

I believe the term you're looking for is "Hikikomori"--Mitsukai 04:02, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, that was exactly what I was looking for! Man, I think that applies not exclusively to otakus, but didn't know where to ask for this info.

Thanks again

I really don't think it can be stressed enough that there are MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR stigmas associated with the word otaku in Japan and even in America. It's almost as if the Paul Soth and other people who have been modifying the article seem to want to cover that up and not be honest about thier own fandom.--taiki

I don't think they are overlooking anything, or trying to cover up anything. The article indicates there is a stigma, but since the main focus of the article is on otaku outside of Japan, there really doesn't need to be more than a small explanation of how it is used in Japan. There is only so much you can say about the stigma in Japan, too, without getting too far off track. As for it being "thier [sic] own fandom", it seems like you would fit into the category as well or else you wouldn't be here tossing in your two cents on the article. ;-) --nihon 07:50, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

I think otaku is a classical example of a nl:geuzennaam. I don't know if there's an English word for that though. Shinobu 18:20, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

The English word for that is pejorative. I had a friend who speaks Dutch tell me that. (^_^) --nihon 18:47, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I thought pejorative just meant scheldwoord or scheldnaam - indeed only a very small part of the article seems to be about geuzennamen. I think the closest I can come up with is "pejorative which is not considered pejorative anymore by the people involved". Yankee would qualify, but zipperhead wouldn't, even though they're both pejoratives. Shinobu 02:20, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

The term you're looking for (though not exact) is "dysphemism treadmill" (see the last sentence of Euphemism treadmill for an explanation).--Mitsukai 19:43, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

External Links

I just re-added a site (otakubooty.com) to external links. It was removed by an anonymous user, with no explanation. I'm afraid that the decision of what to include in the external links section could become contentious, expecially with commercial considerations involved (sites recieve traffic from being listed in a popular wiki entry's external links). Therefore, I think it makes sense for users to explain their reasoning for why a site should or shouldn't be included. At the very least, that will give us a discussion, rather than a revert war.

OtakuBooty deserves inclusion because it gives an unvarnished look at western(mostly american) otaku. Their culture, their language, their behavior, is all featured in a very raw sense. A lot of the external links are about anime and other things that otaku like, otakubooty gives information about the otaku themselves.--Spyrral 19:27, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

I broke down and NPOV'd this article.

The repeated editting of this article does not conform to the neutrality that Wikipedia attempts to maintain. There is nothing here that states the negative connotation that Otaku means, and links that have been added that are negative towards Otaku have been repeatedly removed.taiki

Maybe there needs to be a firmer line drawn between the Wotaku and the Otaku. Perhaps rewriting the article along those lines?--み使い Mitsukai 04:41, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

No. Since most people will look up "otaku" and all of the information pertaining to this term should be in this entry. -- taiki

Which, if you'll notice, is exactly what I said. The fact that there's beginning be some semantic drift between the two variations allows us to be able to explain both the history and the semantic drift between the two "otaku cultures".--み使い Mitsukai 05:19, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

After re-reading the main article, I have to very strongly disagree with your comments about the article not presenting the negative connotations of "otaku". There are whole paragraphs devoted to these negative connotations, and the articel goes into reasonable depth about these connotations in Japan and elsewhere. Therefore, I am removing the POV template from the main article. --nihon 02:01, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Removal of statement

I just pulled the following line from the article:

Additionally, otaku can mean a European or American who is interested in Japanese women, usually dating more than one at a time.

First I've ever heard of this referred to as otaku. Usually that type of person is referred to as "Asian fetish", "Tokyo Joe" (which has nothing to do with the movie), "Peking Tom", or (if you want to get really nasty about it) "Wapanese". First time I've heard of it as "otaku". Anyone else got an opinion on that one?--み使い Mitsukai 14:10, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm in the same boat as you: I've never heard it used that way, either. --日本穣 Nihonjoe 18:52, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

No, that's not otaku. That's the yellow fever. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by All That Is Holy (talk • contribs) 10:30, 26 January 2007 (UTC).

Image in English/Internationally section

An individual, namely BrookieDragon, and an anon. or two, a vast percentage of whose contributions on Wikipedia seem to be currently based primarily on adding two images of some non-notable individual in the Otaku and Japanophile articles respectively (the latter of which was accurately resolved by Wikipedia administrators and the image in the latter article removed after the discussion). A non-notable image of some unknown individual qualifies as vanity, and does not qualify in anyway as supposedly an "example" of "international influence of 'otaku' culture", which is an absolutely absurd claim for all to see. Whenever these images in question are correctly removed from the article by other users, BrookieDragon constantly tries to add them back, even after a similar image of the same individual was removed from the other article, as mentioned earlier. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and is not a platform for which vain and badly-taken images of non-notable individuals can herald themselves a claim for fame, and therefore I feel that this image should be removed as soon as possible from this article. ~ Ganryuu (talk) 06:53, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Once again...

I am unaware of what issues you have personally taken to destroy random Japanese articles on Wikipedia, but it is on the verge of harassment. I hate to bring personal values into a discussion here, but you have done nothing but throw fits while inappropriately vandalizing articles while falsely labeling things as breaking Wiki rules.

No administration action was taken against the Japanophile picture as you have claimed. The picture was finally removed after people got tired of trying to maintain the article as you personally removed the picture countless times when people supported it. There where several people that voiced there opinion in support of the picture, and at the point that you realized that several people where against you in the matter, you began this game of removing the picture every time you logged on and declaring it vain. I can go back into the discussion of the articles, and look at the history of the picture and see where people edited the picture’s description text to fix grammar, and I clearly see the support.

Now you come here. The Otaku picture has been on this article for several months. It has been accepted here and been well established. In efforts for you to carry your battle out against either me, the original poster of this picture, or the person in the picture… you now come to disturb this article for the only purpose of your own personal jealousy/idealology.

On to the picture itself. You claim this picture as not notable and vain.

Let’s hit this one step at a time

Vain?:

“Vanity information is considered to be any information that was placed in any Wikipedia article that might create an apparent conflict of interest,”

This picture in no one disrupts the validity of this article. In effect, it is almost a real life translation of the anime picture at the top of the page, which has been accepted for a major part of the life of this word on Wiki. This picture also talks about a foreign (non Japanese) example of Otaku. This directly fits into the English/Internationally section, which starts off with this sentence. “The word is a loanword from the Japanese language, but in the English/international sense it is used to refer specifically to a fan of anime and manga, though it can sometimes refer to any "geek," in general.” This picture fits the description and shows an English person filling the profile.

Posted by the author to represent themselves?

From Wiki Word Vain: “meaning any material that presents the appearance of being intended to in any way promote the personal notoriety of the author”

I am not the original author of this picture. I am just out to protect other people’s interest from being voided out intellectual supremist.

Non - Notable? Your whole argument for removing this picture is that you do not think it is credible enough of a source. From previous discussions with you on the Japanophile picture, you have made your opinion out to be that if it does not have a previous copyright from a published book/encyclopedia, then it is not good enough for you.

Might I direct you to just a few of the thousands of other Wiki articles that have pictures from users that are used “by example.” Here are a few: Hang Gliding , Racquetball , Cheerleading. That comes from about 20 seconds of searching random articles on Wiki. Also, might I remind you that there where a few people on the Japanophile article who directly said they remember the person from this picture from a decently popular web blog a few years back, as well as one person saying he was a common entertainer in Anime conventions in the Southwest United States.

People keep telling you the validly of the picture, the appropriateness of the picture, and you come back and say there is no proof and remove. Your actions are verging on the extreme and I’m sure some people would appreciate the peace of this article to be allowed to continue as it did for the past 2 months with the picture as part of the article. I will be sending messages to a few of the commenters on the Japanophile picture becuase I'm sure their comments would be constructive too.

--BrookieDragon 19:12, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I have never understood the reasoning for including the images: they just seemed pointless, and do not contribute anything. A couple of pictures of nobodies posing do not make meaningful encyclopedia content. I have enough anime DVDs and VHSs to build a crusader castle with, so should I pile them up, sit on top, and add a photo of that to this article? No! If I were, say, one of the founders of GAINAX (all famous, notable otaku), then perhaps a photo of me would be relevant for this article, but since I was not even interviewed for Otaku no Video, I guess I am not important enough: same goes for the those photos you insist on including. The images contribute abolutely nothing, and do not appear to have any relevancy to the topic. Unless a substantiated argument to why they should be there can be provided, they should be removed and not restored again.

