Jump to content

Talk:Puella Magi Madoka Magica

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articlePuella Magi Madoka Magica has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 7, 2013Peer reviewReviewed
June 15, 2014Peer reviewReviewed
December 18, 2014Good article nomineeListed
January 17, 2016Peer reviewReviewed
July 2, 2018Peer reviewReviewed
Current status: Good article

FA?

[edit]

The article looks pretty good enough that work towards reaching FA status could probably be accomplished. Please see User talk:Jimfbleak#Puella Magi Madoka Magica for more information. Further input is welcome. Pinging Wonchop, Juhachi, Artichoker, and TheFarix. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 07:25, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Naruto, as the primary contributor to the article (in it's current state), I'm not sure it's quite ready for FA status yet. My main concern is still sourcing and overall comprehensiveness. For sourcing, out of the 105 references in the article, 71 of them are to Anime News Network. While this is a great English site to use for information, the article is still lacking in sourcing diversity, especially from important coverage in Japanese media. This brings me to comprehensiveness. I don't believe the article currently meets the comprehensiveness threshold for FA, due to the dearth of Japanese sources, especially as this article covers the topic of a television series produced in Japan. A quick look at this article on the Japanese Wikipedia shows 235 extra sources alone. While I still believe this article meets the criteria for GA, I think there would be considerable work required before it could reach FA. Artichoker[talk] 03:33, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If anyone here knows Japanese, hopefully they can help in adding Japanese sources to the article, which would be nice. @Jimfbleak: @Artichoker: I also note that School Rumble, one of our FAs, also has primarily English-language sources, with Japanese sources being mostly limited to the manga volumes themselves and Oricon. It's possible that comprehensiveness could be accomplished (the production section is pretty comprehensive for what it is already, I think what's lacking at the moment is Japanese reception, and maybe information about casting). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 07:55, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mechademia Volume 10

[edit]

Mechademia volume 10 has an article about Madoka. --122.108.141.214 (talk) 04:07, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Plot conclusion

[edit]

I agree with the revision comments from User:Artichoker that the plot conclusion can be expanded and that "ferries magical girls away" could be further contextualized. I disagree with reverting to the previous edit rather than wordsmithing the change because the previous wording is even more unclear. As it stands, the reader is told that Madoka eliminates witches before they are created and that she becomes "nothing more than a concept". Both parts are unclear to readers who have not seen the series or movies. In the plot, Madoka accomplishes this by taking all magical girls across all space and time away to some sort of paradise before they can change into witches, and that rewrites the laws of the universe and causes her to transcend from a human being into some mysterious phenomenon that magical girls and incubators only vaguely understand. Without expansion, "concept" is nebulous to readers in its meaning (Is it a vague notion? An urban legend people talk about? A memory? An idea? A theory? An unexplored phenomenon?)

"Transcending" is a fantasy/sci-fi trope most casual people are familiar with and providing the name ("Law of Cycles") in quotes indicates that it's a proper noun the reader isn't expected to understand alone. Thus, adding a sentence or so about what that is or what it does as it relates to Madoka would be appropriate. The final part of the current entry stating that Homura is the only one who remembers her succinctly gives context to understand that Madoka has ceased to exist as a known person, so that should remain. I'm open to thoughts on how best to word this. It seems strange to say that Madoka takes the girls away to a paradise before they can become witches (partially because interpreting it as paradise feels a little WP:OR, when the show indicates that the characters only have a vague idea of where magical girls go when the Law of Cycles appears) and I was trying to keep the section concise, but if others are comfortable with that, I could go along with it.

Overall, I do like how concise the plot is. It's just that as someone who read the page before watching the show, I had no idea what the ending meant, and only after watching it do I get what it is attempting to convey. In terms of how concise plot sections should be, the guidelines suggest 400 - 700 for films and we're well under 400 for a 12 episode series. If it needs to be fleshed out with a few more sentences for context, I don't think that interferes with MOS:PLOT.

