Jump to content

Talk:Sailor Moon/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5→Archive 10

Moved from Talk:Sailor Senshi

Meaning of "Senshi"

  • Could someone explain this to me? This article (or Sailor Moon, not sure) claims that "senshi" has no particular meaning, but I see it used a lot in other anime, and it's translated into "warrior". Thanks in advance. Danny Lilithborne 06:19, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
According to Gjiten: 戦士 (せんし) (n) soldier; combatant; warrior; (P); -- ReyBrujo 07:14, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Quite correct. I've attempted to clarify the section of this article that looks like it might have prompted that confusion. --Aponar Kestrel (talk) 07:36, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Moved from Talk:Usagi Tsukino

Hoax description of the name added by user Dasrik

I am not a frequent user of Wikipedia, nor am I very fluent in English, but I am definitely sure that the standard would be improved if any edits by user Desrik, a permanently blocked vandal, is removed. He mainly added (in every scouts' articles) that "野", no in Japanese means "field" and the common belief that no means of the is incorrect, but the fact is that this no is used intentionally to mean both. Therefore I pledge to revert his edits.--218.191.131.92 20:03, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

The claim that her name meaning is "Rabbit of the Moon" is erroneous, he may have vandalized other aspects but the claim that 野 should translate to field is correct. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.254.64.14 (talk • contribs) .

Actually, no. Tsuki no usagi does (as the article currently correctly states) mean "rabbit of the moon". (Or "rabbit in the moon", by parallel with our "Man in the Moon", if you like.) The "field" meaning of 野 is completely irrelevant; likely the only reason Takeuchi-san used 月野 instead of 月乃 (乃 being the old kanji form of the genitive particle) is because 月乃 is a personal name, not a family name. In point of fact I would go so far as to say that, in this context, the fact that 野 usually means "field" is non-notable.  –Aponar Kestrel (talk) 02:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
You know, you could think of the 野 character in her name as functioning as a 外字.  Denelson83  03:11, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Um. Do you perhaps mean 当て字?  –Aponar Kestrel (talk) 03:17, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes. That is a *much* better term. I used 外字 because that was the Japanese word closest to this concept that I knew.  Denelson83  03:29, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Who's this Bob guy, and why is he surly?

Hey, Surly Bob, thanks for all the articles, but, er, could you please be a little less stubborn about signing "your" articles? They aren't yours. They're the project's, i.e., everybody's. See Wikipedia:Most common Wikipedia faux pas for a little more on this.

Also, isn't that Sailor Moon image you uploaded copyrighted? That's a no-no.

Surly, can you draw? I guess it would be no problem to display your own rendition of the character. Or is the character still protected under the copyright regardless of who draw it?

Finally, the article should begin with a definition, not with a list of irrelevancies that make it appear (until you get to the picture) that the person is a real person. See the perfect article (not to say articles gotta be perfect--they don't--see editing policy--but anyway, that's roughly what we're aiming at. --Larry_Sanger

Nonencyclopedicity

Well, at least the "Which name?" debacle is over and done with. Reading through I notice that the article isn't really very encyclopedic. I realize that the information I've put under the heading of "Statistics" is commonly found in character profiles and fan pages -- but this isn't a character shrine, it's an encyclopedia article. Surely there's some way to present it more objectively? The "least favorite food" bit should stay, somehow, even if we have to paragraphize it. --Aponar Kestrel 04:52, 2004 Jul 31 (UTC)

  • As far as I know the character profile is an official one, though I don't know where it's from. Maybe find out the source and list it as being from there? Purplefeltangel 07:06, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

At the end of the series is Usagi still Sailor Moon?

So she kept her memory? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.200.34.179 (talk • contribs) 16:59, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes.  Denelson83  17:18, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
At the end of season 1, she did lose her memory. This was restored in season 2 by Luna. Kyaa the Catlord 18:42, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Well, she didn't "lose" her memory in that sense of that word at the end of *series* one. She asked her crystal, as if it was her soul, to lock it away in the back of her mind, and her memory was, as I would say, "compressed and encrypted."  Denelson83  22:48, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Sailor Senshi outfit construction

Can someone provide information about the deconstruction of the Sailor Senshi outfits? --User:Angie Y.

They wave their wands and shout their phrases, and k seconds' worth of stock footage later, their uniforms have assembled around and on them? I'm not sure what you're looking for. If you want information on how to make a Senshi uniform, Wikipedia isn't the right place for that.  –Aponar Kestrel (talk) 14:29, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Remember, #1 doesn't have a wand for transformation, she has a brooch. And that 'stock footage' you see doesn't actually reflect a transformation in real-time. It's just "fan service".  Denelson83  21:51, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Character article names: Real names or code names?