I just read over the Japanophile dicussion on this topic too, and found it very interesting. Most of the people who want those photos had not contributed before, or since, that discussion. They had also not contributed in any way other than restoring the image or commenting on keeping it. I believe that speaks volumes on its own. Elric of Grans 00:45, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Very well said, Elric of Grans, your points are straight on. That indeed is a revealing factor which I, and I'm sure many others, too had noticed earlier. The majority of contributions by these usernames seem to completely obsessed with adding two badly-taken and vain images of some non-notable individual to Wikipedia articles, and I also agree that these images do nothing but degrade the article's encyclopedic standard to an absurd degree. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a platform for some absurd, badly-taken, non-relevant images of non-notable individuals to herald themselves a supposed claim to fame. ~ Ganryuu 06:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh the joys of dealing with Ganryuu again. You seem to be making a name for yourself as one who thinks his opinion is far superior to that of the Wikipedia community. It astounds me that you can keep up for so long yelling that something is vain and not important when you have had probably a half dozen or more people tell you otherwise. This just seems to spur you to one of your now legendary tantrums where you just revert changes constantly against the will of the community.

Here is something for you. Wikipedia is made by many people. Not just you. Your opinion is not god here. The simple fact is that, from the looks of this, the Otaku picture has been here for quite some time. You coming in here and initially deleting it without any kind of discussion is against the very purpose of what Wiki is trying to do to build information database that people work together on. And when you do try to discuss, you say the same things you've ranted about for the past months, "vain, non-notable." How many times must you be told otherwise? The ability to change articles on Wiki is for the purpose of people to decide what is good and bad, not you to hold your own personal battles against a picture...who your only true purpose against is you just don't like it, or maybe a spot of jealousy as mentioned before?

And for Elric, trying to denounce people, such as me, as a limited poster is shameful. I've been editing on Wiki for years under an IP address. I just have never ran accross a person so arrogant as Gan as to completely ignore anything said from a non-username user, or for him to delete any change from an IP address user without even looking at its contents. Thus, I now have this name that I have to log on just for the purposes of getting him to look past his own stubborn thoughts.

And by the way Elric, the fact that the picture is not of you is not a reason for removal of an established Wiki reference. That, and using little bit of Gan's diction here, is vain. The picture does help this article as much as any other wiki picture does. It stays in my book.

--Getlow 15:41, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

The purpose of the vanity rulings from Wiki are to prevent exactly what your saying, Elric of Grans. Basically they don't want people taking pictures of themselves or friends and posting it on Wikipedia as credible source. What your complaining about not doing, is exactly what your not supposed to do. Just because someone else has others that are willing to stand by their credibilty, and decide to use the picture as as a reference, is no reason to hate because it is not something you can do. --BrookieDragon 01:59, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I do not know whether you have somehow miraculously missed my point, or are intentionally twisting my words, but either way you fail to make an argument, and come off as an idiot in doing so. The picture you insist on including is a meaningless snapshot of some nobody which fails to make any meaningful contribution to the article. It would be better replaced with a screenshot of Craig York in Otaku no Video (as 'Shon Hernandez') as an image of a Western otaku, as an example. I have no desire to have my photo included – I am already too recognised for my liking as it is. My point was simply that this photo is quite possibly less notable than a photo of myself, and I am not worth including (this should be quite obvious from my original message if you read past the first three sentances). Elric of Grans 23:34, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

The question that needs to be asked is if otaku are a subject matter that require an image to illustrate them. A cheerleader has a very regular appearance, thus an image will do great justice to the cheerleader image. Does an otaku have such a strong, recognizable image? I could describe exactly what they look like in Akihabara; backpack, flannel shirt and rolled khaki pants, thick glasses and forward inclined stance. An image illustrating this would present a stereotype. If such a stereotype exists outside of Japan, then what is it? Can you sum it up in an image? freshofftheufo ΓΛĿЌ 18:51, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Otaku as a marketing term

I'm rather surprized that this article makes no mention of the current use of the term Otaku in US marketing circles. It is taken to mean "one who is passionate about a product", usually in reference to viral marketing.

There's a really interesting story about how marketing author Seth Godin introduced the term to the marketing industry, I believe in his book "Purple Cow", with the misconception that Otaku was the passion rather than the person. So at first he was speaking of "having an otaku" for something, but later realized his mistake and adopted the more accurate meaning.

Adding a reference to this meaning would call for a major restructuring of the first paragraphs of the article, so I felt I should test the waters here before making any edits. Thoughts? --24.147.224.18 04:41, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Obsession

Isn't being an otaku being obsessed with Japanese stuff? Like Japanese pencils, Japanese erasers, Japanese pencil cases, or Japanese anime? "Otaku" is pretty funny considering how many American and Chinese students at my school are like this. Good friend100 22:09, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

then you would call then japanophiles.Angelofdeath275 05:44, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Otakus:those obnoxious people who dip into their very limited Japanese words into every conversation becauese cartoons are a good enough reason to want to be Japanese.

Yes, I'me very biased. An otaku=anime/manga. Japanophile might include a variety of other things, it's history, people, music, etc. You might say "otaku" is a sub division of it all.EAB 04:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

The picture of the "unkemp male"

Personally, I think this is a rather biased view of otakus. Some otaku's might be overweight, but some arent. Some might me unkemp, but some aren't. Trust me, I know some. And does the person in the picture know he's on Wikipedia? Unless he gave permission to have it posted and used in a negative fashion, it is up for deletion.

Added: ...Aaaand I just noticed this was argued about above. But still, I dont think it's justified. Blacklist 07:16, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I happen to know the folks who made the original picture. I'm sure they'd be cool with it.

-He Who Has No Name and Does Not Forgive.

Anonymous?

Puzzled as to the missing reason why RV often occurs

The most rampant ones are the deletion of an section (otakuism) and the alternatived meanings of otakus, whenever the elements of "sociology" and "Dr." are introduced. Is there any peopel find the deleted item too difficutl to read because of unfamiliarity? The doers of deletion simply does not realize that what the URL linked are actually sources

Hkcbgcs 16:16, 1 Sept 2006 (UTC)

A blog is not a reliable source. If the good Doctor presents information in a peer-reviewed academic journal, then that should be cited rather than his blog. --Interiot 07:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Suggestions

In my opinion, this article could use a lot of TLC:

It seems that many details in this article may need to be sourced using <ref> </ref> tags.
There are many different definitions/usages of otaku sprinkled throughout the text. I think these could be moved to the initial section, so that the reader gets a quick orientation on the various uses.
Overall organization may need some work. Perhaps the Otaku Murders deserve their own section, since this event was so seminal in the public perception of otaku. There is also stuff in the Etymology section rightfully belongs in the separate Otaku Murders section.
I'm not sure that Japanese loanwords in general deserve their own section in this article. I suggest deleting this section.

If no one objects, I'll try to implement my suggestions bit by bit over time. Ling.Nut 16:11, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

You have cleaned up the true history occured in Japan ccording to your own standard of preference (If fact, people who act RV with derogatory comments are qutie wanton, making the information transfer as imcomplete as they like), so I could say nothing but to notice you that please think twice before you do any cleaning-up. If such henomenon occures agian and again, I consider quiting this uncontrolled wikipedia and publish my second-hand research article via bookstore as an altnerative solution. Hkcbgcs 05:11, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Hkcbgcs, I haven't deleted anything. I haven't changed anything according to any preference of Japanese history. I did not remove any content. The main thing I did was polish the English; I also added some information about the Otaku Murders. Please look carefully at the edits & you'll see that I have done no damage to the content as it stands now.

