Puella Magi Wiki talk:Wiki Cleanup 2025/Article formatting
~~~~) at the end of your comment.Main Topic
Continuing discussion that began on my personal talk page. Please do not insert replies into the middle of someone else's comment. If needed, you can add ---- to more clearly delineate replies.
Re: the character table / infobox...
I really think it makes more sense for information like "voice actor" or "character designer" to be put off to the side in a less conspicuous place, while information like "age" or "date of birth" or "school" is placed front and centre. So I think it might be a tough sell to argue for something that merges both those sets of information into a single table.
My main concern about placing the latter set of information in the infobox is the fact that some pages are dual characters. The existing table is set up to handle multiple characters in one table, but the infobox is decidedly not.
Re: etymology
For this one, I'd say we just need to decide where it goes. It doesn't necessarily need to be an entire section of its own, though I think there may be a few characters where the etymology section could actually be a paragraph or two.
This suggestion:
since an etymology section would be short, maybe at the very end somewhere? after trivia but before the notes.
...seems quite reasonable.
Re: powers and abilities
I'm not sure I agree with this statement:
a lot of characters don't have powers that can be extensively written about.
I think it should be possible to get at least one paragraph for every character. For characters that appear in anime or manga, literally anything magic-looking that they're ever depicted doing could be mentioned. For characters that appear only in games, the section could verbally describe their various skills in the games. Of course, many characters appear in both interactive and non-interactive media, so in that case both may apply.
There is one unfortunate point in that we also have the Magic/Personal Abilities pages that duplicates this info. It would definitely be great if we could find a way to have one place transclude the other, rather than writing it all out twice. Though, I'm not entirely certain that that's a good idea – there may be reason to want it formatted differently in the two places.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 19:14, 14 October 2025 (UTC)
I think some ideas are good and should be used but others seem iffy to me.
The Trivia section appearing under Gallery might cause chaos, since a lot of characters don't actually have their own galleries. I also fully agree with the History section, I think it should exist instead of the Appearances section all Record characters have.
The main argument - the Infobox - I'm kinda split in between. First of all I really like the JP name appearing under the English one, its just kinda stylish. I think the extra info could go in the Infobox under the condition that its grouped in collapsible boxes like fandom has it, and maybe even styled more? I kinda agree with the Character Info Table being kinda ugly, but the whole wiki is kinda bland (I have no idea how to even style it so Im not gonna suggest anything).
As for the dual character pages problem, I'd have to understand how the character variants in Record are planned to be treated first.
I think we should handle the game info for Magia Record in the same way as we're now handling it for Magia Exedra
and this would merge all non-dual variant characters into their base character page
Would the Duo pages stay as they are? If we do get rid of the non-duo pages they would look out of place in my opinion.
About the Memoria/Portraits they could actually go into Game Info, but the tables would most likely have to be collapsed, because them being at the bottom of the page doesn't create much problems, while appearing in the middle would. (Forgot to add that I agree with Game Info being lower, it makes sense for it to be higher in pages that describe units but this is a very general wiki, so it makes more sense to treat them like characters over units anytime.)
Oh yeah I also condone personal magic being on the character's page a lot more than on a Magic/Personal Abilities page, I don't really even understand why they exist.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 19:50, 14 October 2025 (UTC)
re; character table/infobox --
you have a point with the dual units. unless anyone has any suggestions, i'll try to brainstorm on any ideas that could "clean up" the page layout while also being able to accommodate 2+ characters.
re; powers and abilities --
i'm also going to have to vote against just pulling directly from Magic/Personal Abilities -- i've taken a peek at those pages, and even just skimming the promised blood section (promised blood is where most of my character knowledge lies), i see a lot of personal speculation/extrapolations, many of which are not correct or at least not at all hinted toward in canon information. there's also the fact that there is typically a pretty clear gameplay/canon divide for a lot of magireco units, where something their in-game unit is depicted as doing may not necessarily be a canonical ability and was instead added more to spice up gameplay visuals -- off the top of my head, this ranges from something as minor as yuna's attacks having a flourish of "storm magic" (something that i personally headcanon to be true) to as extreme as asahi being able to zip around in the air in her magia (an ability that is never once mentioned/referenced/shown in any story and seems to just have been added to make asahi's attacks look more interesting than just a girl shooting a musket).
for the record, with this, i'm mostly talking about magia record characters -- magireco is where i'm most knowledgeable about the franchise and yet is also where there aren't very many visual depictions of magic to go off of. for the franchise's characters overall, i think a powers/abilities section would be very useful, and i think especially for characters like the quintet, would end up being fairly filled out. but when i consider magia record, i'm not sure how to justify it getting its own section rather than simply a subsection perhaps somewhere under "personality and traits". since yuna is my mockup character, for yuna's canonical, in-story magic that we see her use, i can think of the typical magical girl abilities (strength, soul gem stuff, etc.) and her personal "target redirection" -- her "storm magic" depicted in thunderbolt burial is never shown in the story, and though the "personal abilities" page lists off "flame resistance", this is not actually ever mentioned or shown as being something that yuna is capable of and seems to be a misinterpretation of a scene from crimson resolve.
to be clear, i think the potentially non-story-canon abilities depicted in gameplay should be noted on character pages, but since quite a bit of it is only ever shown in a single animation and then never again, it would be hard to spin more than a sentence or two about it, which is what makes me hesitant to want to dedicate a whole standalone section to p&a, at least on the magireco pages.
re; trivia/gallery --
i was thinking that each character would hopefully get their own gallery section, with the "gallery" heading simply linking to the standalone page. i find separate gallery pages to be much more organized and look much cleaner than for a character's gallery to be pasted in its entirety onto the main page.
- Onitora (talk) 20:01, 14 October 2025 (UTC)
Re: Location of Trivia section
This doesn't seem like it would be an issue for most characters, as the gallery will just be a link, but for minor characters who only have a very small inline gallery… it's hard to say.
Re: Dual Unit Pages
I'm not sure how best to handle dual pages, to be honest. I do think it makes sense for them to exist. It's kinda tough to fit them into any system…
Other than the dual pages, my personal opinion is that it would be best to get rid of the separate "in Magia Record" and "in Magia Exedra" pages and have just one page for each character. So, the variants would all be merged into that character's page as well.
For dual units, one possible solution would be to transclude the game data for them into the page of both (or all three of) the involved units. However, that sounds like it could get pretty complicated, so I'm not sure that's a good solution. It also implies the dual unit has no dedicated page beyond just the stats and stuff, though I don't know if that's a bad thing.
- Re: Powers & Abilities
Broadly speaking, I agree with TheresaFrog on this point and at least partly disagree with Onitora.
i'm also going to have to vote against just pulling directly from Magic/Personal Abilities -- i've taken a peek at those pages, and even just skimming the promised blood section (promised blood is where most of my character knowledge lies), i see a lot of personal speculation/extrapolations, many of which are not correct or at least not at all hinted toward in canon information.
First of all, putting speculations in the powers and abilities section seems fair game to me, though of course there should be a good enough reason to back up any speculation (wild guessing at random has no place).
there's also the fact that there is typically a pretty clear gameplay/canon divide for a lot of magireco units, where something their in-game unit is depicted as doing may not necessarily be a canonical ability and was instead added more to spice up gameplay visuals -- off the top of my head, this ranges from something as minor as yuna's attacks having a flourish of "storm magic" (something that i personally headcanon to be true) to as extreme as asahi being able to zip around in the air in her magia (an ability that is never once mentioned/referenced/shown in any story and seems to just have been added to make asahi's attacks look more interesting than just a girl shooting a musket).