Hey this may have been done to death in the past (but frankly I'm not gonna read thru the huge archive to see if it has when I wanna rant about this *now*, sorry.) but I personally really hate that all the sailor senshi are listed under their real names rather than their title (Usagi Tsukino rather than Sailor Moon). I find the titles much easier to remember than the real names and the titles are what the characters are mostly known as. And the same convention has been applied to the Tokyo Mew Mew characters! Blech. As I am much less familiar with those characters and as I find Japanese names quite hard to remember (Japanese not being my native language and all). I find it very difficult indeed to know which character is which. I don't see what's wrong with 'Sailor Moon' or 'Mew Lettuce'. Whoever made the decision to use real names as the page titles took a very poor decision in my opinion. After all the anime is called 'Sailor Moon' *not* 'Usagi Tsukino'. Personally I think the real names should be noted in the body of the article and not as the title. The vast majority of people know the characters by their titles not by their real names. It is like having the Superman article under 'Clark Kent' or the Batman article under 'Bruce Wayne' It's confusing and it isn't what the characters are commonly called.-Skybluepink —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.108.57.14 (talk • contribs) 18:28, 25 May 2006

Actually, no, it's not. There is an article Clark Kent, as well as an article Superman. Likewise there is an article Usagi Tsukino, as well as an article Sailor Moon. In each case the first article is (mostly) about the character, the second is (mostly) about the series.
That said, this isn't much of a rule: Bruce Wayne, Billy Batson, and Peter Parker are all redirects to the appropriate pages (or in Parker's case, a disambiguation page). And I can't really count The Flash or Green Lantern, since both of those titles appear to have been held by three different people.
It's hard to tell what percentage of "Sailor Moon" hits on Google are really referring to the character and how many are referring to the series. I don't think I'd support a move to Sailor Moon (character), but I wouldn't particularly object either. (I could have sworn this has come up before... but then, hasn't everything?)  –Aponar Kestrel (talk) 01:46, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Saban, did it do "Saban Moon"?

I remember quite clearly hearing that Saban had nothing to do with the "Saban Moon" Pilot and that it was another group altogether that did it. I mean, I can see where Saban would be blaimed, it was most certainly the number one source of that sorta thing and with the success of Power Rangers. But can we get a source on Saban being the ones who did "Saban Moon? --172.209.113.23 16:44, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

"Saban Moon" was a fan parody. Anyone who's seen it would never assume it was a professional pilot episode of any kind. ~EM 169.139.190.6 21:32, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
Um no, it wasn't an fan parody, it WAS a proffessional pilot. It was made by Toonmakers [1] (not Saban as some think Toonmakers made it in the hope of pitching it at Saban actually) more infomation can be found in this article. GracieLizzie 16:41, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
I downloaded the movie of that pilot video. It's not very good, what with the cameraman shaking with laughter and all. It was an extremely Westernised version of Sailor Moon, complete with replacement characters to appease both the black (Mars) and disabled (Venus/Jupiter)markets...it's half live-action, half non-anime animation, and ye Gods it is the scariest/funniest thing I've ever seen. To quote the cameraman near the end... "Thank you for NOT doing that!!!" Lady BlahDeBlah 00:53, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
You know, if there's one word I would choose to describe that "Saban Moon" experiment, I would choose "blasphemous".  Denelson83  04:17, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

The animation in question was indeed created by California-based company Toon Makers, Inc. The copyright within the video reads "1994 Rennaisance / Atlantic". A e-mail inquiry I made to Toon Makers, Inc. was replied to. In the reply, it was indicated that Saban did indeed commission them to do the animation portion. The logo in the animation is clearly the one used by DIC. This leads me to speculate that DIC was involved in the project, but that Saban oversaw the production of the live-action elements (in part, due to similarities to Saban's U.S. adaptation of Power Rangers). 24.254.160.194 20:39, 31 May 2006 (UTC)neob

Merging Various Articles

See: Talk:Dark_Kingdom --Kunzite 01:16, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
See: Talk:Makaiju --Kunzite 15:45, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

I believe it is time to determine which of these external links have been used as references (so that they could be moved into a References section) and which ones were added just because they talk about Sailor Moon. Several of these sites repeat information about the cast or chapter information.