I am trying to help you; perhaps others are trying as well. You should understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia made by everyone; everyone can contribute. It seems you are unhappy with the situation. I saw your personal page when this article was first posted; you felt you were the victim of racism because of other peoples' rvs... I do not know whether this situation warrants a Requests for comment... I am sorry that you are generally unhappy with the way things have gone. What can I do to help you? How can a compromise or agreement be reached between you (the original author) and others who contribute? Please try to be patient with all of us as we work through this problem. We are dealing with at least two different languages, cultures, etc. Moreover, many people love anime-related topics, and are eager to help. Cheers --Ling.Nut 23:04, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

–==Beginning an edit== I've begun tightening up the article, and have completed the intro and the Etymology section. I'll be moving on to the others tomorrow. I also created a brief article about Akio Nakamori. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 07:18, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Etymology Update

I quickly updated the Etymology section based on some comments by Yuka Minakawa made in Peter Carey's book wrong about Japan please check them out, and let me know if anything should be changed or if more information is needed. Edit: Note I used She when refering to Minakawa. Yuka is male though transgendered, if you think 'he' would be more appropriate feel free to edit it though I think it would be disrespectful to Ms Minakawa. Prince Rei 18:19, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

English/Internationally

Although it's obvious there are some people on the internet and anime conventions who like to refer to themself as otaku, I don't see any citation in the article for the English/International section. It's nothing major but I see a problem with the use of the word loanword in the article, since as far as I know otaku isn't a defined word in the dictionary, it isn't an English word officially. This means it is a foreign word and would take the meaning it has in a Japanese dictionary. My next problem would be alot of stuff that has no citation in the English/Internationally section, and a possible NPOV. There are many young people who refer to themselves as Otakus with a sense of pride, and have no sign of overtly obsessive behavior as often associated with the term. These range from perfectly fine-acting 12 year olds to even the elderly. As certain activities are becoming easier to accept, anyone can be an Otaku, from your stereotypical lonely teen to even pop stars and celebrities. This can be compared to the rise in popularity of video games, which were once considered a geek actitivity. Now, many people often admit to being called "game freaks" without being looked down upon, as can be seen in many popular television shows such as MTV's Cribs where celebrities would often showcase their vast videos game libraries. This is a matter of opinion as far as I can tell and since there is no reference, you can't prove it. There isn't any age statistic for otaku, and there isn't any real proof that "certain activities" are becoming more accepted. I don't know what you would officially do to it, but I'd say edit out the whole paragraph.--Ninja 01:21, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

This is a very slow moving article. I'll just go a head and edit it out. If anyone objects, just remember, I documented in the talk page.--Ninja 04:40, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I deleted a phrase from "In English/Internationally" that contradicts the rest of the section: how can one write that "'Otaku' has also been used to describe anyone who has a strong love for anime and manga without the negative connotations." if the paragraph above states the same thing, and adding the fact that the label "otaku" still has negative connotations among fans? That's nonsense. JoshuaCrow 16:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Honestly, this entire section is mostly speculation. You give no citation for strange, random facts (Otaku is more the equivelent to nerd than geek - Where is the cite to something explaining the difference, as all opinions would vary if there even is one or not?). Honestly, I think you're a wishful thinker, and are not qualified to say who is "perfectly fine". Embarassing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.197.20.184 (talk) 05:44, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Concerning the 'Typical_Otaku.jpg' image

Over the past couple days, the Typical Otaku image has been added, removed, and added again. Here's a simple solution that bypasses the debate about its correctness. As the image is copyrighted by http://www.catsonmars.com/, it may or may not be fair use for commentary about that specific website -- the site itself. It's clearly not fair use when copyrighted content from a site is used as an illustration to this article, and so should not be included here.Tofof 20:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

maniakku / mania

Does anyone have any evidence that this came from Spanish as the article states? It seems much more likely that it came from the English words manicac / mania; I don't speak Japanese or anything but it seems like the "-u" suffix is on a lot of adopted words, and doesn't necessarily come from the Spanish "-o"... 68.20.18.144 12:55, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Fixed. My Kojien has both as stemming from English, and besides, the days when Japanese was loaning words from Spanish that aren't very specifically linked to the Spanish language/culture are long gone. TomorrowTime 18:41, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Otome

Why is Otome a redirect to Otaku? It just doesn't fly for me. - Sikon 17:12, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Otome can be slang for a female otaku. "Although stereotypically male, there are also many female otaku. A small alleyway of Tokyo's Higashi Ikebukuro district is known as "Otome Road" ("Maiden's road"). Otome Road's otome are a cross-section of Japanese womanhood, with ages ranging from teenage junior high school girls to housewives in their late 40s. A feature of the area is that there are so many bookstores devoted to comics and books filled with stories about homosexual men, in a genre called Boys' Love or BL. Dōjinshi, manga produced by amateur fans, dominate the shelves along Otome Road, with a significant chunk of the comics' stories about more famous anime that imitate, parody or develop on characters who are usually household names in Japan." -Malkinann 08:21, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

You're misunderstanding this. That alleyway is refered to as "Otome Road" because is full of young women (Otome/Maiden), but the redirect is still misplaced (so I removered it) because the term "Otome" in itself has little to no connection to the term "Otaku". Furthermore, "Otome" refers primarily to "Maiden" and should redirect there. Kazu-kun (talk) 22:31, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

JASON MRAZ. Also Otakon.

So WHY exactly does the See Also section contain a link to Jason Mraz?? I checked his page, says nothing at all about otaku, and the otaku page doesn't mention him at all. I know it's minor, but it seems completely out of place. Is he a recognized otaku? If so it should be mentioned on *his* page, and not the otaku page, as it still adds virtualy nothing to the article other than plugging. Also it is my opinion that the small, pegged-off Otakon sentence adds virtually nothing to the article, acting as yet another shameless plug. It's actually *not* the only anime convention in the world, after all. I'm debating on whether or not to simply remove both of them until someone can obtain something harder, but I'm a bit hesitant. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.28.244.186 (talk) 03:30, August 22, 2007 (UTC)

Wotaku should not be used here

At the very beginning of the article it indicated "wotaku" in katakana as being a spelling for "otaku" this is incorrect being that "wotaku" is a very specific type of otaku who obsesses over idols. If you have seen "wotaku" being used as a blanket term for "otaku" that person was using the word incorrectly. As such I'm going to remove it from the main article. -- NatsukiGirl\^talk 08:49, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok, apparantly it does say this within the article itself, but at the top, and in the English usage section, it perpetuates the notion that wotaku is a blanket term for all otaku. What should we do to fix this? -- NatsukiGirl\^talk 08:52, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Proper Lexicon Missing

I can't help but notice that the actual Japanese alphabet spelling of otaku is glaringly absent and symbolised as '???' - is there no one that can correct this? It seems a fairly important detail for an encylopedic entry rather than so much of the cultural analysis (though woot for Gibson)! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.104.173.69 (talk) 14:13, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Otaku (おたく or オタク) - right in the opening. Are you having trouble seeing Japanese characters? You might need some Help:Japanese. Biccat (talk) 20:57, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

"Wota"

From the article on Japanese Wikipedia, the spelling variants are おたく (otaku), オタク (otaku), ヲタク (wotaku) オタ (ota), and ヲタ (wota). The last one ヲタ (wota), doesn't have any difference in meaning from the other spelling variants. However on English Wikipedia, wota is treated as a subcategory and wota redirects to ota-gei (otaku that specialises in geinoujin), but I think this is based on a misunderstanding. —Tokek (talk) 22:41, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

MOE

Can someone please make a refer-to page useing Moe & than write a bit explaining the difference & similarities of Moe & Otaku? Or even give Moe it's own page?

egirl630 on Veoh says: "moe- A Japanese slang term (ironically, first employed by otaku) used to refer to the fetish for or sexual attraction to idealized people, usually a fictional perfect young girl. Since then, moé has come to be used as a general term for a hobby, mania or fetish (non-sexual or otherwise). This is contrasted with otaku, which would be taking the specific hobby, mania or fetish."

It also seems to refur for favorite types of pairing fetishes, & the more tabboo they are, the more desireable they are. Student-teacher, bodyguard-bocchama, twin brothers, human-mazoku, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

Me thnks what you're trying to say is there is a correlation between these two terms. I say there isn't, and is a case wherein "correlation equal causation".