I strongly disagree on the existence of a "pretty clear" gameplay/canon divide. There definitely is such a divide, but I would say it's very blurry.
Considering your two examples, I would suggest that the Asahi case is more likely just a "visual flair", whereas the Yuna case can reasonably be interpreted as soft evidence that she may have lightning magic or whatever it is that it's depicting. This is because it's using very limited animation, so it's difficult to argue that the movement of the sprite means anything; on the other hand, the choice of particle effect seems like it should be much more meaningful.
In general, I would say that every special attack (the Magia moves in Magia Record, Special Attacks in Magia Exedra) should be considered to be roughly representative of their canon abilities. There may be some simplifications or some extra visual flair, but it's not depicting something they're actually unable to do in canon. I would also consider their other game skills (connect and blast in Magia Record; Battle Skill in Magia Exedra; and basic attacks in both) to be at least soft canon, as long as it doesn't directly contradict anything else. I would also consider that the gameplay effects of those skills (for example, the afflictions cured or inflicted) to be accurate to their abilities, but it's difficult to derive facts about their abilities from this – the afflictions are highly-abstracted, after all. A Bind affliction could represent possibly hundreds of disparate types of canon abilities, from the obvious like ribbons or vines that restrain, to less obvious skills such as, say, stopping the enemy's movement via temporal dilation. (I'm not saying the latter exists anywhere, but I would consider it to be a valid interpretation of a Bind affliction. Though personally, I think it fits for Yuzuki Rion, but I don't think there's any hard proof.)
for the franchise's characters overall, i think a powers/abilities section would be very useful, and i think especially for characters like the quintet, would end up being fairly filled out. but when i consider magia record, i'm not sure how to justify it getting its own section rather than simply a subsection perhaps somewhere under "personality and traits". since yuna is my mockup character, for yuna's canonical, in-story magic that we see her use, i can think of the typical magical girl abilities (strength, soul gem stuff, etc.) and her personal "target redirection" -- her "storm magic" depicted in thunderbolt burial is never shown in the story, and though the "personal abilities" page lists off "flame resistance", this is not actually ever mentioned or shown as being something that yuna is capable of and seems to be a misinterpretation of a scene from crimson resolve.
And then this too I have to disagree with. I don't think we should treat Magia Record characters so dramatically different from the Holy Quintet. If the Holy Quintet can have a Powers and Abilities section, then surely every character can have one – even if it's only two sentences on some of the more minor side characters in Magia Record.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 02:05, 15 October 2025 (UTC)
(going a bit out of order here; bear with me)
re; powers and abilities --
And then this too I have to disagree with. I don't think we should treat Magia Record characters so dramatically different from the Holy Quintet. If the Holy Quintet can have a Powers and Abilities section, then surely every character can have one – even if it's only two sentences on some of the more minor side characters in Magia Record.
to clarify, i did mean that i think a powers and abilities section would be useful for all (magical girl) characters -- just that for some characters it may look best as a subsection (ie "personality and traits" --> "powers and abilities") rather than having being its own distinct section. characters with just a few sentences would get a subsection and then characters with more information would have a "main" powers and abilities section, probably beneath (but not part of) "personality and traits". pages can have their subsections promoted to "main" section as needed, which i don't think would be too difficult.
First of all, putting speculations in the powers and abilities section seems fair game to me, though of course there should be a good enough reason to back up any speculation (wild guessing at random has no place)
speculation is certainly useful and is by far the lifeblood of this fandom, but imo is best restricted to where there is a clear disclaimer that it isn't necessarily canonical information. speculation is not bad, but i don't think it has any place being mixed in with confirmed canonical information, which is what wikis are to document. when it comes to Magic/Personal_Abilities/Magia_Record_Promised_Blood_Girls specifically, i should say it's less "speculation" and more "misunderstandings (?) passed off as canon fact" -- but this discussion isn't about that page so i'll stop there. my point is that i disagree that personal speculation has any place on a character's canonical page -- wikis are for documenting canonical, confirmed-by-the-text information, and i've noticed a lot of personal headcanons/speculation/what have you passed off as canonical truth on multiple pages. given this wiki's history, i think there may be some use in setting up sub-pages (?) (still not coding-smart so this may not be the actual term for them; forgive me) dedicated to character/world/etc speculation, but when it comes to a canonical page, i don't think speculation should be allowed. that's all i'm trying to get at.
I strongly disagree on the existence of a "pretty clear" gameplay/canon divide. There definitely is such a divide, but I would say it's very blurry.
this is my bad for phrasing things awkwardly/incorrectly here -- there is a clear gameplay divide to me. i do agree with you that the divide is overall rather blurry, which is why i think that, in a character's powers and abilities section, it would be wise to note when what's being described is something that's shown up in the story or is simply something that is shown in a unit animation -- this would include all of the "magic" while also not taking a firm stance in an ability being canonical or not. for example, even though i don't think asahi is able to fly like she's shown doing in her magia, i think it would be wise to include such information on her page with the caveat that it's something we only see her do in a gameplay animation and not something she's ever shown doing in the story. the viewer can come to canon/noncanon conclusions on their own; that's not for the wiki to do.
re; trivia location --
for characters with very small galleries, i think those images could just be put onto the page beneath trivia and above notes. that shouldn't clog things up too much.
- Onitora (talk) 02:53, 15 October 2025 (UTC)
I don't think we should treat Magia Record characters so dramatically different from the Holy Quintet.
This is what we should go after. A GIANT problem with this wiki is inconsistency, I mean just look at any of the newer character pages and Madoka Kaname, she has sections we didnt give to other characters such as Design or Personality, so I will always say that we need to make these pages actually consistent. That's why I also agree with Celtic on the powers section, no point in making it into a subsection, even if it looks bare. The same goes for Trivia being above the gallery for some and below for others.
I agree that we could have a Personality section for each character, but would what Appearance be? We have a Summary section thats very random on Magireco pages, it has the description of the character, their doppel description and then side story, which all is effectively game info for Magia Record. Would appearance be about that or about their design?
I believe that before we do these changes, we should start doing the game unit fixes Celtic mentioned. I still don't fully understand them but they would clean the pages up a lot. - TheresaFrog421 (talk) 14:18, 18 October 2025 (UTC)
Appearance would obviously be a textual description of the character, perhaps supplemented by images in some cases. It seems somewhat redundant when we do have images, but, well… I think there would definitely be people who find it useful if it exists. ~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 14:33, 18 October 2025 (UTC)
yes, i agree that page inconsistency is an issue on this wiki. however, i don’t agree that minor differences in section/subsection placement counts as ‘treat[ing] magia record characters so dramatically different from the holy quintet’. i don’t think the quintet should be held up as what the average character page on this wiki (or any wiki) should look like — the truth of the matter is that, at this point in the franchise, the quintet are so bloated with in-universe and out-of-universe information compared to the other characters that their pages are going to have to be a bit different to accommodate that. i think that powers and abilities would look best on non-quintet pages as a subsection; non-quintet characters are going to have much shorter p&a information, and to make it a whole section instead of a sub-area beneath personality and traits would look very awkward at such a prominent placement at the top of the page. aside from that, yes, i think it ultimately makes sense for pages to have their layouts roughly standardized for organization purposes.
