Talk:JoJo's Bizarre Adventure (TV series)

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus after over 2 weeks and a relisting. A few things here: as noted in the discussion, the RfC found that "anime" should generally be deprecated in favor of more standard disambiguators. Additionally, the current advice at

• JoJo's Bizarre Adventure (TV series) → JoJo's Bizarre Adventure (2012 TV series)
• JoJo's Bizarre Adventure (1993 anime series) → JoJo's Bizarre Adventure (1993 TV series)

• Oppose, it's not a TV series. —Xezbeth (talk) 04:56, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Xezbeth: Care to elaborate your strange oppose?... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:13, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh, is this one of these OVA things?... These are a persistent problem in these discussions. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:14, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose. Calling the 1993 anime a "TV series" is incorrect, since it was never aired on TV. They are OVAs (Original Video Animation) and released on VHS and Laserdisc (and later DVD). I suggest it be named JoJo's Bizarre Adventure (OVA) like the following page: Sonic the Hedgehog (OVA). Username 57 (talk) 05:17, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • And I oppose that suggestion. We need to come up with a systematic naming scheme for these OVA series that everyone agrees with... As it stands, I still think the 2012 TV series should be moved back to "by year" disambiguation, to disambiguate from the 1993 OVA series, and as your October move should now be considered "controversial", that article at least should be moved back to where it was before your move. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:23, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        • As I said, this article doesn't require anymore disambiguation, for being the only TV series named JoJo's Bizarre Adventure. The 1993 anime should definitely be moved, seeing as (anime) isn't suitable anymore, but moving it to (1993 TV series) would just be incorrect. And as you can see, I did suggest a naming scheme for the OVA series, which is something you haven't done yet. I'll wait to hear other people's opinions. Username 57 (talk) 05:41, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
          • It's still a "controversial" move now. I'd also like to see other opinions as well, as regardless of the medium, there's a "1993 series" and a "2012 series", so I strongly feel that "by year" disambiguation for both of these is somewhere between a very good idea and necessary. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 05:46, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: First thing though, is that undiscussed move should be restored to the pre-move title as it had no consensus for that change. --Gonnym (talk) 10:56, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - "OVA" is not a widely known word. In-fact both dictionary.com and merriam-webster.com don't have an entry for "Original Video Animation", nor does Wikionary. I also don't buy into the need for another modifier here. Most "films" are not shot on "film" anymore yet we still call them that. Cats (1998 film) was released as a straight-to-dvd film, yet we still use the general "film" and not "OVF"; For Lovers Only (film) was released straight-to-iTunes and here too we use "film" and not "OIF"; Daredevil (TV series) and Big Mouth (TV series) were released on Netfilx, which is not television, but we still use "TV series" and not "streaming series". This all shows that the medium is not the deciding method of disambiguation, but what the topic essentially is - a "film" or a "TV series". --Gonnym (talk) 10:56, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Support both - the 1993 anime, while not aired on TV, was produced on home media (VHS/Laserdisc) clearly intended for display on home television. Much like how modern streaming service shows are still designated as "TV series", the medium isn't the important quality - its about the intended viewing method. This move brings the series in line with
  WP:NCTV it is based upon). OVA is not suitable - it was considered but not adopted in the recent anime naming RFC. -- Netoholic @ 11:05, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Yes, I'm fairly persuaded at what Gonnym is saying

WP:NCFILM – these need to be put under one naming convention or the other, and be done with it. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 16:09, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

• Oppose, OVA series have never been called TV-series in any kind of discussion, formal or informal, academic or not. It would be very confusing if wikipedia becomes the only place using the term TV-series like that. If OVA is not acceptable as a disambiguator then at least call them film series. Tyrosian (talk) 16:50, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That, right there, is the point! Right now, "OVA" is covered under neither

WP:NCFILM. If there's consensus for that, that's fine. But the OVA articles need to be permanently placed under one naming convention or the other... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:09, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

• Just because the term isn't included in a dictionary or even Wikionary isn't a good indicator that a term is widely known or not.
• Just because something was produced on VHS/Laserdisc/DVD/Blu-Ray etc. does not automatically mean its a "TV series" because you can watch it on a TV set. If this were true then film franchises like Star Wars, Halloween, etc. can be moved to TV series using that logic despite what their sources call them.
• Calling a web series that airs on Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Video, etc. a "TV series" is generally acceptable because most people see them as TV series irregardless of the medium. Also streaming services are becoming viable rivals to traditional pay-TV broadcasters and distributors who themselves are launching similar services to complete thus blurring the lines. This has no relation to what an OVA is or how they are released.

