Talk:Wolf Children

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Japanese cinema task force.

Anime and manga Mid‑importance

	Anime and manga portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime, manga, and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anime and mangaWikipedia:WikiProject Anime and mangaTemplate:WikiProject Anime and mangaanime and manga articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Werewolf's name

I keep reverting edits stating the werewolf's name is "Ookami". I don't believe this name is ever given in the film. I could be wrong; am I?

Bear in mind that we don't use names given in, for example, credit sequences for plot summaries. If the name isn't mentioned in the story, then we shouldn't include it in the description of the story, because the name isn't part of the story.

Additionally, giving the character's name isn't necessary for a thorough description of the film's plot.

I'm going to keep reverting it until a source is provided. Popcornduff (talk) 20:57, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You can't issue ultimatums like this. If you continue edit warring with people, you will eventually be blocked by an admin. Also, providing false edit summaries, as you did here and here is very frowned upon. Please be careful to make sure you are not giving false information about your edits. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 18:53, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, in the Japanese (manga and anime), he is referred to as either "he" or "him" (彼) or "Wolf Man" (おおかみおとこ). I've seen Japanese articles which refer to him as simply おおかみ, though, so that may be where the confusion comes from. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 19:10, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My posting this on the Talk page is an attempt to resolve an edit war, not prolong it.

I had to check those edit summaries to see what you were talking about. I apologise, I must have mixed up what I thought I was editing, and there was no malice meant by it. In fact I'm not sure how that happened at all...

Anyway, about the name: we can ignore the manga, because this article is about the movie. We can ignore what articles call the character, because we're summarising the movie plot based on the movie plot, not other sources. In the movie, the character's name is never given. This is deliberate. To name him in the plot summary is misleading. Popcornduff (talk) 19:25, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Did you bother reading what I wrote? I was explaining the confusion, not arguing that he had an actual name. I had remembered seeing his name on the ID card Hana keeps on top of the shelf, so I rewatched all the parts with that and found I had misremembered. The Japanese credits (at the end of the film), as well as the English credits, refer to him as "Wolf Man" (or おおかみおとこ). I'm not saying that's his given name, so just drop that.

Dude, your response was hostile, and you didn't even admit you were wrong about the name. I just wanted to make sure we understood each other. edit: btw, I don't mean to suggest I want an apology or anything silly like that - I meant your post was ambiguous in context and could be read as further defence of including the name. Popcornduff (talk) 23:47, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As for werewolf, none of the wolves in this film are considered werewolves. They are never called that in the film, they are never called that in the manga (which is based on the film), the director never calls them that, and they don't fit into any typical "werewolf" mythology because their transformations are at will and not controlled by the moon. It is not a curse. They are not evil. It is simply who they are. Calling them "werewolves" just makes it confusing. They are more akin to the shapeshifting foxes and tanuki in Japanese mythology.

Here is the definition of a werewolf from our very own Wikipedia: "A werewolf, also known as a lycanthrope (from the Greek λυκάνθρωπος: λύκος, lykos, "wolf", and ἄνθρωπος, anthrōpos, "man"), is a mythological or folkloric human with the ability to shapeshift into a wolf or a therianthropic hybrid wolf-like creature, either purposely or after being placed under a curse or affliction (e.g. via a bite or scratch from another werewolf)."

The fact that the film itself doesn't explicitly call the characters werewolves is unimportant; the characters fit easily into popularly understood imaginings of the werewolf trope, and it's perfectly appropriate to refer to them as such in the article and plot summary. It aids the reader's understanding the film in the way that calling them "half-wolf" people (what does that mean? anthropomorphic wolf-people?) doesn't.

Here are two reliable sources where reviewers have used the term "werewolf":

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2013/oct/24/wolf-children-review

http://www.totalfilm.com/reviews/cinema/wolf-children

Please also note that you are exhibiting characteristics of trying to own this article. You do not own it. You can not simply revert anything anyone else does to improve the article, even if you disagree with it. You need to work to reach consensus, not issue ultimatums and decrees of how things are (according to you). Please back off and start working with your fellow editors rather than imposing your will without any attempt to assume good faith or inquire why someone may have made an edit. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 23:17, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I revert things that are demonstrably wrong, and I'm always happy to explain why. When you re-inserted the "Ookami" name you insisted in your edit summary that I shouldn't remove it again (though you were wrong about that huh, whoops); it was me who opened up the discussion on the talk page so we could hear the other side of the argument. Now, let's both chill out; we both want what's best for the article. Popcornduff (talk) 23:47, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]