(also, adding this, since i'd typed this up earlier and forgot; i've seen plenty of wikis that have character pages with a roughly standardized layout, but also with some wiggle room depending on the specific character/information available. even wikis like bulbapedia will add, take out, or rearrange entire sections for a character's page if it makes sense to do so. so, i don't think that quintet/non-quintet/etc pages need to be held to exactly the same standards, given the discrepancy in information available for the quintet and the other characters in this franchise -- in this case i think it's best if some adjustments were made just to keep the pages looking nice, since readability is going to be important here).
as for what each section would include, thank you for making me realize i haven’t explained. so, just so we’re all on the same page --
- 1. Appearance
- 1a. Magical Girl; details of the character's physical appearance. celtic minstrel noted that it seemed redundant when there are images, but i think it's important to help set up the rest of the article (most wikis, even nonfiction wikis like wikipedia, utilize descriptions even if there are images supplementing the rest of the article), as well as, as noted, to be potentially helpful for various reasons.
- 1b. Doppel; details of the character's doppel's physical appearance. largely only relevant to magireco pages.
- 2. Personality and Traits; a description of the magical girl's canonical characterization.
- 2b. Powers and Abilities; [not part of original mockup] a description of the magical girl's canonical magical abilities.
- 3. History; the character's story appearances and backstory in chronological order, broken up into subsections (ie 'crimson resolve' or 'blood(y) tragedy' for yuna's experience in cr). not an omniscient summary of various events/stories/etc featuring said character like the current side story sections.
- 4. [misc game section]; no idea what to title this one, but a section (or two) dedicated to game information, or a link to a subpage with game information, like stats, magia name, discs, etc.
- 5. Gallery; link to a character's gallery, or potentially an on-page gallery if it's small enough.
- 6. Trivia; confirmed/canonical factoids that do not otherwise fit into the article and are not vital to understanding of the character. not a section for speculation or headcanon. i emphasize this because i think a lot of editors on this wiki misunderstand what a trivia section is for; i find that inkipedia's policy article explains it well.
- 7. Etymology; [not part of original mockup] information about the character's human/doppel name; short and sweet.
- 8. Notes; additional information/elaboration for information presented in the article; footnotes. may not be necessary for most pages.
- 9. References; basically a bibliography. i think this wiki would significantly improve in quality if information was required to have a source attached; there have been numerous false magia record character rumors that can be directly traced back to unsourced misinformation being posted on this wiki as fact and nobody taking it down because they've just assumed it to be true.
overall, the placement of powers and abilities isn't really a hill i'm willing to die on. i think it'd be best for layout/readability if it were handled differently depending on the amount of information available, but i am only one person. even if i have my personal gripes, as long as this layout is roughly followed, at least for the magia record pages, i can't complain.
- Onitora (talk) 18:17, 18 October 2025 (UTC)
Hmm. I think the current side story sections could maybe be split to a separate page, like the Exedra side stories? So then each page has its own story. In some cases, various side stories lead directly into each other, so those ones could even be merged into one page for the entire flow, which could be even better since you can just read the entire sequence of events all at once. Examples of this are seen with Nanaka's and Hazuki's teams and the Tokime trio; I don't remember the exact details.
For me, I think Notes and References could be merged most of the time – many of those references would be in footnotes anyway, wouldn't they? It could be a References section that dumps the footnotes and then maybe adds some links, like the current See Also sections. It's not that I'm opposed to separating them out, though…
I had one thought about the Memoria Card or Portrait lists – do they go in part 4 or part 5? I added them to the Gallery on Café Récompense, after all, but they're not in the gallery section in any of the character pages.
Regarding 1a and 1b – I think we don't need separate subsections for girls who don't have a doppel. Just put the content of 1a directly in 1.
I'm not entirely sold on the section title of History. Another option is Backstory, but that also has problems…
I think we still need to settle on the role of the big info table and/or the infobox. As I mentioned before the conversation was shifted over here, I think OOC and IC information should be kept separate, so I'm not really sold on dumping both into the infobox…
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 20:02, 18 October 2025 (UTC)
if i can be totally honest, i don't see the need to compile summaries of stories on the wiki. if people want to read an event's story, they can...go read the event. summaries tend to give people incorrect ideas and help them to draw incorrect conclusions, anyway -- like this wiki, i've found a lot of misinformation in the english fandom stems from people reading summaries (both on this wiki and on reddit) instead of just reading stories for themselves. i'm personally going to have to vote against having dedicated "story" pages at all. i see no reason for it. this is a separate thing than having a brief rundown of a character's story involvement -- and only that character's involvement -- on that character's page in the "history" section. editing to clarify; i think event pages should be less about compiling "here's every millisecond of this event story" and more about a nice harmony of both gameplay and story. an event's page could have a little intro blurb at the top, then a quick story synopsis (4, maybe 5 medium-long paragraphs of the primary story beats; not like the long-winded reddit "summaries" created after using mtl to read a story the day it drops), then gameplay information (currency? shop? quest nodes? etc.), then maybe the text transcripts if they fit. make the pages informational and not just mtl summaries from 4chan and reddit.
"notes" would be less about listing off where information comes from and more about clarifying information in the main part of the article. like i said, think about the footnotes in a nonfiction book. to use bulbapedia as an example, their page for the character kieran from pokemon scarlet/violet has a single note regarding his listed age. it is not a source, but it clarifies that the information comes only from the french version of the game and that the information is not present in other translations of the game. that information would not be present in a "references" section, which would simply be a bibliography.
memoria cards -- with no information attached -- would go into the gallery. a character's personal memoria could go into their gameplay section, as that is relevant to gameplay. i have no preference either way on if non-personal memoria that still features the character in some capacity also goes into the gameplay section.
yes, obviously characters without doppels will not have divided subsections to facilitate a doppel.
i think "history" works just fine. it is a compilation of the character's history in the game; "backstory" would only cover things before the main story.
my opinion has not changed about the information table. i still think they should be merged. while the table is useful, i find it, in no uncertain terms, very ugly, and it breaks up the flow of the page. i see no issue in merging ic/ooc information like how it is done on bulbapedia character tables, as i mentioned previously.
- Onitora (talk) 22:44, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Text transcripts, if present, should be on a separate page for sure. I wouldn't say we need them, but EPF is going to great lengths to make them, so whatever! I don't think gameplay information like quest nodes and the like is super important, but I also wouldn't be opposed to adding that (the Magia Record fandom wiki has all that information, I believe). It's certainly true that the summaries could be compressed a lot more. I'm still in favour of keeping the big table and separating IC from OOC info. It may be partly because I put a lot of work into getting that table working, but I do question combining the two categories of info into one place. Maybe I could change my mind if I see a working example, I dunno. ~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 01:11, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
i would be willing to help create new summaries for different events whenever those pages are reworked. my current priority is the character pages, though. just to clarify, when i mention synopsis/gameplay/transcripts, i mean for pages separate from the character pages, not on the character pages. these would clutter up the character pages.
as for the infobox, i think currently my favorite example of how it's done would be bulbapedia, as i mentioned -- here is an example. i think it looks sleek while also merging both ic and ooc information, which helps to clean up the rest of the page. it's not something that's very obvious, but the way that the various pieces of information are visually grouped together (ie, age/gender/eye color/hair color have their own section) helps to keep things organized within the box. we don't have to copy this exactly, but i think something inspired by it, at the very least, would look very nice.
- Onitora (talk) 01:32, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
The reason I go for the transcripts is - they're pretty close to objective. A summary or a synopsis inherently will have a third party's interpretation and potential misremembering of the events. Being able to point at an exact quote is tremendously helpful in maintaining objectivity. Another benefit is searchability - the wiki will never have a synopsis on every topic a person could be interested in, some stuff is really niche trivia. Yet trivia that is useful nevertheless. Being able to search through the quotes yourself makes it much easier. It's also great if you remember something was stated, but have no idea where. This is also why I'm postulating on adding the AdvancedSearch extension. This is also data preservation - gachas are live-service games doomed to disappear one day, having at least a transcript saved means a story's less likely to become lost media EPF (talk) 02:53, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Wait so are we planning to get rid of the Side and Costume stories' summaries and just leave a link to a transcript? It would actually kinda help with the game section's build.