Instead of focusing on keeping just the bland (OVA) disambig tag or straight Support/Oppose since this is a debated topic try reaching a compromise IJBall has already presented one compromise here that hasn't really been discussed. One proposal would be to use (OVA series) and (OVA film) which is actually a good compromise. If no consensus is reached or if the titles are not moved I do agree with Gonnym's comment from 10:56, 17 November 2018 (UTC). ♪♫Alucard 16♫♪ 21:06, 18 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I still think putting OVA stuff under either

WP:NCTV is the best way to go here – Tyrosian's suggestion is that these best go under NCFILM, and as "direct-to-video films" are already covered under NCFILM anyway, this makes sense to me. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 06:22, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

Strong Oppose - This makes no sense. the 1993 iteration was not a Television series, but an OVA. - R9tgokunks ⭕ 09:38, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@R9tgokunks: Care to suggest an alternative proposal?... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:26, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - just pointing out that regardless if you agree with the proposal or not, the use of "anime" as a disambiguator was decided against in a RfC at the Village pump, so there is absolutely no valid argument to keep it there and bypass community consensus. --Gonnym (talk) 14:16, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The other point is that at least 3 of us agree that the move to
    JoJo's Bizarre Adventure (2012 TV series), the last stable title. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 15:59, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
    ]
• Support. I'm sure we had an RfC which determined that "(anime)" was not suitable as a disambiguator. In any case,
  WP:NCTV is the go-to naming convention here as this is episodic programming. --woodensuperman 13:54, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • We did - Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 141#RFC: Is “(anime)” a suitable disambiguator? --Gonnym (talk) 11:03, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • The issue isn't the word anime (which I personally don't care for), but that we don't want to call OVAs TV-series because it is factually incorrect, confusing and goes against decades of usage. I propose OVAs should fall under NCFILM in general, 1 episode called 'films' and series just 'series' or 'video series' for further disambiguation. In this case the 2012 series is JoJo's Bizarre Adventure (TV series) and the 90's OVA is JoJo's Bizarre Adventure (Video series). Tyrosian (talk) 12:50, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • That's not a bad potential solution, though "video series" is not "standard disambiguation" (under
        WP:NCFILM (e.g. there are no "seasons" in film series, just in TV series...) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:42, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
        ]
        • I like Alucard 16's suggestion to use (OVA series) and (OVA film) the most, my idea is more like a 'back-up'. In the WVP many comments are using contorted logic to argue that OVAs are TV-shows even if that goes against
          WP:COMMON. The discussion was also weirdly contentious and hostile. OVAs mostly fit under the the film category, the biggest exception is that individual series installments are called episodes rather than films, of course there is a precedent for that (Star Wars). Tyrosian (talk) 18:38, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
          ]
          • The "hostility" probably comes from the fact that a number of us consider "OVA" to be an esoteric term (if not an outright
            WP:NEOLOGISM) that only means something to the anime fandom. I'm in that camp as well, and agree that OVA should not be the chosen disambiguator for these, because the general readership will have no idea what that means. Either "film series" or even "video series" would be a much better choice for a disambiguator here. Also, the 1993 series and the 2012 series should probably be disambiguated "by year" as well in this case, regardless of the final solution to the "OVA" issue. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 04:58, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply
            ]

Actually, we don't – as per

WP:ONUS. The point is that "OVA" is not a generally understood term, so it should not be used for article title disambiguation purposes. We shouldn't be using narrow, area-specific terms for that, as much as possible. Either "film series" or "video series" are much better choices for disambiguation purposes. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:49, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply

]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a

talk page or in a move review

. No further edits should be made to this section.