Look - and this is directed to everyone here - everybody posting here is involved in Sailor Moon fandom to some extent. It's a notoriously divided fandom. We all have our favourite resources and we all have resources that, either due to percieved low quality or our dealings with their creators, we dislike. But if we're ever going to reach any sort of consensus, we have to put personal feelings aside. But the way things are going, I really don't think this is ever likely to happen. Case in point: I run an encyclopaedia about Sailor Moon. I know the first three anime seasons inside out. But my contribution to Sailor moon articles here on Wikipedia has been almost zero, because frankly it doesn't seem to be worth the trouble. Fixing up the articles would involve treading on too many toes, and provoke too many edit wars. I have a limited amount of free time, and I don't want to spend it having blazing arguments with factions of fandom on such subjects as spelling or whether site A is better than site B. It's a shame, becuase I support Wikipedia and am active in many other areas, but I consider the Sailor Moon pages to be a lost cause. I'd like to contribute, but there's too much conflict here, and I don't want to be drawn into it. Dooky 15:41, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Ahem... I posted on Genvid, I read Genvid, and I myself had added Genvid to this list way back when PGSM was broadcasting. The site's a good resource when the show's broadcasting, but it's still a blog with hard to navigate content. There are better resources... and wikipedia guidelines give some guidance on commercial sites... (One too many Jay Sherman-esque "buy my book" plugs, I suppose Jay. Also, if you'll notice, I also removed the venerable Hitoshi Doi's site.) My proposal at the bottom to remove all fan site links and link JUST to an open collection of links still stands. This article is crap by wikipedia standards. If you want to re-write it, I would love for you to do it--just cite your sources with inline references. (Though, you can't use yourself as a source.. WP:VANITY)
P.S. Dooky, it was ReyBrujo who brought up about bringing the link list into compliance with WP policy. Not Lilthborne. Read the original message at the top of this thread for the reasons. --Kunzite 23:06, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Duly noted. Apologies for the mix-up. Dooky 23:31, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
  • DIES GAUDII - Contains articles on etymologies of Sailor Moon words and fact checking on plot points.
    • Keep or make into reference. --Kunzite 05:36, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Keep or make into reference. I don't always agree with Ian's articles, but there can be few people who've done as much research into the series as he has. Dooky 14:38, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Delete His articles look accurate on the surface but the references are either old or false (I checked them out a long time ago). Such as with the Mau argument, that book is from the 70's and a (intentional?) misquote of the original. When he's asked for additional references beyond his one or two per article he refuses to do so. He's also done a lot to upset the Sailormoon community in general and has a set of articles dedicated to that which are a violation of copyright law (since the sent private e-mails and did not ask permission from the authors of said e-mails for release.) So info is false, and he carries with him a lot of negative emotions which should not be the source of a wikipedia article. If you plan to make into reference the only thing of real note is the Pluto/Saturn "switch" debate. Hitsuji Kinno 17:58, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