For the Memoria and Portraits going into galleries, even though I really like the way we have them now... Yeah it makes more sense for them to be in galleries instead, and just leave the personal/unique ones in the game section. I want to ask though, would we keep the Memoria/Portraits like we have them now (showing all the info) or turn them into regular gallery sections?
Also Celtic, I have an attempt at recreating Onitora's idea for the infobox on my Sandbox page, specifically for Shizuka, its not a template though. - TheresaFrog421 (talk) 12:36, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
(i apologize for my silence; i am very busy at the moment and wiki work isn't my highest priority)
my idea was less that we'll be getting rid of pages and more that the event/side story/etc pages will be transcripts instead of somebody else's interpretation of events. especially since this wiki does not always source its summaries from reliable sources, many summaries have been pasted onto the wiki without permission/credit, and i know somebody personally who threw random misinformation into one of their summaries because they knew the wiki was putting their work up without credit and without fact-checking. like epf says, transcripts are as close to objective as you can get without reading the event story for yourself as well as a form of data preservation, and as i mentioned previously, these poorly-written summaries have been the source of multiple incorrect rumors/misinformation in the english fandom.
for personal memoria in the game section, those would have stats/descriptions/etc.; for memoria in the character's gallery, i think those are best off without that information attached. of course, this creates a problem for what to do about non-personal memoria -- the fandom wiki hosts all the memoria information that anybody could ever need, so i don't think it's critically important that we do the same, but i'm not against the idea of individual pages for every memoria card, either.
i think that mockup looks wonderful. i think it would certainly tidy up the character pages. thank you for your hard work!
editing to add; this is relevant more to the wiki as a whole and not juts to character page layouts, but i think i should bring it up. a while ago, a discussion in the magia union translations discord server came up about the idea of uncredited work on the wiki. going forward (and retroactively), i think it would be wise to edit various templates to include a credits section. off the top of my head, i know i've done some witch/kimochi translations that i've uploaded to the wiki that have gone entirely uncredited unless somebody were to dig around in the page history, and i know multiple others on the mut project would appreciate credit for their work if/when it is ever used on this wiki (which, if we're to include transcripts, will be inevitable). Onitora (talk) 23:16, 21 November 2025 (UTC)
Personally, I think the best way to properly credit people would be to ask each person to personally post their work so that their name is attached to the edit in the log. But I understand that that's not going to happen every time, so when it doesn't we should certainly make sure that credit is properly given for stuff that deserves it (chiefly translations; there are likely other things too, but I think that's the biggest one). ~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 23:52, 21 November 2025 (UTC)
- Also, regarding the mockup, I would recommend transferring it to the main page of this page: here. ~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 23:56, 21 November 2025 (UTC)
i've been editing in my own translations; i don't think the edit log is a good way to track translation/etc. credits. most translators do not have wiki accounts (i do, and i can think of two others, but they are not active users) and most people are not going to be checking the edit logs for translation credits. the edit log will make crediting even less clear if it's on a page that is edited regularly. while i do have my own account and have my translations attached to my name in the wiki's edit log, i'd rather have more clear credit, and that's something i've seen expressed by other users as well, especially since quite a few mut translations have more than one person working on them -- antimony and bst tend to team up for translations rather than doing solo projects, the arc 2 main story chapters all have multiple users pitching in to help, and events like ashen revolution had larger teams working on them for one reason or another; sometimes a story gets stuck in purgatory and will then have tons of credits on it because it keeps changing hands. a single person editing the page and the edit log being their credit will simply not work in most cases. Onitora (talk) 01:13, 22 November 2025 (UTC)
I don't know if everyone would be okay with it, but can we restructure the way Character pages are set up when they have multiple appearances? Let's take Sayaka for example. Instead of having these pages for her:
- Sayaka Miki
- Sayaka Miki in Magia Record
- Sayaka Miki (scene 0 ver.), summer ver. etc.
- Sayaka Miki in Magia Exedra
- Sayaka Miki in Magia Exedra/Insert variants here, etc.
How about we have the structure be more cohesive, and have the units from Exedra, as well as Record, in the same page. For example:
- Sayaka Miki (character information and story stuff)
- Sayaka Miki/Magia Record (will have sections for each of her versions)
- Sayaka Miki/Magia Exedra (will have sections for each of her versions too, so that everything won't have to be split in a million different directions, and the information won't have to be repeated)
I just thought this would be more efficient and easier to uphold, especially since I've seen pages that don't have all the information from the character's main page to their record versions for example. Sweet Beanie (talk) 08:50, 22 November 2025 (UTC)
I think merging the Magia Record variants into the main page is broadly a good idea. I'm not sure if I like your specific proposal though. In particular, I'm not sure that having separate subpages for Magia Record and Magia Exedra is needed – is there a reason that information can't be on the main page? On the other hand, I like having the game units on subpages that are transcluded into the main page, as is currently done for Magia Exedra. ~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 17:08, 22 November 2025 (UTC)
- I filled out the mockup to cover everything from Onitora's original mockup as well as most of what we've discussed. The text is filled with a mixture of Lorem Ipsum and transclusions of real content from Shizuka's and Mami's pages. I think it probably still needs more work though – I'm not entirely confident in the headings I chose for the "game info" sections. ~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 18:42, 22 November 2025 (UTC)
- Also, if someone wanted to show off a completely different mockup, you could feel free to add an additional =Toplevel Section= on that page and put everything for your new mockup underneath that. ~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 18:43, 22 November 2025 (UTC)
While I agree with the way you want to handle Game info, I have questions.
What about the Doppel descriptions of alt units? Right now they would just cease to exist. I think it would be better if they would just be included in the game section for each unit, but to be fair I think even more things should be there, such as the unique memoria (and unique portrait for Exedra).
- Adding this, could the doppel descriptions just be added into the game info template? I still think the template deserves a remake and I think this could almost work...?
Also I don't really understand the gallery section here, the Memoria and Portraits should be on the gallery page not section, and I dont think the costume stories should be there at ALL, but I understand that there's not really any other section this belongs to... - TheresaFrog421 (talk) 12:13, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
I really like the Shizuka mockup, but I have some notes.
- Appearance: I think that the Appearance section shouldn't have the Doppel in it. Personally, I wouldn't include the sub-heading for "Magical Girl" either, and just describe all the outfits seen worn (like different versions and such), all in different paragraphs in the Appearance heading.
- In Magia Record / In Magia Exedra: I think these should have descriptions of the girls as units (like their record/exedra pages already do). Info like when they were released, their unit descriptions, Doppel Descriptions, etc. for every version. I think Costume stories (like pijamas, halloween and other outfits that dont come with units and their stories should be at the Magia Record section too)
- Notes: I think Notes should be replaced with Observations, or at least used the way Observations has been used until now, where symbolism and stuff like that should go. Units that already have these are Meiyui, Kagari, Yu, Pernelle, etc.
Here's a better summary of what I mean and how the table of contents would look like:
| Warning, this section contains spoilers. |
|---|
|
1.1 Appearance |
Sweet Beanie (talk) 12:50, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
- Doppel Descriptions: Can't we just put all the various doppel descriptions in the currently-marked place?