There are neither similarities nor differences.

Explain why, so that we may discuss on this in further detail. The user egirl630 on Veoh is not a reliable source of info, btw. --Animeronin (talk) 11:06, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Moe is a term used for describing things, Otaku is used for describing people. They are totally different terms, and your English needs to be improved before you try to understand Japanese loan terms. Moe is mostly used by otaku to describe things that are favourable.(It would be very unlikely to meet a non otaku that understands what moe means in Japan, quite a lot of story in Japan uses that as a plot device for conversations between otaku and their friends that are not otaku.) MythSearcher^talk 11:45, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Missing subject in beginning sentence of introductory paragraph

In this essay he observed that this and most notably, animationist like Haruhiko Mikimoto and Shōji Kawamori.[3] (He observed WHAT???)-72.186.159.68 (talk) 06:32, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Otaku and Wapanese aren't the same

Otaku are people who love manga and anime. I thought wapanese were people who love Japan. It isn't the same. The should be a different article for that term.Ariana-hime (talk) 14:14, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Weeaboo

Weeaboo isn't a portmantu of anything. It's from an old word filter on 4chan. 173.9.5.45 (talk) 19:44, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I cleaned up that sentence to make it clearer. 72.70.18.242 (talk) 11:53, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Huh?

What does this sentence mean? "Otaku is derived from a Japanese term for another's house or family (お宅, otaku) that is also used as an honorific second-person pronoun."It is at the beginning of the etymology section. Can someone who understands what it means rewrite it in a clearer fashion.

Michalchik (talk) 07:20, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

pop culture list

Can we limit it to main story line only? Say, the NGE entry is only a minor charater being an otaku(furthermore, without source) seems to be only making the list becoming hard to read and not notable. MythSearcher^talk 10:50, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Broken English!!

The main character Morisaki Kouta who is an otaku living in the residense of Higansou apartmen. When suddenly a 9 year-old girl approches him and claimed to be his daughter.

Sound weird? Yes. Copyvio? Maybe.

TheListUpdater (talk) 23:30, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Shadowrun

Replying to the comment in the revert, if "there's no need for a section on the usage in one game" because "the word is used similarly (albeit in an extreme way)," then there also is no need for an English/international section separated out from a Japanese section. Exactly the same argument applies. As to the cultural importance of this one game, check out my comments on Shadowrun's influence above.

Would this section flow better were I to emphasise differences rather than similarities? I rather thought that the concept of *literally* preferring to live in the Matrix rather than the real world defined the essential difference, but a different approach may be preferred. - Tenebris —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.112.27.247 (talk) 02:04, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

It would be fine to have a section like that in the Shadowrun article, but not in this article. Shadowrun does not have enough of a global influence for mention in this article. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 02:21, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. While the importance of relevance is understood for any Wikipedia article as a whole, I am unaware of any Wikipedia policy which demands global influence for every subsection, only that each subsection have relevance to the topic. The Shadowrun usage of otaku certainly meets that criterion. - Tenebris

Try WP:Trivia. If your logic works, then thousands of relevant series would be included into this article. MythSearcher^talk 07:33, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Does not apply here. This is not a tangential pop culture mention in one medium or another, but core to the understanding of what otaku is. I understand that the nature of otaku is to focus on the value of one to the exclusion of all else, but here the otaku-focus is being applied to exclude an influence of close to equal influence, for all the reasons I have already given in this talk thread. Before you dismiss as trivia, you might answer the arguments given to that effect in the other section above. - Tenebris

The most that could be included is something along the lines of "In the roleplaying game Shadowrun, "otaku" is a character class." Anything beyond that (from the section you tried to include) would be original research. You can include the information in the Shadowrun article if you can find a way to do it that isn't original research, but there is no valid reason for including it here which doesn't run afoul of WP:TRIVIA. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 20:33, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I'd be willing to bet that most otaku don't even know what Shadowrun is, so I doubt it's "core to understanding what otaku is". The article no more needs a secion on the Shadowrun class than samurai needs one on street sams. — Gwalla | Talk 21:15, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Needs a source

The line "In Japan there has been some negativity towards otaku and otaku culture, incidents including the Akihabara Massacre and the Osaka School Massacre, just a few of the crimes related to "otaku hatred" or "obsession" " need a verified source, I have looked at the articles on the two incidents mentioned, and neither of them had Otaku Hatred as any of the reasons for the crime, just because a crime takes place in an area known for a certain group, doesn't mean its against that group, in the first incident, it could have been very well only chosen for the high population of potential victims, and not what the victims were regarded as.~metalica11~06/07/2009 1:46 am est —Preceding unsigned comment added by Metalica11 (talk • contribs) 05:48, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Police profiling

It appears that in Japan, profiling based on an individuals' appearance by police is prevalent in areas such as Akihabara, where people who appear to be "Otaku" are singled out and searched for weapons.

The hunt for the otaku is on!

I may be able to provide more sources if needed. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 13:59, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Interesting. Now if it would only appear in a reliable source... ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 16:52, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

where is criticism?

Well? 199.117.69.8 (talk) 18:13, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

They haven't done anything considered super negative. So, there is no criticism about them. Besides, there isn't much of an article for the cartoon fans. Besides, they don't go lunging at people to be just like them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.168.67.38 (talk) 22:32, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

How about the stabbing in Akihabara? And several other crimes commited by otaku. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.117.69.8 (talk) 18:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

What stabbings are you talking about? --66.168.67.38 (talk) 20:19, 14 October 2008 (UTC) Never mind, Found it. Doesn't mention rabid Otakus, sorry to say. It mentions a guy who killed some Otakus, but, it didn't state that he was one.

Tsutomu Miyazaki. (Momus (talk) 18:13, 1 November 2009 (UTC))

How do I pronounce the word Otaku???

I asked this question all the way back in 2007 and still don't know. It would be nice to inform the readers in the article by providing an English pronunciation. ---- Theaveng (talk) 21:36, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

It is a Japanese word, so you would pronounce it as oh-tah-kooh basically. See this page on how to pronounce Japanese vowels if you're still confused. mx3 (Sorafune) 話 22:32, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Do We Really Need Another Article For the World Nerd/Geek

Seriously, at least this isn't as bad as having different articles for seiyuu and voice actor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.152.187.104 (talk) 08:11, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

We don't have any articles for nerd or geek worlds. But if you're talking about the words, then yes, we do. Geek, nerd, and otaku are not the same thing. mx3 (Sorafune) 話 16:02, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Etymology

"Yamanote dialect" removed.And a point of"in understandable English" is not possible to understand for me "What is understandable"(;´Д`)（´Д｀）（´Д｀；）･･･It thinks extremely fortunately if it mends appropriately. (by Machine translation[3])--大和屋敷 (talk) 16:19, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but your additions have not been in understandable English, which is why I removed them. If your English capability is so poor that you have to rely on machine translations like that above, I think you should consider editing on the Japanese Wikipedia project instead. --DAJF (talk) 00:09, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

あなたがただしい英語になおせばいいだけではないか。出典付の情報をむやみに削除するな。（Do you only have not to translate into correct English?Do not delete information with the source excessively. ）--大和屋敷 (talk) 00:18, 5 September 2010 (UTC)I apologize for becoming the instruction tone. Please do not delete information with the source excessively even if it is described by the English word and the English grammar not interpreted easily for you. You can participate in the edit of Wikipedia by correcting it to an easy word and an easy English grammar. Thanks.--大和屋敷 (talk) 00:31, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I've reverted the addition as well. For one, I really couldn't tell what it was all about because the quality of the English was so poor. The external link was to a website that wouldn't pass the English Wikipedia's standards for a reliable source either. I'm also not sure what exactly the link is suppose to source. —Farix (t | c) 03:36, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Poor source?

