User talk:Link20XX/Archive 2

On 17 June 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Toma Kamijo, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Toma Kamijo ranked first in a survey asking people which anime or game character they would name their potential son after? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Toma Kamijo. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Toma Kamijo), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:03, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Link20XX. After reviewing your request, I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when using rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing
  Twinkle
  .
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of
  good faith edits
  .
• Rollback should never be used to
  edit war
  .
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into trouble or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Seddon ^talk 00:46, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations | July 2021 Backlog Drive
July 2021 Backlog Drive: This Thursday, July 1, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number, length, and age, of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here .
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive. Click here to opt out of any future messages. --Usernameunique

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's too edgy that I made this page. Highest-grossing adult animated films. I don't mind if you do edit some missing informations or references. Fortunewriter (talk) 13:41, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How is the review not pushing opinions when its mostly talking about yuri in a show which is not yuri about how much their yuri was not handled how they liked it instead of talking about the show itself? Sorewho (talk) 14:19, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sorewho: Whether you think it is Yuri or not is just your personal interpretation. If a reliable source says it is, then we can't remove it unless another reliable source is there to counter. Link20XX (talk) 14:22, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Link20XX:But its not just my personal interpretation?You only need to check the tags of the show,there is no yuri tag,there are girls in the show having attraction to girls but the existance of lesbians does not make it a yuri show and the review focus on how much they liked(or in this case disliked the yuri instead of talking about the actual plot or even the main couple.Sorewho (talk) 18:48, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Then why did you remove the review altogether? It would probably be best to rewrite it if that is the case. Link20XX (talk) 19:08, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Link20XX:90% of the review is about the reviwer's opinion on yuri,if i removed those parts then what is left cannot even be called a review,even in this case the reviewer compares toka gettan to Yaimbou,an actual yuri series so even the few words that actually talk about the show still compare it to a yuri series.So even the parts that do not talk about yuri are still using a yuri show as a point of comparison.Sorewho (talk) 11:40, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think I understand. I would say it might be a good idea to add it as a link in a further reading section then, since the article has some notability issues. Link20XX (talk) 16:21, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay i am glad we reached an understanding but i am not aware in what you reading section you want to move it to.Is it okay remove it now?How is it gonna work?Sorewho (talk) 05:23, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Haruichi Furudate, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now

create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation

if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to

create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation

.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Yeeno (talk) 🍁 18:45, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Link20XX. I know that it was previously discussed about the reliability of Monsters and Critics, and while I'm not particularly fond of the website, I think that at least stuff like interviews, like the one that was added to the Fire Force article, should be kept, as I personally think that it would be helpful for a potential production section. Maybe this should be better discussed in the WikiProject Anime and manga, but I wanted to let you know my thoughts first. Cheers. - Xexerss (talk)

Hello Xexerss. I guess stuff like direct interviews would be alright, although those would probably be better off in a production section rather than with the release information based on the content. Link20XX (talk) 22:15, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi link, I saw you accepted request on Pikachu's talk page, could you copy paste the content here on the

 Done Also filled in the bare refs and did some cleanup. Link20XX (talk) 01:11, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article

criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tintor2 -- Tintor2 (talk) 16:20, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply

The article A Certain Magical Index you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:A Certain Magical Index for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Tintor2 -- Tintor2 (talk) 22:42, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I have noticed that you marked the manga (and written in prose) as completed, but it's still ongoing per the artist's own twitter account with the latest chapter being released in June 2021: [1]. Regards,

Huh, Admittedly I misread the source. Thanks for the correction. Link20XX (talk) 23:49, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Link20XX, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on

On 2 August 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article A Certain Magical Index, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the second volume of A Certain Magical Index was finished in only seventeen days? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/A Certain Magical Index. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, A Certain Magical Index), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:03, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ann is used on many pages even the page you re-edited to bad information. If you looked at my first edit. I used the same link. But if you read you would know ANN is reliable. FedualJapan (talk) 05:09, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the exact text at

WP:ANIME/ORS on Anime News Network: "A note about using Anime News Network as a reference: ANN is divided into sections of varying quality. For news, reviews, and release information, ANN is a reliable source and close to being a newspaper of record for anime and manga. The "fan interest" pieces, however, may be pulled directly from unreliable sources and generally should not be used - http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news is the "reliable" feed. In addition, because the encyclopedia portion is user-edited, that information is not reliable by Wikipedia standards." The link you provided (this) was to their encyclopedia, which as you can see in the bold text, is not reliable. Their news and reviews are reliable in almost every case, yes, but not their encyclopedia. Link20XX (talk) 05:13, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

“Behind The Voice Actors - An online database of voice actor credits in anime, cartoons, and video games. This can be used to shortcut verify the roles as long as the credit itself has a green check-mark that leads to an on-screen capture of the closing credit that confirms the role.“ FedualJapan (talk) 05:30, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Look at Arthur Romeo. Jyubei has a green check.