- Gallery: I don't think the memoria and portrait list should be carted off to a separate Gallery page. Whether or not they go in the gallery at all is an open question though – they could belong in the Game Info section instead. As for costume stories, I can agree that they don't really belong there; I plopped them into the Gallery section because they showcase the costumes themselves. If we were going with that mockup, we'd probably adjust things so that it's just the costume images and not the stories as wel.
- Unit Descriptions: That's a good idea, actually.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 15:11, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
My issue with the Doppel descriptions being in Appearance is that it doesn't feel like it fits there? Atleast not the descriptions, when that section is about their looks. It just feels like its there because there's no other place to put it in.
I believe the stats template should be changed so its showing off more, like the card art since its not gonna be above it on the page (like we have it now with each unit having a page), and I think doppels would fit in there well.
About the game sections I think it would be best if they had a "top" section, for Record that would have the costume stories and for Exedra it would have the description and the personal Portrait, since they dont change depending on unit. If we put the Memoria/Portraits there then it would be best to close those tables since they can get VERY lengthy (thats why Im more for them being in the gallery pages but I can see the other perspective). - TheresaFrog421 (talk) 15:37, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
looks like there's been quite a bit of discussion since i last posted. to try to address everything --
In particular, I'm not sure that having separate subpages for Magia Record and Magia Exedra is needed – is there a reason that information can't be on the main page?
i do not think everything should be merged into a single page. while it will make more pages to be maintained, i think it is in our best interests for organization for characters to have separate pages for each of their incarnations -- not least because the magireco timeline is not the same as the anime timeline. putting magia record story information onto sayaka's primary character page alongside information from the original anime run and rebellion would only serve to confuse people. though i don't think we should be titling the pages like "sayaka miki in magia record" like the current standard is; i think we're better off slicing that down a bit into something more like "sayaka miki (magia record)" or "sayaka miki/magia record", with these linked on the primary page.
[...] I agree with the way you want to handle Game info [...]
for the most part, me as well. i think those boxes are useful, save for the fact that i think magia record and magia exedra information should not share a page.
What about the Doppel descriptions of alt units? Right now they would just cease to exist. I think it would be better if they would just be included in the game section for each unit, but to be fair I think even more things should be there, such as the unique memoria (and unique portrait for Exedra).
i think the official doppel description(s) should go under game information alongside their gameplay information; the section under "appearance" is not intended for the official blurb to be copy-pasted into. and i also agree that personal memoria should be in the gameplay section.
Also I don't really understand the gallery section here, the Memoria and Portraits should be on the gallery page not section, and I dont think the costume stories should be there at ALL, but I understand that there's not really any other section this belongs to...
ditto.
Appearance: I think that the Appearance section shouldn't have the Doppel in it. Personally, I wouldn't include the sub-heading for "Magical Girl" either, and just describe all the outfits seen worn (like different versions and such), all in different paragraphs in the Appearance heading.
i think doppels have description priority over different outfits. aside from describing units with alternative appearances (ex; vampire yuna), i don't think we should be describing anything outside of a character's magical girl outfit, her witch/doppel, and maybe her school uniform.
I think Costume stories (like pijamas, halloween and other outfits that dont come with units and their stories should be at the Magia Record section too)
i vote against having summaries of events/stories/etc. on a character's page, even if that story is associated with a costume for that character.
Notes: I think Notes should be replaced with Observations, or at least used the way Observations has been used until now, where symbolism and stuff like that should go.
hard no on putting speculation on characters' canonical pages. this is how misinformation spreads and headcanons are passed on as fact. given the history of this wiki and the nature of this franchise in general, i am open to the idea of characters having a linked "speculation" subpage for people to mess around on. but not on the main page that is intended to compile canonical information. that is not what wikis are for, and while i feel mean bringing it up, this is a big reason why this wiki's reputation is currently so poor.
regarding memoria -- i think personal memoria with its gameplay information should be on the character's page, beneath the gameplay section. memoria that is not personal but otherwise showcases the character in some capacity should be in the gallery subpage. the fandom wiki currently hosts every memoria card and is currently where most users go when they want to look up a card's information. if we want to also host gameplay information, i do not mind, but i think we should follow in the lead of cards having separate pages with that information, rather than users needing to look up cards on character pages. especially since character pages often do not have every memoria card that features that character.
- Onitora (talk) 15:48, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
I believe the stats template should be changed so its showing off more, like the card art since its not gonna be above it on the page (like we have it now with each unit having a page), and I think doppels would fit in there well.
- In that case, perhaps we should start mocking up an alternate stats template as well?
aside from describing units with alternative appearances (ex; vampire yuna), i don't think we should be describing anything outside of a character's magical girl outfit, her witch/doppel, and maybe her school uniform.
- I don't think there's a need to describe the school uniform unless they're a character who "customizes" it. Mostly I'd say the description should cover costume-agnostic aspects (hair, eyes, build, etc), the magical girl costume, and for those that have one, the magical girl swimsuit.
- But while that's the bare minimum, I think it's fine to cover other costumes that they're seen in as well. This could include costumes that have a dedicated unit (eg vampire Yuna), costumes that have a dedicated story (eg tiger Shizuka), and even just random costumes that appear in a story (eg pyjamas, winter clothes, just casual clothes, etc). I don't think these are necessary to have, mind you, but they would be reasonable to include if someone feels like writing that description.
hard no on putting speculation on characters' canonical pages. this is how misinformation spreads and headcanons are passed on as fact.
- I really think it's fine to include some speculation on the main page as long as it's clearly marked using the Theory templates… but only small speculations, like bullet points or a short paragraph. Detailed theories definitely don't belong on the main page.
regarding memoria -- i think personal memoria with its gameplay information should be on the character's page, beneath the gameplay section. memoria that is not personal but otherwise showcases the character in some capacity should be in the gallery subpage. the fandom wiki currently hosts every memoria card and is currently where most users go when they want to look up a card's information. if we want to also host gameplay information, i do not mind, but i think we should follow in the lead of cards having separate pages with that information, rather than users needing to look up cards on character pages. especially since character pages often do not have every memoria card that features that character.
- I don't think the memoria/portrait list should be relegated to a subpage (unless that subpage is "the Magia Record/Exedra game info page"). It's easy to make it be initially collapsed though if you're just worried about space. And the way the lists are built automatically by the wiki software means that character pages actually will have every memoria card featuring that character (assuming they're all tagged properly).
I prefer to have everything about a character nominally on one page. There could be subpages for organization, but I'd prefer them to be transcluded into the main page to keep everything together. I know that the Magia Record and primary timelines are different, but the characters aren't especially different in the two timelines. We could link to the subpages instead of transcluding them, I suppose; it's not what I'd prefer, but I guess it would work. (This would be like how many pages link to their gallery instead of directly including it.)
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 17:08, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
In that case, perhaps we should start mocking up an alternate stats template as well?
Yes, no matter if we put the info on the main page or a /Magia Record subpage, the Template should be expanded.
I have an attempt? on my Sandbox page but its rough, I think the Card display is good, the only character that has 1 card is the valentines Kuro, and she's an outlier anyway so I don't think we should accommodate the whole template for her.
It's probably easy to tell that I used the Exedra template we have as inspo, but that's because I just like it tbh.