Can someone please tell me why the link to http://soul-hunter.com/sailormoon has been removed TWICE from this page? The page in question is certainly a resource, and deserves citation. Further, the site has more extensive information (researched at length and cited with episode, act, and volume numbers) than many other sites listed, and contains more multimedia content than any other Sailor Moon website that I am aware of. I've edited this entry several times before opening an account (as well as other Sailor Moon entries) citing information from it. I don't quite understand why it is inappropriate to list this reference, when information has been taken directly from the site. I am also at a loss at to why http://thetour.animehunters.com/ has not been allowed to stay in the past - a site that many consider to be an ESSENTIAL resource for information - while far less informative pages have been allowed to remain. BettyAnn 06:02, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
(edit conflict) This requires a small introduction. Wikipedia articles needs to be written with information that comes from verifiable sources. These sources must be notable by themselves, that is, you can't use a forum, a blog or a geocities/fortunecity/tripod/etc page to backup information inserted into the article (except very rare exceptions, in example if the article is about a singer and the singer has an official blog, the information the singer puts in the blog can be used into the article).
An article has two ways of including external links: resources and external links. Resources can be paper resources (books, newspapers, etc) or external links from where editors have picked information in order to build the article. Thus, references are notable. External links are just additional links that are put into the article to point the casual viewer for further reading. These include official links and fan sites.
Now comes the hard thing to understand: According to the external link style guide, point 3, Fan sites: On articles about topics with many fansites, including a link to one major fansite is appropriate, marking the link as such. In extreme cases, a link to a web directory of fansites can replace this link. (Note: fanlistings are generally not informative and should not ordinarily be included.) This is backed up by the WP:NOT policy, point 1: Mere collections of external links or Internet directories. There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant link to an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. On articles about topics with many fansites, including a link to one major fansite is appropriate, marking the link as such.
This means an article can have any number of references (the more references the better, so that the information is verifiable), relevant official links (in the article about a singer, in example, you can add the link to the singer's blog, official page, seal, but not to her husband's site), and as much, one fan site. Currently this article has 10 external links to fan sites. Now, we must interpret the spirit, not the letter of the rules. That is why more than one fan site is allowed. But I personally consider 10 to be just too many.
As Kunzite says, the article needs a rewrite (although there are some worse for sure). We must begin adding references, and thus some of the sites that appear now at the external links section could be "upgraded" to references. If I (or anyone else) is deleting external links is because I (or anyone else) consider that more links just break the spirit and guidelines of the external links section. That the site has good information is not enough to become an external link. If it is that good, better to upgrade it to a reference. However, we must first rewrite the article and add the references. -- ReyBrujo 06:14, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
So, you're saying that the information taken from certain resources isn't good enough for this page? Verifiable information, I might add, as the listed pages do include page numbers, episode numbers, etc. Several bits of information were included from these pages - including some corrections. As a small example, the entry previously listed Parallel SailorMoon as being from the Infinity Artbook, but it was in fact from the Materials Collection. This is verifiable information. It is important to note that official sites are often very limited when it comes to providing actual information. This is especially useful in the case of Sailor Moon, as the official site is almost useless as an informational resource. Are you suggesting that anything found on other pages (including verifiable information or even images) is inappropriate for this entry? If so, are you also suggesting that I remove all of my previous edits (containing very pertinent information and corrections)? Are you implying that I should not be allowed to add accurate information from resource sites, thus detracting from the community spirit of Wikipedia? BettyAnn 06:30, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Not at all. I am saying that new "external links" are not necessary, but instead new "references" are welcomed. If you have used the information from a determined web site, the information is verifiable and the site is reliable, then be bold and add the information with a reference to the page you used. My last sentence (However, we must first rewrite the article and add the references.) was not meant to stop anyone from editing, but instead that we need to create a reference section and move the appropriate external links from there to the references, to set a style to be used in this article (even if later the Anime Wikiproject changes it) and to see which contested facts need references. Had I really wanted to disrupt your contributions, I would have reverted your previous edits, which I hope I haven't. -- ReyBrujo 07:12, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Tag Removed

[cleanup-spam] --> It's a good idea to remove this tag once the attacks die down. Tag removed. KAS 17:15, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

The tag should have stayed. Apparently you keep adding your own site. Read: WP:VANITY --Kunzite 18:01, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm Not Spam, I'm Not Vanity, (Vanity = Bot + massive spam on other parts of Wiki - Not a Bot.) I'm in GuidelinesKAS 20:51, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
You're wrong. Actually read the guideline next time. Danny Lilithborne 21:06, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Added note: Quality control and compliance is my specialty. I have an acute understanding for guidelines and compliance. Fan sites means exactly that – Fan sites. Additional note concerning VANITY – It is NOT policy. Please review the page header and disclaimer on VANITY. It doesn’t seem to me as good common sense to arbitrary delete whom ever you decide comes along and doesn’t fit into your personal framework of architecture. KAS 21:14, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I actually looked at the site. It's a terribly designed, unprofessional fansite that offers no true information. You don't get to put a site on the article just because you say it's notable. Feel free to take this issue up with admins, but don't re-add the link until the issue's resolved. Danny Lilithborne 21:31, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
There is no policy that says a site has to be professionally deigned. Please do not keep deleting this link that is with the scope and description of the topic header FAN SITE, AND for reasons already stated above. KAS 21:36, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
You see the header above? The one that says "External links"? Why aren't you posting there? This is a waste of time; you just keep repeating yourself. Danny Lilithborne 21:41, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
You miss read – it reads “Tag Removed” and this is a waste of our time. Please stop. Perhaps “reaction formation.”KAS 21:45, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

You used to have an Internet store on the site. If you still had it, the site might be notable. Danny Lilithborne 21:49, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Declaration: “I don’t have an Internet store.” If you think I have, then it is obvious you didn’t review the site. As a matter of fact, I pay out of pocket $50.00 a year for a decent guestbook for visitors. I would say that would make me a fan on top of collecting everything Sailor Moon. KAS 21:58, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Wow, fifty dollars for a guestbook. Color me impressed. Still doesn't make you notable. Now drop it. I'm leaving it alone today. Danny Lilithborne 22:05, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Sailor moon was at the top of internet websearches back in its heyday. Sad to say... Every Anime fan and thier grandmother has had a Sailor Moon fan page... the web is littered with the empty shells of half-completed and long forgotten pages about so-and-so's undying love for Sailor Moon.