Look at Imari Williams. Tokotsu has a green check. I told ponyo it was on behind the voice actors. I told them was on Imari’s Twitter and Arthur’s Facebook and Instagram. They talked about verified sources. I knew ANN was one. I was trying to make the page reflect the truth. But I don’t understand why information with no sources and false is more reliable.

https://www.behindthevoiceactors.com/Arthur-Romeo/

https://www.behindthevoiceactors.com/Imari-Williams/

FedualJapan (talk) 05:39, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see at Wikipedia:General disclaimer, Wikipedia is not guaranteed to have reliable or accurate information. However, since the links you provided above have a green check mark, they are reliable and thus you may use them. Link20XX (talk) 05:40, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I will try it again. I wished Ponyo did not make it like that site was unreliable and I would had used them instead of the ANN FedualJapan (talk) 05:48, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also about your point that was irrelevant to what I was saying. I am well aware of that and how people will vandalized it. I know Wikipedia does try to be reliable and accurate that is why it has references. I was not allowed to use Wikipedia but I was allowed to use their sources if they were reliable sources in my pages in my university. FedualJapan (talk) 05:51, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

While looking over reliable sources that indicate what company licensed Darker than Black and its sequel to Australia, I found Madman Entertainment but I can't find the official source indicating the DVD volume and instead a wallpaper. Could you give it a look? Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 03:38, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I did some looking, and via internet archive, I found the page for Madman's complete DVD boxset for the series. According to the archive of their catalog page, it appears like they also released it in 5 sets, however, the link for the 5th set and "all releases" are dead. When it comes to non-primary sources, I found this for the second season. Link20XX (talk) 04:09, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On 19 August 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mashima Hero's, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the manga series Mashima Hero's was originally titled Hero's and had its name changed to rank higher in search engine results? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mashima Hero's. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Mashima Hero's), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:03, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've made the changes you suggested. Thanks. ISD (talk) 06:33, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So, did you understand what I meant when I said Local newspapers and industry media are generally reliable, but three stories in local press or in industry media isn't enough to prove notability? —valereee (talk) 16:46, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• I am well aware of
  WP:AUD when it comes to sourcing, what I want to know is why you think The Fandom Post is in this situation. Link20XX (talk) 16:56, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  Because for me, The Fandom Post falls in the same category w/re supporting assertions of notability: media of limited interest and circulation. —valereee (talk) 17:47, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • I disagree with that. For one, the website covers many topics, not just anime and manga. And while it isn't a big website, a website doesn't have to be as large as something like The New York Times or by far the largest animanga website Anime News Network to count towards notability, at least from my understanding. My interpretation says that by "limited circulation", they refer to the audience that it is intended for. A local paper will have a very small audience, however this is an international website which covers many other topics as well. Certainly not a limited audience. Link20XX (talk) 18:03, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    The audience is limited by the coverage: fans of specific kinds of popular entertainment. That makes it very much a limited audience and very much like industry-specific media. I'm a huge fan of food and read food-industry publications, well-regarded blogs, etc., some of them global in their reach. Their audience is still limited to people with a deep interest in food, and I don't try to use them to prove notability except in the rare case I have other sigcov and think I can use major coverage in a food industry publication -- and I mean major coverage, like a cover article -- to push it over the hump. (Best to ping me, my watch is out of control.) —valereee (talk) 18:47, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @

    WP:DRV. Link20XX (talk) 19:30, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply

    ]

    I don't think it has anything to do with being an admin. It has to do with having made tens of thousands of edits to thousands of pages over many years. My watchlist hasn't increased by much because of my work as an admin. The biggest increase I see is because of my work at DYK. Some people prefer not to be pinged; I was just saying I actually prefer to be. Best to you. —valereee (talk) 20:03, 28 August 2021 (UTC

I see other references on the Vivy: Fluorite Eye's Song's page using Anime News Network as a reliable source, why is this one different?--Gonavan (talk) 02:30, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• The link you used references their encyclopedia (looks like this), whereas the sources cited in the article reference their news (like this) or reviews (like this). As per
  WP:ANIME/ORS, the ANN encyclopedia is editable by anyone, thus unreliable. The news and reviews however, are not and thus perfectly reliable for use. See above for a similar conversation with another user. Link20XX (talk) 03:23, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

4meter4 (talk) 00:23, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen you accepting edit request before on the history, could you also accept mine if you can? there's an editor who just reject those requests for no reason. My only request is to copy paste the

Sorry about the lack of a quick response. I will likely do it after cleaning up your draft a bit. Link20XX (talk) 01:34, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the delay, but I have done it. Let me know if you want me to modify it and thanks for your contributions. I also recommend that you create an account. Link20XX (talk) 04:21, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This my super duper last request

WP:OR. It doesn't matter if you're late or something, at least we worked together on the article :). I don't need an account, since I won't gonna stay on Wikipedia for long. I just edit normally on other articles and fixed Pikachu's article before it will be demoted. Also, thank you so muchfor fixing and answering my edit request. Wishing you for the best! 45.119.84.59 (talk) 06:06, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

The first request was reverted by Kurisumasen. I would like to hear them out before making any changes. Link20XX (talk) 19:27, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt that he will respond, that reversion is clearly a bad faith especially without good reasons. Looking at his history, it seems that he actually have edit warring issues and only improving children's television articles without touching fictional character's articles yet. 100% my content were improvement as I placed the contents of the criticism and merchandise at the right place. This is why some Wikipedia articles remained awful, Best to revert back. 45.119.84.59 (talk) 23:27, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On 12 October 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Natsuko Takahashi, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after Natsuko Takahashi lost a screenwriting contest because her submission had the wrong theme, she was hired by the examiners? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Natsuko Takahashi. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Natsuko Takahashi), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]