Tbh Im fully okay with the Doppel being out of the template, just still in the game section, thats because I don't think the way I implemented it, is very good :sob:
I'm sure there's useful stuff that could be added to the template that I didn't add. Also treat my design like the infobox I made, its not a working Template. - TheresaFrog421 (talk) 18:29, 24 November 2025 (UTC)
That mockup's not bad. There's the question of how an EX skill would be inserted into it though, and it feels a bit weird that Connect/Magia are side-by-side but only Doppel gets its own row. I also agree that the Doppel Info section isn't great, but it's not terrible, I guess… I think I wouldn't give the English and Japanese text equal weight like that though. Maybe put it in tabs like in the Witch template. ~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 20:12, 24 November 2025 (UTC)
I decided to fully remove the Doppel info section (after being deadset on it being there), even if it looked good I think it should be separate from the Game Info, the same way the Spirit Enhancement Data is separate. I also moved the Doppel/2nd Magia next to the Connect and Magia, it looks way better. I think the current look is best.
The last thing I see a problem with is the EX skill, mostly the scaling, because it doesnt fit with the other skills, that are scaled by the unit rarity. I think I could do it like the previous doppel/like how we have the crystalis on the exedra template, but I honestly prefer the first idea.
| Connect | Magia | Magia 2 | Ex Skill | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Let's Come Together as One(一緒に環になろう) |
 Due Anima(デュエ・アニマ) |
Grief-Filled Farewell (フェアウェル・グリーフ) |
 An Unreachable Power
| ||
| ★4 | Attack UP [VII] & HP Restore & Chance to Critical | Damage to All Enemies [V] & Attack UP (All / 3T) & Damage UP Versus Witches (All / 3T) & Revive Ally | - | 1 - 3 slots | Defense UP [I] (All) & Negate Critical Hit [2x] (Self) |
| ★5 | Attack UP [IX] & HP Restore & Chance to Critical | Damage to All Enemies [VII] & Attack UP (All / 3T) & Damage UP Versus Witches (All / 3T) & Revive Ally | Damage to All Enemies [IX] & Attack UP & All Disk Effects UP & Damage Cut (All / 3T) | 4 slots | Defense UP [II] (All) & Negate Critical Hit [2x] (Self) |
| Connect | Magia | Magia 2 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Let's Come Together as One (一緒に環になろう) |
Due Anima (デュエ・アニマ) |
Grief-Filled Farewell (フェアウェル・グリーフ) | |
| ★4 | Attack UP [VII] & HP Restore & Chance to Critical | Damage to All Enemies [V] & Attack UP (All / 3T) & Damage UP Versus Witches (All / 3T) & Revive Ally | - |
| ★5 | Attack UP [IX] & HP Restore & Chance to Critical | Damage to All Enemies [VII] & Attack UP (All / 3T) & Damage UP Versus Witches (All / 3T) & Revive Ally | Damage to All Enemies [IX] & Attack UP & All Disk Effects UP & Damage Cut (All / 3T) |
| Ex Skill | |||
| An Unreachable Power
| |||
| 1 - 3 slots | Defense UP [I] (All) & Negate Critical Hit [2x] (Self) | ||
| 4 slots | Defense UP [II] (All) & Negate Critical Hit [2x] (Self) | ||
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 21:39, 24 November 2025 (UTC)
i'm just going to address one thing here, because it's all i have the time for right now --
I really think it's fine to include some speculation on the main page as long as it's clearly marked using the Theory templates… but only small speculations, like bullet points or a short paragraph. Detailed theories definitely don't belong on the main page.
i really hate to be harsh, but allowing speculation and headcanon is why this wiki is treated as a joke in a lot of serious fan spaces. no, the wiki should not be allowing random users to insert their personal speculation onto canonical character pages, directly next to canonical information. this is how misinformation is confused for canon. this is how misinformation has spread and continues to spread throughout the english fandom. i know that this wiki was made simply to compile old 4chan speculation from when the anime was still airing, not to act as an objective information source as it is attempting to now, which is why, to stay true to the site's roots and to the nature of this fanbase in general, i am not against the idea of a subpage (ie, Yuna Kureha/Speculation) to compile these things. but not on the canon pages. not directly beside canonical information, disclaimer or no.
the amount of very incorrect speculation and other information on this wiki is why i decided to attempt to pitch in. if the wiki continues to allow blatant headcanon on pages, then i am sorry, but i don't think that there is much to be done to clean it up. if this comes off as rude, then i apologize. Onitora (talk) 21:36, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
Re: Everything: I really agree that there's a lot of speculation and incorrect information overall. A sleek new infobox to not confuse all the meta facts versus the in-universe facts would be great.
For the powers, there's been a lot of cases where something was a misundertsanding, or just incorrect. There was the time Karin couldn't steal magic items even though she stole grief seeds in her mss, there was the assumption that Himena could do coordinator stuff because she synthesizes powers, there was Yuna being immune to fire because of one CG, there was Sudachi teleporting because she grabbed Shizuka once, etc. I think it's a good idea to not only go through all of the characters, but to also label when something is in their story, or their record animations, or even in cases where it is only their magia archive entries (Gunhild comes to mind)
Frankly, I think we should also do away with spoiler tags for text. The wiki page is meant for spoilers. I think that if there is any spoiler tag stuff left, the tags at the start of the articles (with clear labeling of which media is being spoiled). And even then it should only be for the latest media. Forgive me but I think stuff like Arc 1 should be public knowledge by now.
Speculation doesn't deserve to be next to canon material, as that makes it super confusing. I think a section for ==Speculation== or even a sub-page would be ideal. If it were up to me, it would be next to Trivia or something like that. Community theories are welcome, but not when placed next to canon.
As for replacing record event summaries with transcripts, that would solve a lot of issues, especially since Exedra events are already getting that treatment. I think the available summaries should still have a place somewhere, but maybe a sub-section or sub-page lik /plot. Even then, a lot of them use different languages, come from weird places like 4chan, but if they're listed at the top then a reader would know what to expect.
Frankly, a way to remove a lot of speculation would be to use references. 99% of wikis already use them. Forive me if I don't know the tools or guidelines for the wiki, but I have a plan for everything after the formats / templates / other details are decided upon:
- Phase 0: We decide on the rules for this cleanup plan that I have listed below. If anyone wants to change it, I'm willing to do so.
- Phase 1: Set the new rules (Before w start editing)
- We need to finalize the details on the infobox that doesn't confuse meta facts and in-universe facts. Once it's ready, we make it the official template for everyone. Make a list of the characters to go through and implement this into one by one.
- Write the Style Giude: We need one page that spells out the exact order for sections (like putting Speculation next to Trivia, or on its own sub-page) and what goes where. This will stop people from just adding stuff randomly.
- Remove the Spoiler Tags: As a rule, we should do away with spoiler tags for text. The wiki is for spoilers. We can have one clear warning at the top of an article, but stuff like Arc 1 should be public knowledge by now.
- Phase 2: Make a Master List and THrow Away the Junk
- List Everything: We make a master list of every character, event, and topic page. We tag them all with a [[Category:Cleanup Needed]] so we know what’s left to do.
- Delete the Meme Pages: We go through the list and immediately tag any pages that are just for memes or jokes with [[Category:Deletion Candidate]] or something. Then we delete them. No reason to keep stuff like Poorf*g if you ask me, this isn;t 4chan. Alternatively, a page specifically for these meme stuff can be made.
- Phase 3: The Actual Cleanup (Page-by-Page)
This is where we take pages from the Cleanup Needed list and move them through stages.
For a CHARACTER PAGE:
Step 1:
Read the page and mark every case of misunderstanding or incorrect info. We all know the ones: like Karin not being able to steal magic items, references to Livia's husbad, etc.
Figure out what needs references and if one can't be found, we ask around then remove it if we can't find the reference for it.