Reasons why your site meets the "not to include" guidelines here:

  • Not a major fansite Fan sites: On articles about topics with many fansites, including a link to one major fansite is appropriate, marking the link as such. In extreme cases, a link to a web directory of fansites can replace this link. (Note: fanlistings are generally not informative and should not ordinarily be included.)
  • Incorrect Information. "Any site that contains factually inaccurate material or unverified original research, unless it is the official site of the article's subject or it is a notable proponent of a point of view in an article with multiple points of view. (See WP:RS for further information on this guideline.)"
Example: You label this picture "Sailor Venus" [2]
  • Vanity "A website that you own or maintain (unless it is the official site of the subject of the article). If it is relevant and informative, mention it as a possible link on the talk page and wait for someone else to include it, or include the information directly in the article."
This item has a special note attached.
"This comes with a special note: NOTE relating to items #3 and #9: Because of neutrality & point-of-view concerns, a primary policy of wikipedia is that no one from a particular site/organization should post links to that organization/site etc. Because neutrality is such an important -- and difficult -- objective at wikipedia, this takes precedence over other policies defining what should be linked. The accepted procedure is to post the proposed links in the Talk section of the article, and let other - neutral - wikipedia editors decide whether or not it should be included." (emph added)

Other stuff: You set off the SPAM radar.

  1. Don't gratuitously set off our spam radar. There are certain stylistic behaviors that will say "spam!" loud and clear to anyone who's watching:
    • CHECK. Adding a link to the top of an unordered list. This is an A-number-1, red-flag, hot-button spam sign. It suggests that you want people to look at your link FIRST FIRST FIRST! You wouldn't butt in at the head of a queue; don't put your link first.
    • CHECK. Even bargaining to keep the link added at a lower position on the list. Adding a link that's snazzier than any of the others. If there's a list of products that gives just their names, and you add a product with a short blurb about how great it is, we'll all know why you did it. The same applies to adding a list item that is in a larger or otherwise more prominent font than the other items.
    • NO. Adding many links to (or mentions of) the same site or product. Going through an article and adding the name of your product to every paragraph where it seems relevant is just going to attract the revert button.
    • CHECK. (Your article creation history shows that your non-sailor moon site is linked from another article.) Adding the same link to many articles. The first person who notices you doing this will go through all your recent contributions with an itchy trigger finger on the revert button. And that's not very much fun.
  2. NO CHECK. You did not consult with us. If your product is truly relevant to an article, others will agree -- try the talk page. We usually recommend that editors be bold in adding directly to articles. But if the above advice makes you concerned that others will regard your contribution as spam, you can find out without taking that risk: Describe your work on the article's talk page, asking other editors if it is relevant.
  3. NO CHECK. Do not add an external link to your signature. However, external links to Wikimedia projects are acceptable. For example, Talk page.

So... the way that I see it, you've violated several WP guidlines (cited above). Your link was rightly removed. --Kunzite 00:36, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Please note that I put a 24-hour block on User:KAS because she infringed on the three-revert rule.  Denelson83  00:45, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Fansite Proposal

  1. Remove ALL fansites. Since there are (still) so many fan sites on the internet devoted to Sailor Moon it may be better to remove them all and...
  2. Link to ONE directory listing. I propose that we link to to DMOZ Sailor Moon Listings]. It contains as many fansites as you ever wanted to have.
  3. If neither of the above... I propose that we use guidelines that the site a) conatin relevent content to this article based upon guidelines. i.e. 1) contain more information than is contained in Wikipedia's series of Sailor Moon articles. 2) Have been reviewed and listed as "good" by a discerning website reviewers site (i.e. the now defunct AQ) and/or c) choose the Sailor Moon related sites (that meet content guidelines) have the highest Alexa Rankings. d) We allow only one site devoted to a particular aspect of the show. i.e. one site on video games, one site on myu, one general site, etc.

--Kunzite 00:36, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

As this went almost a week and was unconstested. I was bold and implemented this per WP:EL compatible suggestion. --Kunzite 23:58, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Page protected?