The dictionary site[4] makes this book[5] a radical. Is that good though it is also possible to delete the link and to introduce this book directly? --大和屋敷 (talk) 08:22, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

There is nothing about the website that indicates that it is a reliable source. Anyone can throw up a website, but that doesn't make it reliable. And the second link you provided is giving a 404 error. Also, if you don't know English well enough to write coherently, then editing articles on the English Wikipedia may not be the thing for you. —Farix (t | c) 11:35, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Woops! 404（´Д｀）[6](It is a Japanese document.東京方言集)--大和屋敷 (talk) 15:24, 5 September 2010 (UTC)Because it is atmosphere that the contribution block seems to be done, the after is good for you&you. --大和屋敷 (talk) 15:24, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Ore no Imouto

I think Ore no Imōto ga Konna ni Kawaii Wake ga Nai should be included as well. There are also plenty of parodies of the treatment of otaku by the media, otaku and others. -69.237.109.158 (talk) 22:01, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Needs a source (again)

I have to agree with the very first point made on this discussion page. There is still no source regarding a link between the Osaka School Massacre o the Akihabara Massacre and otaku. Nor does the English wikipedia page for the massacres mention it. Maybe someone who can read Japanese can verify a source for this somewhere? Otherwise I think the reference to these crimes needs to go. 24.201.152.243 (talk) 03:41, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

You can the remove the "needs source, as contains original research", as I have added contemporary references. Being Lazy - I've not tracked down the online articles, even though I'm sure the magazines will contain them - so not added hrefs. Will make the page neater, so: Someone with power, please do so, ta 109.154.144.90 (talk) 11:45, 31 March 2011 (UTC) ( as "Lazy" Saccade. Ie, not signed in)

Hiragana/Katakana

おたく returned 6.58 million results and オタク 31.8 million. Also, when I did the first search, it even prompted if I was looking for the latter. Yes, I know the Hiragana one is correct and the latter is not, yet it is so wildly used that it is worth some mention. —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearcher^talk 07:51, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

More stuff

Bennett, Colette. "Otaku: Is it a dirty word?." CNN. September 12, 2011.

WhisperToMe (talk) 00:34, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Differences between Male and Female Otaku

I really feel that this should be removed as WP:SOAP (Opinion pieces). While I understand there are differences between Male and female Otaku I feel that the section does not help the article and is too narrow in scope, that and it just talking about spending habits (Anime and Manga) and not Otaku as a whole. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:01, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Otaku/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Piotrus (talk · contribs) 11:08, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
Ok on that front. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:21, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
References are a problem. There are some unreferenced claims; some sentences are missing citations making me dubious whether the cited offline source is really used for them, and finally, there are missing reference information (ex. page ranges; in same cases - authors, article titles...). All refs should be converted to Wikipedia:Citation templates for consistent formatting. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:21, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Some come from ebooks which have no pages. Like the one I just cited Fandom Unbound: Otaku Culture in a Connected World. How should I best resolve this issue. The reference converting is ideal, I'll see about getting to that later. I've never converted them before. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 14:16, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Do you have the physical copy or an ebook? In my experience only bad Google Book scans don't have pages. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 16:24, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
No, I am using the Google Books ebook. You can verify the content yourself in said material, but no page numbers are given. While not ideal, I do not see how this will be a barrier because the material is verifiable in the sources. Same as the Wrong about Japan link. The "May 2006 issue of EX Taishuu magazine" cite can be dropped because it is already cited once. I have other material I can replace it with. Same with refs 5-6. Those are "trivial" sources as far as I am concerned and are easily replaceable. So for the immediate time, the only matter should extend to Wrong about Japan and Fandom Unbound: Otaku Culture in a Connected World for pages because I am going to replace the others. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:13, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
I've asked about good practices for this at Wikipedia_talk:Citing_sources#How_to_cite_a_book_without_page_numbers.3F. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:27, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
I doubt whether the article is broad in coverage. 1028 words for a major popculture topic - this is still barely a C-class in that regard. It fails to mention a number of books that deal with this topic, for one almost random example: Patrick W. Galbraith (25 June 2009). The Otaku Encyclopedia: An Insider's Guide to the Subculture of Cool Japan. Kodansha International. ISBN 978-4-7700-3101-3. Retrieved 12 August 2013.. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:21, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Sorta confused here, because this is page is intended to be definition, usage and history of the term, not an analysis of Otaku subculture and groups. In a review of the material before I nommed, I was confronted with that problem and the details of the subculture versus the definition of the word is massive and the groups included are huge. The disconnect between Japanese usage and English usage is also important and I was told that the detailed subculture should not be discussed on this page. It would actually be rather confusing and unfeasible for a single page to cover "otaku" properly because you have train otaku, history otaku, vending machine otaku, idol otaku, fishing otaku, and others that are distinct subgroups that have nothing in common with each other - much less anime and manga. In English, the term describes anime and manga fans, but even that is not a major term and it is not a subculture. One page cannot hold the information, and it would need to be more indepth than Trekkie if such a page was going to be nommed. I will address the types of otaku to make this more clear though. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 13:51, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
I am not sure who is the intention-making party in "this is a page intended"; I certainly disagree with such an intention and consider the page grossly incomplete as long as the coverage of "an analysis of Otaku subculture and groups" is not added. If you disagree with me, we will have to ask for another reviewer's opinion here (if you'd like a second opinion, please request it at WT:GAN). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 16:24, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Oh don't get me wrong here, I recognize the omission, but did not want to quibble over the 12 recognized groups and the government's recognition or impart an unbalanced view of Anime and Manga otaku. I will address the issues you've raised immediately. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:17, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
Ok.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:21, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
I strongly disagree with the assessment that the article, as it currently stands, is a "fair representation without bias" due to the use of word "excessive" in the opening sentence. As pointed out by ChrisGualtieri in the coverage section above, the article is meant to provide a definition of the term "otaku" without an extensive analysis of its subcultures and groups because the "groups included are huge," that there are "distinct subgroups that have nothing in common with each other," and that it is "unfeasible" to cover them on a single page. Yet at the same time the article name-calls on all of these groups as having "excessive" interests right at the beginning. There certainly are individuals who excessively pursue their interests, but that's a behaviour issue on an individual basis and is not what unifies all of these groups as "otaku." An otaku is someone who has a hobby -- in other words, a hobbyist. To call anyone who has a hobby as someone who has an "excessive" interest is an inappropriate overgeneralisation. As a remedy, I suggest using words like "specific" or "particular" in place of "excessive" in the opening sentence. Oscar 23:58, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
Ok.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:21, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Only one picture is not enough; there should be several pictures illustrating various self-identified otaku groups and their culture. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:21, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
This is not a requirement for a GA level. I will try to find some free photos and do what I can though. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 13:38, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Depends on the reading of the requirement; at this point the article has no room for more pictures, so the issue is somewhat moot. But if it is expanded as it should than it will need more images. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 16:24, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Agreed. Moot for now. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:14, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
I am putting this on hold on the off chance this can be turned around in a week or so, but just the problem of coverage, requiring reading through at least one book and probably a number of articles suggests that taking this to GA level is a work for a number of weeks. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:21, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I've done some major reworking and added the psychological development and history of the subculture, the evolution and its recent positive leanings - all without getting into the specifics of a single otaku group. Gundam was key for solidifying the collective interests and ultimately led to the expansion and identification and self-affirmation of the subculture. I hope this is what you were wanting to see added. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:44, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
- It seems to be expanding in the good direction. We have space for 2+ images, I think - to the left in the middle, and one near the bottom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:27, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
- Quick comment: I see some underlinking issues with new content (ex. dating sim or vocaloid should be linked). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:25, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
- Content comment: mention of Otaku no Video brings to mind more modern Comic Party and Genshiken. If just OnV is mentioned, the article seems not up to date, IMHO. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:27, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
- Another content comment: this article has 14 see also links. It is a good rule of thumb that an article should not have any see also if possible, as each suggests something to be discussed inline. Now, it is not always possible to achieve this, but personally I say that more than 2 see also in a good article is a cause for concern about the topic not being comprehensively covered.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:29, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I believe I have addressed those above issues. Added more links, went and used the Comic Party and Genshiken mentions and added NHK, Watamote and Otaku Unite. Purged the redundant ones out of the "see also" section. How's it look now? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 15:20, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I asked some others to comment on comprehensiveness, but so far there are no other comments, and it looks like we are at least touching on most points I can think of. At this point we just need to finish the ref cleanup: introduce cite templates, add the missing pages where required, etc. Note this also means adding missing authors to some article pieces, at least one entry (r15) doesn't have access date or publisher. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:12, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

I do not believe the refs need to all be of one type or completely filled in for GA criteria, but I will get to them tomorrow. It is an acceptable amount of hair splitting - since it helps me get used to the higher standards of FA works. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:19, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

All converted to ref templates. With Google preview I can't get the chapter from Wrong about Japan. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 13:57, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

@User:ChrisGualtieri: Almost there, but please add missing cite info where available:

ref 1: publication date

Done

ref 2: author, publication date, page numbers, language field, does the title really begin with ">"?

