Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Claymore chapters/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page. No further edits should be made to this page. The closing editor's comments were: 13 days, 2 support, 2 oppose. Not heading towards a consensus. Fail. Scorpion0422 12:36, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is a list of chapters of the Claymore manga. I believe it qualifies under the featured list criteria, and covers all relevant aspects of the topic. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 06:48, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - All information is reliable, up-to date and complies with WP:MOS. σмgнgσмg 05:46, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose I think such a list should include the publication dates for individual chapters too (at least a from/to for the volume), and I think volume summaries like those added in the Naruto list above (and parallelling anime episode summaries) should probably be present.
- As a side comment, you might as well use only one color for this list and the episodes list.
- Is it the translation that stops using "part" with chapter 57? If so, maybe a content note about it is pertinent, because otherwise it looks like an inconsistency of transcription.
- Why not give translated titles for volumes unreleased in English?
- Circeus 22:58, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't really see any need to include dates of serialization - the collected volumes are the permanent edition, and the serialized chapters are not really notable the way individual issues of American comics might be. If people still feel there is some need to acknowledge the original dates of serialization, I suggest the year and volume number of the magazine it appeared in - this information is always included in the collected edition, and is easily obtained and verifiable. Examples I happen to have on hand...Bleach (manga) volume 30 contains a note on the inside flap that says it ran in Weekly Shonen Jump in Heisei 19, issues 10-18. But this information can get really complicated; Hunter × Hunter 24, for example; Heisei 17, issues 34, 36/37 (a combined edition) - 39, 41, 42, 46, 50, and Heisei 18, issues 8-11. I feel like this information is inherently trivial, and absolutely should not be included. The date for the tankobon's release is the only relevant information. Doceirias 02:43, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Just because bibliographic information is tricky to include or locate doesn't mean it is irrelevant.
Why then do we bother with airing dates for anime, I wonder: after all, they are available on DVD!.Specific dates are not absolutely necessary, but I still strongly feel something like "between X and Y" for the volume would be appropriate. A similar issue arise with Franco-Belgian comics, and the original serialization dates of e.g. Tintin or Gaston Lagaffe (the latter has two final editions, the original of which is notorious for not being in a chronological order and omitting strips) are still considered relevant. Circeus 03:16, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]- Being tricky to include or locate was subservient to my opinion that it just isn't actually notable. It seems like people are considering adding it just because one person thinks the lists need it; I'd like to know if anyone else has feelings one way or the other. Doceirias 05:06, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm more or less willing to compromise on the original publication date, but could you at least address my comments re: colors and "part"? I'm personally of the opinion that it is more pertinent to have this list reuse the color of the anime episode list than to try and have all the manga episode lists have the same basic colors. What do you think? Circeus 00:23, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- That's fine. Done. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 02:19, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm more or less willing to compromise on the original publication date, but could you at least address my comments re: colors and "part"? I'm personally of the opinion that it is more pertinent to have this list reuse the color of the anime episode list than to try and have all the manga episode lists have the same basic colors. What do you think? Circeus 00:23, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Being tricky to include or locate was subservient to my opinion that it just isn't actually notable. It seems like people are considering adding it just because one person thinks the lists need it; I'd like to know if anyone else has feelings one way or the other. Doceirias 05:06, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Just because bibliographic information is tricky to include or locate doesn't mean it is irrelevant.
- Oppose Before we can call these lists featured we need to hammer out some details on their formatting and what content they should contain. -- Ned Scott 03:12, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- As long as people are consistent between the two lists currently on FLC, it should come out alright. Circeus 03:16, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]