I'm just curious why? I can't see anything on this page that explains why the page is protected (none of the discussions seem to be the reason as far as I can tell). Could Denelson83 please explain why? Thanks! (^_^) ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 00:52, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

This article is on my watchlist, and when I opened it up and saw this kind of bickering going on, I had no choice but to intervene. If you wish to make an edit, just ask me.  Denelson83  01:19, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I was just curious. List of English dubbed anime, which had this article on it, has been superceded by Category:Anime dubbed into English, so I added the new category and fixed a typo in another category. Nothing related to any discussions on this page. (^_^) ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 01:40, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
I would like to wikify the first reference to "Codename wa Sailor V" -- Seitz 06:50, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Hmm... just wondering, is the protection going to stay until the involved people calm down, or should a discussion be held here? -- ReyBrujo 03:11, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Exit Sailor Moon Fan

Lohan as Sailor Moon?

There's a recent net rumor going around that Lindsy Lohan is slated to play Sailor Moon. I'd put it into the article it's nothing more than a mere rumor at moment and any chance of it being real may be bogus. Check this site for further details 144.137.74.182

  • Check this talk page, I'm pretty sure they talk about it. It's fake. Danny Lilithborne 13:04, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Also, Genvid is reporting it as nothing more than a rumor. The details promised in the rumor did not pan out even though they scoured the magazine that was supposed to contain news, even Lohan's response on MTV did not lead much, if any, credibility to this... (But it did draw some new questions) Kyaa the Catlord 03:36, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Exit - Sailor Moon Fan -2

This user (KAS) has a #1 rating on Google for Sailormoon and it is higher then Wikipedia/Sailor Moon - again, I didn't post here for vanity or to get higher link ratings – due to my site is already #1. Those that think otherwise, I invite you to search the Internet and you won't find that I've placed links to my site anywhere. I only placed a link here in this Wikipedia site because my experience over the years has been Sailor Moon fans were playful, nice, and friendly (my guestbook clearly shows this) - but I see that was a mistake assuming this here. Dang, the Sailor Moon in the show behaves different then the tone of this site. This site has been hostile since I first linked as a Sailor Moon fan, and certainly out of character of the Sailor Moon show. So please, when the site is unlocked, remove my link. I’m just a Sailor Moon fan, and that’s it. All the recent putdowns and arguments can be easily debated, but I choose not to for the following reasons. Concerning Wikipedia, and contributing to articles in Wikepedia, in my “opinion” there is a mob like mentality of some Wikipedia individuals that have access to editing and admin controls. They hijack a page and guard it as their own. This is just one of many examples concerning the problems of Widipedia. My friend Sam Vaknin http://www.toddlertime.com/sam/index.htm indicated I should run like hell from this mess. His views here (links below) and I belive it! After posting, I'm gone myself.

http://samvak.tripod.com/busiweb13.html

http://samvak.tripod.com/busiweb23.html


Sorry, but this is spamming, perhaps you should get permenently banned. If you *want* hits, and to be recognized, work harder on your website instead of wasting everyone's time spamming Wikipedia. Even before the no vanity rule, I did not list my link on this website. I *strongly* advise you to stop promoting your website. When your website is up to par and *others* think you are good, *then* you might get recommended, wait for that. Find something *unique* that no other website has done and do it well with page number/ clips, or whatever. Just stop bugging Wikipedia. You're not doing your rep any good as a web master which will in the end get you and your website a firm kick in the pants. Hitsuji Kinno 19:40, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Your comments comes across in my view, as rude, unconstructive and mean spirited. If Wikipedia members are typical of your post to me, then in my opinion, I’m in a very toxic environment in Wikipedia. My website is already #1 under the keyword "sailormoon" on Google, higher then you or Wikipedia so your argument that I want hits appears as moot. See this link for evidence:
See upper left image:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=sailormoon
Site growth "without" promotion on the web or on Wikipedia
http://extremetracking.com/open;unique?login=kathiann
Addionaly, since my site is rated higher then Wikipedia, the the removeal of my site actually hurt Wikipedia hit rates according to the Google forumlary. So that Wikipeda had something to gain with my link posted here, not me.
I can't express enough how sick I am of these sort of comments and would deeply appreciate if some ADMIN could *permanently* wipe out all traces of KAS USER, KAS Talk, and KAS discussion. KAS 17:33, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
A Google search for "sailormoon" gives a lot of pages, none being http://www.toddlertime.com/sailormoon/ (Sailor Moon Universe, Eternal Sailor Moon, etc). PageRank for that page is 4. Why do you say your site is #1? What is the exact search you use to get that conclusion? -- ReyBrujo 17:45, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
I think an image from her site appears at the head of the list. So... she's at the head of the google images sailormoon search. --Kunzite 17:56, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
See upper left image:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=sailormoon
Site growth "without" promotion on the web or on Wikipedia
http://extremetracking.com/open;unique?login=kathiann
KAS 18:12, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I looked at those statistics. It's cuz google included you as the first image on the image search. That's all. Your site is not link or cite worthy. You just have an image with the name "sailormoon" that shows up first in a search engine. So what?
We don't link to fullinuyasha.com simply because an image from the site comes up first in the list of sites on google for an Inuyasha search. We don't redirect failure to George W. Bush because somone google bombed the word.
It's now a totally moot issue anyway. We're following the WP:EL rules and linking only to one fan site aggregator--feel free to add your site there. (And I thought you were leaving?) --Kunzite 03:09, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
(sigh) I got your message, and the underlying intent. I felt toxicity reading your post. If you want to be mean-spirited, I can't do anything about that. If you feel your post to me was constructive by slamming me once again, okay. I have no idea what the point is since I requested my link to be removed and it was. I disagree with several black and white statements, generalizations, assumptions, and assertions, and this environment doesn't seem to be receptive for discussion, and there is an element of hostility and I don't see that changing, at least not now. I did leave and had no desire to be a part of the Wikipedia-sailormoon, yet someone felt they needed to trash me once again, same as you have just done, so I responded, and perhaps shouldn’t' have. KAS 06:30, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Kunzite - Respectfully, I would just like to add that you are a fine debater and have good arguments. You have a terrific mind. Now I'm leaving ;-) KAS 06:28, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
[Removed to avoid threatened actions BitterGrey 15:05, 22 June 2006 (UTC)]