Done

ref 4: I'll let this pass w/out page numbers, but please add quote(s) supporting usage. And ISBN.

Done Made a note to extract the quote. I also found another Arai reference pointing to Patrick W. Galbraith's Otaku Spaces, I've read some of Galbraith's work before and found it very authoritative, so I will also note his specific claim. I've linked that introduction two his photographer's blog and a more mainstream media outlet that contains the relevant excerpt for verification. I will make no attempt to place the citation without verifying the page numbers personally. I think its been satisfied for now.

ref 5: do we really need a ~30 page range? Explain or narrow

Done The specific quote itself is on page 167. And I found a public link for it through the official website.[7]

ref 6: publication date

Done

ref 7: publication date

Done

ref 8: publication date, URL is broken, restore/remove

Done Not broken, displays fine for me.

ref 11: romanization needed, is there no author?

Done It translates as "Open Letter" and this is from the NGO-AMI group. It can be literally translated as "NGO-AMI Everyone" - Everyone (at) NGO-AMI - where 同 denotes "All of us". So I just attributed NGO-AMI.

ref 12: author, URL is broken, restore/remove

Done

ref 13: is in Japanese, so please add Japanese title, publisher an author (plus romanization), pub. date

Done I translated the title to better English, its probably not the correct title as a result. Rest done.

ref 14: romanize, add author, pub. date

Not sure what you mean here, as its not Japanese to start with.

That's for the first half of ref. I hope you get the idea of what's missing; please do the same for the other half (otherwise I'll have to post another list like that).

Done

Also, [8] is a dead elink, please remove/derot. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:41, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Done Easy fix.

How's it look now? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 13:27, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

All right, all issues addressed, seems to me to be GA level. Good job! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:48, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the GA pass! I don't particularly like the referencing system as you did, but it is consistent and its allowed - it probably makes it easier to upkeep though. So I'll let be. I'll begin preparing it for FA levels! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:56, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Single-sided Intro?

As of July 31, 2011, the intro section of the article has the following text: "Otaku (おたく / オタク) is a Japanese term used to refer to people with obsessive interests, particularly anime, manga, or video games."

Upon examining the entire article, it would indicate that the intro is taken from the "In English" section, which begins with: "The term is a loanword from the Japanese language. In English, it is usually used to refer to an obsessive fan of anime/manga and/or Japanese culture generally, and to a lesser extent Japanese video games."

One potential issue with this is that, since the intro section is meant to provide an overview of what a particular subject matter entails, the single-sentence intro appears to promote a narrowed, single-sided, and unbalanced interpretation of the word "otaku" by many circles around the world, while ignoring what the original meaning of the word is and how the modern slang usage of the word came about in Japan (note: referring to my edits to the article on August 1 and 2, 2011). For people who are unfamiliar with the term to begin with, the intro text has an undesirable effect to lead one to believe that:

anime, manga, and video games are all "obsessive interests;"
all otakus are "obsessive" individuals;
or, it is okay if one goes out to an arcade to play video games on a random basis from time to time, but if he/she does the same at home, then holy moly, the person must be obsessed or the hobby must be an obsessive one!

Given how well-read Wikipedia is globally and how links to Wikipedia often come out at the top of search engine results, I am sure many would agree that articles on Wikipedia should always strive to maintain a neutral point of view and encompass multiple viewpoints including negativity and criticism. However, the existing intro text of "otaku" potentially breeds wide-scale misunderstanding and unnecessarily disparages a specific group of people. As such, it is my sincere hope that my contributions to the article will be kindly reviewed and reconsidered, otherwise unfortunate incidents such as revision 443452790 are bound to reoccur.

Oscar 12:08, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

As far as I can see, the intro adequately summarizes the content of the article as a whole. The etymology of the word (meaning "one's home" or "you" in Japanese") is properly explained in the "Etymology" section immediately following the introduction. I disagree that the article paints anime, manga, and video games of their fans as "obsessive", but it certainly (correctly) describes "otaku" as somewhat "obsessive" since that is part and parcel of the meaning. The editor above also seems to be confusing the original meaning of "one's home" as being related to activities done at home - which is not the case. "Otaku" activities are certainly not limited to home - as exemplified by railway otaku or cosplay otaku, amongst others. --DAJF (talk) 02:09, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

I would like to object once again to the discriminatory tone and narrow-minded view carried by the main article, particularly in the opening sentence. According to a 2013 survey conducted by Mynavi, a career development and public opinion research agency in Japan, more than 50% of people under the age of 30 consider themselves as an otaku, with the term now commonly used to describe anyone who is familiar with any given hobby or interest, but without the derogatory "obsessive" connotation. The survey has a sample size of 137734 respondents, one of the largest in recent years; its results and some of the responses can be seen at http://news.mynavi.jp/news/2013/04/27/076/.

In comparison, the view currently expressed in the English version of Wikipedia article is obscene and clearly outdated. It comes across as an mean-spirited opinion piece written in late 1990 / early 2000 with a thin-veiled despite of Japanese language, culture, and society. It ignores how the term has positively evolved in the last decade, and as a result, the article is neither balanced nor neutral by today's standards. Prior to the American Civil War, language and publication in which a portion of the population were unjustly discriminated were commonplace. Today it is no longer the case in most corners of society. The intro section of this Wikipedia article, in my personal opinion, presently functions as an attack banner that encourages bias and prejudice, and should be remedied regardless of original intent. -- Oscar 10:05, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Comments

Ok, I'm going through the article and doing a copyedit. Here are a few sentences that confused me:

"after the release of works like Mobile Suit Gundam before branched into Comic Market" I'm not sure I understand here.
"Other institutions have split it further or focus on a single otaku interest" I get the first part, but "Other institutions ... focus on a single otaku interest" is a bit unclear to me.
"The economic impact of otaku has been estimated to be as high as ¥2 trillion ($18 billion)." I assume this is because they buy a lot of products? Might want to spell that out.
"applied the term to unpleasant fans in caricature" A little unsure of the meaning here, what do you think of "used the term to caricature unpleasant fans"?
"but noted that Fan Rōdo (Fan road) contained the same otaku attributes under "culture clubs" which was published in 1981" how about 1981" how about "but noted that Fan Rōdo (Fan road), published in 1981, contained the same otaku attributes under "culture clubs" or something similar?
"interviews the novelist, artist and Gundam chronicler Yuka Minakawa." maybe just use one title to describe her? Perhaps something general like "writer".
You might want to explain a bit about the Otaku murderer, or at least why he's called that.
""When these people are referred to as otaku, they are judged for their behaviors - and people suddenly see an “otaku” as a person unable to relate to reality".[7][8]" You should say who's being quoted here. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:50, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I see that the key issue is context for esoteric things. I'll have to explain a few points better, but I am glad there are not too many issues. Though I believe I may end up having to find or create a collected sterotype of otaku as a result of these concerns. Page 2 of this source contains an English translation of the original 1983 essay. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:05, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

You might want to include a brief parenthetical explanation of Japanese words that might be unfamiliar to most westerners, like "a self-mockingly pejorative Japanese term for female fans of yaoi material (describe yaoi)." That might just be my preference though.
Check for common words that don't need to be linked (like "fan") or words that are linked more than once in the body of the article.
Are there differences in the way the term is used in, say, the US vs how it's used in Japan?
" Of these groups, comics was the largest, with 350,000 individuals and ¥83 billion market scale ... Travel otaku was the largest, with 250,000 individuals and ¥81 billion." Make up your mind here, which is largest? :)
"The third type is the "media-sensitive multiple interest" otaku, whose interests are diverse yet strong hobbyists who is open and shares their interests with others." I think you meant to say something else here, rather than "whose interests are ... hobbyists" It sounds like they're interested in other hobbyists. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:26, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, every thing helps, I've been tinkering and trying to address the issues, but I suppose I'll need to wait a bit and come back with fresh eyes before trying to make this even better before submitting to FAC. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:35, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