Step 2:
Fix the Powers: We go through the Powers section and label when something is in their story, their Record animations, or just from their Magia Archive entries (like with Gunhild). We remove anything that’s just a guess, but I think it's enough to just say things like "Accordig to Magia Archive, Ranka's unique magic is blah blah blah. This might likely mean that blah blah lah"
Cut the Speculation: As I said before, we move any theorycrafting off the main page, or at least its own sub-section for the character since a lot of characters won't have any speculation.
Add the New Infobox and Layout: We put in the new sleek infobox and reorganize the page to follow the new section order.
Add References: We add sources for everything. This is the best way to kill baseless claims.
Step 3: Final Check.
Someone else checks the page to make sure it’s clean and follows all the new rules. Then it gets marked as don eor the category for the cleanup needed is removed.
For an EVENT PAGE:
Step 1: As Before
Step 2:
Replace the Summary with a Transcript: As for replacing Record event summaries with transcripts, that would solve a lot of issues. The main page should have the full transcript, just like Exedra events are already getting that treatment.
Archive Old Summaries: The available summaries should still have a place somewhere, but on a /plot sub-section or sub-page. At the top, we list where they came from—like if they're from 4chan or use different languages—so a reader knows what to expect at least. Making summaries of the events would be the lengthiest process we could ever hope to achieve, but transcripts would circumvent that issue.
Step 3: Final check.
Phase 4: Track Progress
We use the category system to track everything. We’ll have categories like Cleanup In Progress and Cleanup Verified so everyone can see what’s left to do.
The main Wiki Cleanup page will have a list showing our progress, or even templates we've agreed to use, etc.
Once a page is done, we can just keep track of events and new stuff that would change the page's status quo
I believe this plan is straightforward. If most people are up for it, (and after we've decided on what standards we'll use) we can continue. What do you all think? Sweet Beanie (talk) 14:11, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
I agree with the plan, tho we still have a lot to decide on.
- 1. Where do the Memoria and Portraits go?
I still believe it should be the gallery, them having a certain character in themselves doesnt actually mean anything unless theyre personal/unique, now I also know that the Memoria don't really appear anywhere else but the character pages, so I can understand why the info should still be kept, but the tables are VERY big, its usually not too much of an issue because of the game character pages (like Sayaka in Record or Iroha in Exedra) these help split these out but together they're way too big, now obviously this can be fixed by just collapsing them from the start, but then they would be awkardly placed in the game info. The Gallery pages are already giant, so these tables being in them wouldnt be that weird.
- 2. Speculation
I agree with Sweet Beanie, that it should be a section of the page somewhere low, most speculation is too small to warrant a whole subpage for it. I think we could even hide them in something like the spoiler boxes we have, just to make SURE nobody mistakes it for official info. I do believe Speculation can exist on this wiki, like the whole Nighthawk is Kuroe and AQ is Alina thing, but I agree that it shouldnt be weaved in with trivia.
- 3. Record Game Section
To be fair I think this one is decided on, just needs actual working on, like the Stats Template being updated (I could do it IF I UNDERSTOOD THE TEMPLATE), the doppels, personal memoria and costume stories, none of that is done yet. Also where the game sections are, I believe they can be on the main page, the info is always hidden anyway, tho the naming on the current mockup page feels rough, but I know that making it ==Game Info== and then ===Magireco=== might make it look weirder, with how small the headers would be.
About the event summaries and transcripts I guess I'm more for transcripts too, but I dont really know how to handle that, so I'll just stay out of this. - TheresaFrog421 (talk) 16:08, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
I only have two things to say about SweetBeanie's proposal, which mostly sounds good:
- I'm against deleting the "binbou-chan" page. It was already moved to the Community namespace in any case, so I don't think anyone will be mistaking it for canon.
- I'm against putting event transcripts on event pages. An event page should at most summarize the plot of the event. The existing event pages are way to verbose in their so-called "summaries" - a summary should be at most five paragraphs and definitely not several sections. Then it can link to the transcript on a separate page, for people who want it. And sure, we can also link to the older "summaries" as well. (They are not summaries though. They are a description of the entire event. I'm not sure what the word is for this, but "summary" is not it.)
I do like the idea of having a separate section for "Speculation". It would go after "Trivia", and would always use the theory templates. It would be omitted if there is no speculation. I'd also say that we should limit such speculation to only "highly plausible" theories. It's hard to say what makes a theory "highly plausible", but I'd say it at least needs to have multiple points of support in canon. If there are more off-the-wall theories to cover, like the "Nighthawk is Kuroe and AQ is Alina" theory, they could go on a separate page if someone really wants them to be on the wiki, but that sort of thing doesn't belong on the main page for sure.
Not putting any speculation whatsoever on the main page isn't great because there are some things that are technically speculation (as canon doesn't officially confirm it) but which appear to be an obvious consequence of some aspect of canon. Of course, if we decide these things aren't speculation at all, we could revist the issue of speculation on the main page. (Sorry, I don't have an example off the top of my head.)
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 18:50, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
It was long ago, but there were times when I wasn't alone. / Once there were three of us around, and another time it was just two of us. And there was the time I was part of a large group, I guess. / But maybe the most memorable time was when we were a trio. - A-Q, Lighthouse Memories Episode 4
Though I guess if I thought about it enough... / ...I'd get a hankering for strawberry milk, since it's been ages. - A-Q, Lighthouse Memories Episode 5
I think that in my case, it was because I had the power to create Labyrinths. - A-Q, Lighthouse Memories Episode 7
Name: I found a drawing.
A-Q: Is it one of my pieces? And more importantly, is it worth all this fuss? [...] Oh... It's a kid's drawing. I was looking forward to seeing some lost masterpiece you'd discovered.
- Green in color
- VA - Ayana Taketatsu
- Name starts with A
-
Canvases, paint...
-EPF (talk) 21:50, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
I get why people would want to make the claim based on that, but I don't think any of those can be seen as more than just coincidences. Lots of people like strawberry milk, for example. And lots of people draw art. Admittedly there aren't very many that can make labyrinths, but there's no reason to assume that Alina is unique in that regard (even if she is unique in that regard amongst canon characters). Besides, isn't being part of a large group actually very unlike Alina? A-Q's personality in general is very unlike Alina, in fact. In short… sure, I can see the argument, but a pile of coincidences isn't really enough to merit putting it on Alina's or A-Q's main page.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 05:06, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
For the Memoria and Portraits, I think it would be reasonable to have a sub-page for it entirely. There's way too many of them. We can have them like: Sayaka Miki/Memoria.Sweet Beanie (talk) 14:33, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
Quintet characters already have pages for cards. Gallery:Sayaka_Miki/Cards EPF (talk) 19:15, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
I'm not sure how good of an idea this is, but maybe we should directly change (or add an option in-) Template:Magia Record Memoria List and Template:Magia Exedra Portrait List to be smaller and simpler, to fit into a gallery page nicely. Having a separate page for memoria/portraits seems nice but would that mean that Candy (who has a total of 1 memoria and 3 portraits) should get her own page too? I think there's just too many witches/characters that have a small ammount of memoria/portraits to justify each one of them getting a page for those. In my idea the new templates would look more like the <gallery> syntax (again to fit into the galleries) and only keep the name and rarity of the memoria/portrait. This does sacrifice details which is not good but the detail is kind of the root of our problem. The details would still be visible on the memoria's/portrait's page, which in my opinion is okay enough. To be fair I have no idea how this would be done. - TheresaFrog421 (talk) 00:52, 14 February 2026 (UTC)
I have an accurate example of how it would look on my Sandbox page as of now. - TheresaFrog421 (talk) 23:05, 17 February 2026 (UTC)
Im just gonna do it. - TheresaFrog421 (talk) 17:29, 19 February 2026 (UTC)
What do we do with the External Links? Its not on the image mockup or the page mockup. - TheresaFrog421 (talk) 17:13, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
Hmm… there's no See Also section either… they could go in References, but that doesn't quite fit. I think either leaving them as External Links or putting them in a See Also section is probably best? ~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 23:11, 20 February 2026 (UTC)
There might be too many External links in some cases? Like Iroha is gonna have WAY too many, my only suggestion is that we either put them in the unit pages (maybe with <noinclude>) or get rid of them, but I guess since they're here in the first place, someone does care about them.