Here's my shot at the relevant section:

After these revelations, Madoka decides to become a magical girl with the wish to stop all witches in the past, present, and future before they are created. The scope of this wish rewrites history and the laws of the universe, and her existence as a human girl is erased from time. Instead, she transcends into a cosmic phenomenon called "The Law of Cycles", which appears to all magical girls at the moment before they become witches and rescues them by taking them away to a heavenly paradise. In the new reality that is formed, Homura is the only one who remembers Madoka."

Other editors are invited to collaborate.Luminum (talk) 07:49, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This improved wording clarifies the ending greatly. I agree it should be included. Given that the plot is so short, it might also be good to expand other parts to give a fuller summary of the story. Alexwho314 (talk) 17:05, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of Legacy section

[edit]

Please add a legacy section. Madoka is one of the most influential modern anime series. I added links under the "Further reading" section. Thank you!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.186.211.171 (talk) 01:50, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Puella Magi Madoka Magica. 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) 09:18, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Genres

[edit]

Please, avoid reverting it. Major reverts can result into blocking users and pages too. When sourcing the genres use WP:Reliable sources. While Anime News Network is considered reliable, its encyclopedia area is NOT because it is edited by users rather professional writers. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 02:28, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Its not just this page, IP's are modifying genres on a lot of anime/manga articles. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:54, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The dark fantasy genre really needs a source. There are 2 users saying that distributors criteria is not a good source and insisting that the series belongs to such genre, but they come without any source supporting that fact, and one user said it's fine because Anime News Network has "dark fantasy" as a theme for the series. That's not good, writing something in an article without any single proof is just personal criteria and Wikipedia is not supposed to work that way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.173.168.121 (talk) 06:13, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed dark fantasy as there is no source cited for the genre. The real question is whether retail sites are a reliable source for genres. This would require great input from WP:ANIME, WP:TV, WP:FILM and perhaps WP:RSN. —Farix (t | c) 15:20, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Issued 3RR warnings to both IPs. —Farix (t | c) 15:24, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Genre

[edit]

Okay but how am I supposed to prove that?37.38.90.160 (talk) 16:33, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Check out WP:RS. Specifically, [1] appears to be a collection of research papers, and although Wikipedia does use some scholarly material, WP:SOURCETYPES, these usually have to be vetted and peer-reviewed by other journals for them to be considered reliable. There's also the fact that you're trying to use a source that's about the use of space in asian cinema to cite a genre that has nothing to do with space. Lastly, the authorship of the article you cite, which appears to be Deborah Shamoon. may be an associate professor at National University of Singapore, but is there any independent way to verify that she's considered an authority in her field?--十八 20:17, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Create an article for Magia Record

[edit]

An anime adaptation of Magia Record has been announced and will be released on 2019 so shouldn't you guys create a separate article for it? The game also has a stage play and a manga adaptation so there is already enough material for it! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.231.93.179 (talk) 14:44, 12 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My thoughts

[edit]

Hi! I saw this had a peer review that was closed. Here's my opinions before an FAC, from a quick scan:

Hope this is helpful. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:20, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Lee Vilenski: To answer the Magia Record update, that has been moved to the Winter of 2020 with this being the reference that I could fine.[2] HawkAussie (talk) 06:29, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Themes?

[edit]

Why is there no "Themes" section in this article? Madoka Magica explores many themes such as Human emotions, depression, and despair and hope and also features many symbolism and religious themes. Can we create a "Themes" section for this article or is it not allowed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.128.158.197 (talk) 20:34, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You need to provides reliable sources for that.Tintor2 (talk) 01:27, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Madoka Magica is well recognized for its complex themes and storytelling, yet the article does not mention a single thing about its themes. Not only that, but the reception is also incomplete. Many Japanese critics praised the series yet there's no mention of them. The legacy section also needs to be expanded. And I also think "Merchandise" section is missing but maybe its not important. How is this even a "Good Article"? It feels so incomplete. Please create a "Themes" section asap.

Circlejerk and advertising

[edit]

Reading this as a third-party not related to wikipedia editors, this article reeks of journalists who only put their own stories in even though they are not relevent to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.33.94.3 (talk) 07:17, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Witch forms.

[edit]

Should we provide the witch forms for the magical girls on their pages? I need to be sure. Im a shoe2 (talk) 17:50, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Puella_Magi_Madoka_Magica&oldid=1246106071"