The Gundam sentence, I think it is talking about a specific anime boom event, where the director and creator of Gundam, Yoshiyuki Tomino held an event with the release of the first Gundam Movie and made a speech called "New Century of Anime Declaration"(アニメ新世紀宣言). Which led to an otaku boom, kinda like a coming out event where otaku cosplayed in public as characters of the show. It is possibly sourceable in Fan Road and here. —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearcher^talk 12:22, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Fan Road doesn't have it I'm afraid, but the source didn't draw a clear parallel to one series, but I've never seen it tied to the movies which were largely cut content from the show. The impetus seems to be the identification of a subculture that social outcasts would draw them in and change anime to cater to their interests. They embodied the "loser's culture" and disappear as soon as it goes mainstream, according to the essay on otaku. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 13:03, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Well, the movies is when Gundam hits mainstream media. The TV show did not have a lot of viewers so it was cut to only 43 episodes(planned to be 50). Fan Road is a source suggested in the Japanese article. —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearcher^talk 15:19, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

And the other source I have says that when something hits the mainstream the otaku leave it because its not a refuge, I don't want to have a possible synthesis here where something could be factually incorrect as a result of reading into this. Also, it wasn't just Gundam. I guess something needs to be done though... ChrisGualtieri (talk) 15:30, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Correct Japanese Spellings

We provide the spellings for Japanese of Otaku as "おたく or オタク" - is this correct? An online translation says the first means 'home' and the other 'mania'. Mania makes sense but i just wanted to check this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.38.32.3 (talk) 15:21, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

The traditional word (お宅, おたく) means home, while the newer slang (おたく、オタク) means "mania" ("mania" being another Japanese word with a slightly different connotation than in English as explained in the article). —Tokek (talk) 22:41, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

The first generation of otaku used hiragana to spell otaku, so it was おたく, following Akio Nakamori's original article. In the 1990ies, former Gainax member Toshio Okada and self proclaimed Otaking tried to improve the image of otaku, held lectures in universities and published several books on the topic. He used the katakana spelling オタク and it has since then become the standard spelling. Though members of the first generation like Eiji Ōtsuka, editor of Manga Burikko, still use the hiragana spelling even today. NextEven (talk) 11:24, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Tomohiro Machiyama's involvement in Otaku no hon

"Later that year, Tomohiro Machiyama wrote a book called Otaku no Hon (おたくの本 lit. The Book of Otaku?), which delved into the subculture of otaku and has been claimed by scholar Rudyard Pesimo to have popularized the term.[7]"

Tomohiro Machiyama didn't write that book, according to Wikipedia he was the planning editor. He is not credited in the publication.

It is a collection of 19 articles by as many authors, among them Akio Nakamori, the original person to coin the term otaku. The editor credited is Shinji Ishii.

It was released as the 104th volume of Bessatsu Takarajima, a "magazine on knowledge of your contemporaries".

I will change the passage as follows:

"Later that year, the contemporary knowledge magazine Bessatsu Takarajima dedicated its 104th issue to the topic of otaku. It was called Otaku no Hon (おたくの本 lit. The Book of Otaku) and delved into the subculture of otaku with 19 articles by otaku insiders, among them Akio Nakamori, who originally coined the term. This publication has been claimed by scholar Rudyard Pesimo to have popularized the term.[7]"

NextEven (talk) 05:51, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Please explain why he is credited and cited as its author and why ANN and other books refer and acknowledge him as the author.[9][10] ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:25, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

What would be the equivalent phrase or word in English?

Since the article says it has very negative connotations in Japanese, would "nut-job" or "wacko" be an equivalent word in English? In other words, saying to your friend, "He's some sort of bird-watching wacko" or "He's one of those 60-year old nut-jobs who still plays with those little green army soldiers, reenacting the Battle of the Bulge every evening". Does that convey the same sort of meaning that it does in Japanese? Jimindc (talk) 22:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Nerd/Geek would be pretty much the same. The negative connotation of the term is more towards the social culture in Japan, people hate to be called as a different group than others, since it took away their social status of belonging to the society. Any words you suggest in English will not carry the same effect since people are less concern of being different from the rest.(many are even happy to be different) Think of it as like being called as a Aspie, psycho, just because having a different hobby than others. —Preceding signed comment added by MythSearcher^talk 01:26, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Otaku is used over here too. However it refers to specifically interest in japanese pop culture particularly anime, so I don't think it carries the same meaning as a 'japanese person obsessed with their own popular culture'. I see 'weaboo' also used to imply this even more when the person is actually trying to be japanese, but knows nothing about japan really as only informed by watching animes, uses japanese words in conversation, thinks they are learning japanese because they learnt to use 'kawaii' and '-san' etc. (basically 'otaku taken to annoying extremes') But I think nerd/geek is equivalent in the status it WAS used not so long ago as very derogatory, now not so much as just used to describe now acceptable/widespread interests like computers or video-games or used to describe having technical/scientific intelligence. It used to not describe intelligent-often the opposite, but obsession with hobbies/collecting, living in mom's basement at 40 etc.. (gamers, those with obsession over tv series particularly ones for children, people who play games workshop, people who collect something particularly toys, comic book obsessives, people with train-sets etc...maybe that's the equivalent?)

The foreigner use is mixed with positive and pejorative uses - English usage is not well-documented, but generally anyone who really would meet the definition of an otaku (as per the Japanese definition) understands it is not generally a good thing. Nerd/Geek doesn't cover it and you won't find an analog so easily. Different culture, different concept. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:37, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Vandalism

I've noticed that there has been repeated vandalism on this article over the year, so I'm going to semi-protect this for a month against newer editors and IPs. The vandalism here isn't super heavy, but it does appear to be somewhat persistent. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:33, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

If this continues on past the month and continues to happen on an almost monthly basis (which seems to be the case here) then this might warrant an extension. Hopefully this will deter them for a while, though. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 14:33, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

How is it pronounced?

That ought to be added to the article, so I don't sound like an idiot when I read it out loud. ;-) - Theaveng 17:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I concur. I still don't know the answer. I've heard people say O-ta-ku with emphasis on the O, and O-tak-u with emphasis on the middle syllable. Which is correct? ---- Theaveng (talk) 14:05, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure about stress, but because of the way syllables work in Japanese the first is correct as far as how the word is broken up (letters in Japanese almost all represent consonant-vowel pairs). There's a pronunciation in there now though. Rifter0x0000 (talk) 01:55, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

All of the syllables are said with the same stress. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 04:56, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Three letters: O TA KU Vowels in Japanese always make the same sound. O is "oh", A is "ah", and U is "ooh".

oh-tah-koo

Also consult https://translate.google.com/#ja/en/%E3%82%AA%E3%82%BF%E3%82%AF, but be aware that it's using dippy robot voice, so it's a little slurred compared to the way a human would say it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.168.176.62 (talk) 21:16, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

It depends on whether you're referring to the Japanese term or the American English term. They have slightly different histories and thus slightly different current meanings, and pronunciation helps clarify which you're referring to. Lawrence Eng discusses some of what's at stake in his article on networked cultures from 2012's Fandom Unbound (Yale UP). Rylee001 (talk) 17:29, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Subtype cars section is wrong.

> Other terms, such as Itasha (痛車?), literally "painful car"

This is wrong. Itasha is simply a concatenation of italian + sensha (chariot). This used to refer to the influx of a large amount of fancy italian sports cars, mostly Ferrari, during the "economic wonder" decades of Japan. For example, the Sailor Moon manga's author, Ms. Naoko Takeuchi used to drive an open-top F355. Later the shorthand was transferred to decorated cars, usually still somewhat sporty types, e.g. boxer-engined Subaru or a V8 pick-up. Itasha decals don't need to be anime / manga themed but almst always are. 92.52.247.220 (talk) 22:10, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Relation to AS?