Is IMDb Wrong??

I read on IMDb that the English dub of Sailor Moon is Banned? In the UK, Australia, Canada and America? What's going on there? Please explain, I'm very confused! Isn't it something to do with licenses? 210.50.189.128 07:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not seeing it. Can you provide a link? It might be talking about Toei's refusal to license any further Sailor Moon series in North America. Danny Lilithborne 08:11, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
From what I can tell as DiC's licence has expired I don't think its dub is supposed to be played anymore. So in effect it's banned but that's not quite the right terminology use. At least that is what I've been lead to believe. GracieLizzie 16:30, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

It's not banned it's just that A) They don't show it anymore,why I don't know & B) Toei REFUSED to give out the Sailor Stars Season. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gatogirl (talk • contribs) .

The reason is that the ratings for Sailormoon are very, very poor so they are not showing it on Cartoon Network. DBZ has beat Sailormoon hands down several times which is why the DVDs of DBZ, though released at around the same time are still out there where as the ADV and pioneer Box sets are out of print. It all has to do with money. Of course if Toei coughed up Sailor Stars on time, there wouldn't be an issue. But as it is none of the companies have elected to extend their liscense agreements, and from what I understand none of them can anymore since Toei blocked all liscense agreements probably due to the release of the Anime box sets in Japan which are at least 2 times the price of the foriegn counterparts. (i.e. It's cheaper to get the box sets imported from the US or another country than to buy it in Japan). So it's basically commercial interests on both sides. Check out Amazon.co.jp for the Japanese Sailormoon box sets, and then realize that the SM ones were selling for 80.00 and you'll see why. As for ratings, this was what it was in 2001, and why they were happy to have SM. http://www.timewarner.com/corp/newsroom/pr/0,20812,668629,00.html Compare it to this: http://50.lycos.com/030105.asp That's why there is no new liscense. Catch 22 though. When it stopped airing on TV, the box sets didn't sell, when the box sets didn't sell then they thought they can't show it on TV... Why would they continue with a show that does not sell? Hitsuji Kinno 15:41, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
Um, it's not taken off because of ratings. It's taken off because the American rights were lost and the creater was fighting Toei regarding rights (iirc) CaravaggioFan 23:58, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
I sourced mine, source yours before making such a statement. It was ratings, at the time of cancelation it was low so Cartoon Network chose not to reoption the liscense to watch so Cloverway (a division of Toei) also chose not to continue. Hitsuji Kinno 18:02, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Sources...

US Sales Data

August 14, 2001: "... if Sailor Moon were listed with graphic novels, it would easily have topped Marvel's Ultimate X-Men collection, which did head Book Scan's most recent list of graphic novel bestsellers." --Kunzite 02:26, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

More info from the KAS collection about MIXX and Sailor Moon "MIXX'S SAILOR MOON MANGA IS THE NUMBER 1 GRAPHIC NOVEL OR TRADE PAPERBACK IN AMERICA!"
http://www.toddlertime.com/sailormoon/history/main-release.htm —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.234.124.19 (talk • contribs) .
Info by KAS 20:08, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Usagi's best friend?