I don't necessarily disagree with the linking in related subjects to Asperger's Syndrome, but I'm not sure there is any hard support for that correlation. It seems right, but it should be cited before adding. user:john.ohno —Preceding comment was added at 15:04, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

The whole section was a mess. I kept the most relevent wikilinks and removed the rest. The presents of many of the wikilinks appear to be pushing a POV that connected otaku with mental illness. --Farix (Talk) 20:56, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Asperger's syndrome (or autism in general) is not a "mental illness", no more than, say, dyslexia, or even synesthesia (which proponents of the neurodiversity paradigm, who consider autism neutral like any personality variant, would be more likely to compare it to). (Down syndrome, for example, is not a mental illness, either.) It is generally considered a development disorder by psychiatrists. The similarity between the social awkwardness and special interests typical of Asperger's and the traits ascribed to otaku are quite obvious. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 11:18, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Illustrating the etymological origin

English lacks a politeness distinction comparable to the T–V distinction common in European languages, but couldn't the pronoun otaku be compared to the French vous or German Sie? (I do know that the Japanese pronoun system is far more complicated, but a rough analogy for the lay reader may be beneficial to understand the idea behind the term otaku.) In Early Modern English, the corresponding pronoun would be ye, as opposed to the familiar thou. The only way to reproduce the effect in a simple way I can think of right now would be to address a person as (dear) sir/madam, as is sometimes done jokingly by young people on the Internet as well, or keep saying Mr./Ms. X instead of using the first name. This should make the semantic development clearer: otaku are people who are prone to social awkwardness, illustrated by the use of excessively formal, "correct", pedantic or polite and socially distant language inappropriate in the context (i. e., not in a context of, say, role-playing upper-class characters).

This is also, by the way, considered fairly typical of people with Asperger syndrome, especially children (Hans Asperger himself dubbed his child patients "little professors"). They may, however, be perceived as rude because of their bluntness in other situations, without intending to be rude or even being aware of committing a faux-pas; it's their manner of speech that tends to be on the formal side. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 12:12, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Otaku. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080501103354/http://picnic.to/~ami/ool.htm to http://picnic.to/~ami/ool.htm

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) 13:48, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Otaku. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130901021523/http://www.androniki.com/blog/otaku-spaces-book/ to http://www.androniki.com/blog/otaku-spaces-book/

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) 19:43, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Otaku. 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) 11:29, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Otaku in Japan

Just wondering how 'derisive' a term it is in japan. If i'm not wrong i believed the ex japanese prime minister (Aso?) paraphrased something along the lines that the latest culture of japan is one that is 'otaku'. And furthermore implicitly implied that he was a manga otaku... Dont have any citations atm but i thought it may be worth noting the larger acceptance of 'otaku' culture in japan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.237.8.41 (talk) 11:22, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, there is this Japanese show aired in HK where the culture minister(or someone along that line) used Cantonese to express that he is an Otaku. That episode is about a prize giving ceremony of the foreign language manga in which it happened to be two Hong Kong artist who got the first two position(and thus held in HK). Also, Japanese pop stars often appear in shows that are otaku based, a lot of pop stars even openly said they are otaku and are very active in anime casting. The main problem is that those are pasted shows and their own blog entry that are extremely hard to track back to source. MythSearcher^talk 08:15, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

How society perceives otaku is currently a very hot topic in Japan. You should be fully aware of the relation between otaku and anti-otaku that is almost a media-war. If you take one side, the article will inevitably become one-sided. 18:00 24 June 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.69.203 (talk)

Recently, in an article in Maichni News the noted Japanese drummer, Senri Kawaguchi described her father as a mecha-otaku (メカオタク), in a far from derogatory way. While there may be some in Japan who see it in a derogatory way, it would be a mistake to call it a derogatory term.Everlong Day (talk) 13:57, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Negative views of "otaku"?

I'm pretty sure it would be appropriate for wikipedia to have some sort of controversy or negative views section on the otaku article. I think encyclopedia dramatica (Despite being satirical the opinions on that site are still based on those of *channers) could be reference enough. --Ogremagi (talk) 12:59, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree with this. Especially since the meaning of otaku inside and outside Japan are different. While in Japan it has an extremely negative connotation that involves being shut-in, obsessive, gross etc, outside Japan it usually refers to any person who likes anime/manga. Komeirin (talk) 13:57, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

I disagree with this. There is a danger of over-generalisation, here. While there are some who have a very negative disposition to otaku, there are just as many who do not; and I am not simply talking of members of an otaky subculture.Everlong Day (talk) 14:00, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Bibliography

There is an extensive and up-to-date bibliography about otaku culture here. Take care. --BaldusY (talk) 00:54, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Otaku or Otaku

The article is inconsistent in its use of italics for the subject. It should be otaku throughout or otaku throughout, instead of switching back and forth. Gnome de plume (talk) 16:47, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Sources in Usage

Regarding the quote "When these people are referred to as otaku, they are judged for their behaviors - and people suddenly see an otaku as a person unable to relate to reality" in the usage section, I think the article would benefit from more robust sources about judgement of otaku, particularly in Japan. References 14 and 15 both appear to be blog posts, so hardly authoritative, and written from a decidedly non-Japanese POV. Additionally, reference 15 is actually a post in response to an NYT Magazine article which predicated its entire argument on incorrectly cited statistics. If the purpose of these sources is to show how otaku are perceived in America/the West that should be stated, and in any case there should probably be some Japanese sources for its use in Japan. Maybe we could include some of the information mentioned in the "Otaku in Japan" topic below? --RampagingKoala (talk) 01:12, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Otaku

correct definition of otaku, otaku is a person who loves anime or manga according to the definition of oxford languages, neither more nor less. Hastengeims (talk) 19:33, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

In English-language usage in Anglophone contexts, maybe, but it's more complicated than that--look at the sources of the article. (Usually, I'm the person saying that even in Japan is is primarily associated with manga and anime fans. But here, I have to take the opposite tack, because the word otaku is complex and cannot be simply reduced down to animanga fans.) Sandtalon (talk) 20:29, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Zqq1996.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Merge (Ōkina otomodachi)

I suggest that Ōkina otomodachi be merged into this article. First, there are very few references. Also, It is subtle whether Ōkina otomodachi (The big friend) has notability. It is a word that is often used in Japan, but there is no strict definition and it is not an academic word. Since it simply refers to a type of otaku, I think it should be merged into this article. 126.205.192.59 (talk) 00:57, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Done I merged it. 126.208.8.55 (talk) 22:28, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Japanese loan words

Otaku etymology

Otaku terminology and loanwords

Female otaku in Japan - "Otome"

looking for term

External Links

I broke down and NPOV'd this article.

Removal of statement

Image in English/Internationally section

Once again...

Otaku as a marketing term

Obsession

The picture of the "unkemp male"

Puzzled as to the missing reason why RV often occurs

Suggestions

Etymology Update

English/Internationally

Concerning the 'Typical_Otaku.jpg' image

maniakku / mania

Otome

JASON MRAZ. Also Otakon.

Wotaku should not be used here

Proper Lexicon Missing

"Wota"

MOE

Missing subject in beginning sentence of introductory paragraph

Otaku and Wapanese aren't the same

Weeaboo

Huh?

pop culture list

Broken English!!

Shadowrun

Needs a source

Police profiling

where is criticism?

How do I pronounce the word Otaku???

Do We Really Need Another Article For the World Nerd/Geek

Etymology

Poor source?

Ore no Imouto

Needs a source (again)

Hiragana/Katakana

More stuff

Suggested link and comments on writing style

Differences between Male and Female Otaku

GA Review

Single-sided Intro?

Comments

Correct Japanese Spellings

Tomohiro Machiyama's involvement in Otaku no hon

What would be the equivalent phrase or word in English?

Vandalism

How is it pronounced?

Subtype cars section is wrong.

Relation to AS?

Illustrating the etymological origin

External links modified

External links modified

External links modified

Otaku in Japan

Negative views of "otaku"?

Bibliography

Otaku or Otaku

Sources in Usage

Otaku

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

Merge (Ōkina otomodachi)