This really is just something minor, but on this page Ami Mizuno is listed as being Usagi's best friend. Is this really true? I mean, yes it was Naru at some point, and really Usagi is very close with all the inners... but isn't it implied quite a bit that Rei would better fit this title? Or should I just shut up?

Psykhaotic 20:06, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

#1 doesn't have a "best" friend per se; she has many friends, including #2 through #5.  Denelson83  21:57, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Out of all the Sailor girls I'd say Rei and (in the manga) Minako is who Usagi is closest too. But that's just my opinion. GracieLizzie 11:02, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
I disagree. Without going into details, Usagi in both versions and all versions is obviously a ESFP (Personality type), and they don't *have* best friends. Usagi displays the trait of not treasuring one over the other. One can argue that any are the best friends. I mean one could say Mamoru is, or Minako... but it's against her personality to favor one person over another which has Canon support. At the begininning of SM it *was* Naru though.

Hitsuji Kinno 19:46, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

New Sailor Moon wiki

I thought I might let you know that Genvid L.L.C. has opened up a new wiki called WikiMoon, devoted entirely to information on the Sailor Moon franchise. I've already created an account over there, and you can as well. This will be the only plug for this wiki.  Denelson83  22:30, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

They really need to set a copyright policy. (Hopefully, one that's compatible with WP.)--Kunzite 00:46, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
I agree. So for now, I advise everyone to not copy text from Wikipedia directly onto WikiMoon at the moment.  Denelson83  01:16, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
Or ever, for that matter. The people behind Wikimoon have chosen to put the site under CC-BY-NC-SA 2.5.  Denelson83  03:04, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Yup. An in-compatible license with wikipedia, so no copy and paste. --Kunzite 12:46, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Do you think it would be okay if we just linked to WikiMoon in this article, and leave it at that?  Denelson83  05:59, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Is the site notable enough? I mean, aren't there more known wikis about Sailor Moon? License isn't a big deal with external links. -- ReyBrujo 13:08, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Sailor Stars Box set released

just noting that Sailor Stars has ben released at Amazon, :D just letting you guys know. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.109.174.175 (talk • contribs) 09:53, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Most likely it was meant for region 2, which means it won't play in the U.S. and Canada.  Denelson83  20:48, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

theres a web site called uk2usa witch you can buy it from its region 0 it will work on any —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.93.21.134 (talk • contribs) .

"Hero Boxes"

I feel that charcters beside the Main Senshi and Tuxedo Mask Should get the hero (Or villan) Boxes to try and keep the looks of the charcter pages uniform. Any Hero or villan that is in more than one episode or in the movies should get one (And if they share a page, put more than one on the page) I have commented on this on a few talk pages but there are too many pages to put it so i'm putting it here. Charcters i think that should defeintly get them are : Starlights, their princess, Luna, Artimas, Helios, Diana, Head Villens (The guys in charge of each set of villens), Semi-head villans (ones that seem to be in charge or are in charge the monsters) Al and En (they don't have a head villen <_<) The Asteroid Senshi, ChibiChibi, Sailor Cosmos, and maybe a few more... Also, The Boxes are supossed to be uniform, the top bar is supposed to be pink on all of them denoteing that the charcter came from a Japanse source, and the lower one is supposed to be red for heros and blue for villens and grey for Nutral/other, as of right now, Only Moon, Chibi-Moon, and Tuxedo Mask are correct colors. --Lego3400 18:41, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I've started to add them... If the group dicides they aren't needed, just revert them --Lego3400 21:21, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
Also, Don't go and start removeing the Relitves secitons.. Its only disabled... Until we have final word on wheter its being removed they stay in case it gets re-enabled. --Lego3400: The Sage of Time 17:46, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Come again? --  Denelson83  18:32, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
People have started to remove the Relitves section from hero boxes becuse it is dissabled as it is under debate whether or not it should be removed. If it gets re-enabiled it will cuase more work to re-add then it would to leave it while it is not visable.

--Lego3400: The Sage of Time 20:32, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, relatives! I understand now. --  Denelson83  20:57, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

hey

ummm i just wanted to kno how many episodes are there in sailor moon????

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sailor_Moon/Archive_3&oldid=1137169882"