Also I believe the Infobox is fully finished! As of now its on Template:Infobox character/Test and fully documented. I decided to add unique colors to the infobox just so it looks nicer, we do that for Witches already so why not for everyone.
As of now I believe the only things to migrate before we can fully start this are Trivia and the External Links sections, but tbh I dont wanna do it. I have a lot of time but I already migrated all the Magireco Units into their own pages and all images so I believe its fair (╥﹏╥). - TheresaFrog421 (talk) 15:18, 13 March 2026 (UTC)
I don't understand. Why would Iroha have so many external links? Why would any page have a lot of external links at the bottom (as opposed to sprinkled throughout)? ~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 17:01, 15 March 2026 (UTC)
Iroha has so many because of how many record units she has, and yeah I agree that putting them on the bottom is worse, but I dont really know what you mean by sprinkled throughout? If you mean like what I said, where they would just be on the unit's page then yeah, I agree.
Also I have another thing I want to talk about, infobox images, cause right now we have pretty tight rules of what we use for them, with that usually being their appearance in their original media. But I think it would just be easier AND look better if we didnt do it this way. NOW I understand, right now we have In Magia Record pages, so I understand why the manga characters don't use images from record, as to differentiate the pages, but... after we get rid of them there should be nothing stopping us from using them. I already tested a LOT of characters with the infobox, and they all look way better when they use the profile images from record than just the colorless images from their original mangas. Its not like those images arent drawn by their artists, and theyre not Magia Record exclusive either, I mean Yuma has her art reused for her 3star Kioku for Exedra. Also there are pages that already break the rules such as Umika using an image from Madoka Magica Online. There are exceptions, such as the suzune characters already having colored images in their infoboxes, so I wouldnt change them, and also characters like Minou, her profile image is pretty cluttered, and idk if it would be good to use it in the infobox.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 12:50, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
You… haven't really answered the question of why Iroha would have so many external links at the bottom. I also don't know why you took "sprinkled throughout" to mean "on the unit's page" either. I probably wouldn't be asking if I knew what the links were.
I don't think the infobox image rules are as tight as you're saying. I know I've been saying that, ideally, the infobox image should be taken from the original media or auxiliary materials associated with it (like promotional materials for example). That's my opinion; was it really an actual rule? I do think it's typically better to have a colour image when available, though. Preferably still from or related to the original media. I definitely don't think it's good to turn things into "every character page now features an image from Magia Exedra in the infobox".
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 13:29, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
For why Iroha would have so many I said "Iroha has so many because of how many record units she has", and for why at the bottom, thats just because that's how they are now. Right now the links are at the bottom of the pages. If I took the sprinkled throughout wrongly then just explain it T-T, and if you don't know what links I'm talking about, I'm talking about the external links to youtube videos that appear at the bottom of character/old unit pages (ex: Iroha Tamaki#External links). I (also) said that I wouldnt mind just not keeping them but if they're there, that means someone cares about them.
The infobox thing is not an actual rule, its just that when you said it, I treated it like one, so dont mind the wording. You're right that using images from the original media would be preffered, but sometimes the Magireco images are just better, they represent the characters better (because they're colored). You're right about Exedra, but like I said, the profile images from Magireco (that I was saying are the images we should use) are drawn by their og artists, I wouldnt choose using a 3D render over a 2D one (unless we dont have any other like Yotsugi Ononoki right now), and its not even the case for Sumire and Fuka, where they still use their 2D images.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 13:41, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
Okay, so bundling them at the bottom of the page definitely isn't the best look, though it's also nice to have them all together in one place… hmm… I could see some of them being moved to unit pages, perhaps.
I think this could even be a section separate from External Links, or even a separate page, which links to videos for everything related to a particular character.
Ultimately I don't know which approach is best. All three (four?) of the ones I just mentioned have significant downsides. Putting them at the bottom of the page (whether in External Links or a separate section) sorta looks like clutter and takes up a lot of space. Putting them on the unit pages makes them much, much less visible, and thus hard to find. Putting them on a separate page means a new page for every Magia Record/Exedra character to hold these links.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 13:59, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
Maybe one page where ALL external links are all in one place? It would be VERY cluttered, but we could use the {{#ev:youtube||}} to make it look better. Imo putting them in unit pages is the most "correct" way of doing this, but this idea seems good too in my opinion. It would be called Gallery:Magia Record/Videos or something like that (definitely needs a better name). I'm not sure how it would be better to split up the videos though, by character, by type of animation or just by units. Idk in my opinion its the best way just because it doesnt clutter up any other page, but it also has the problem of being hard to find. What do you think?
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 14:23, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
Hmm, that's not a bad idea – using the Gallery namespace for videos seems like a pretty reasonable thing to do.
As you say, the actual organization of the Gallery page (or pages) could be done in a number of different ways, but whatever way is chosen, it can be linked to in the See Also section on all Magia Record pages.
My thought on organization would be to split it into the following pages:
- Gallery:Magia Record/Main Story Videos – divide the page into 5 sections for Main Story Arc 1, Another Story Arc 1, Main Story Arc 2, Another Story Arc 2, and Puella Historia
- Gallery:Magia Record/Event Story Videos – divide the page into sections by topic (eg Summer, Valentines, Tanabata) or year; Scene 0 could go here too, or maybe on a subpage of its own
- Gallery:Magia Record/Magical Girl Story Videos – divide the page into sections by faction or city, perhaps? Costume stories can go here too.
- Gallery:Magia Record/Magical Girl Quotes – as above
There are a lot of other options too, and I'm not sure if the above list is comprehensive. (And I realize that the first two items on the above list weren't what we were directly discussing here, but it does make sense to deal with them in the same way.)
We could then do a similar breakdown for Magia Exedra. Probably one page per section in the in-game Story Gallery.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 18:00, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
I think your list is perfect, its really only missing transformation and battle animations (Magias, Doppels and 2nd Magias), though they could go under one page (like right now in the Exeternal Links sections theyre both under Gameplay Videos).
Also I dont see a need to split the character based pages by anything really, but if by anything I would just split them the same way that theyre split on Magia Record Characters.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 19:14, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
The Magia Record Characters split doesn't really work if you're grouping by character – despite the name, that page is a list of units, not characters, so the same character appears in several different places.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 23:14, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
I meant the way the characters are split on there, without the units, so like Arc 1, Arc 2, Puella Historia, Side Story and all that (just with some changes like not merging all the manga characters together).
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 23:44, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
Hmm… I suppose that might be okay, since it's just a list of links for each character… unless you were thinking of using the Youtube embed code and formatting it like a gallery? In that case it'd probably be better to break them down into smaller categories than "by arc" would produce.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 00:01, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
I would prefer to use the Youtube embed code yes, I dont really see why we should split them THAT much though? Most characters will not have a lot of videos, plus we have the pages split by type of videos already.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 10:09, 15 April 2026 (UTC)
Well, videos probably take up more space than a character icon, right? Maybe I'm wrong about this… they definitely take up more space than a list of links though.
But, I suppose it would be better to actually see it before making a final judgement.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 01:58, 16 April 2026 (UTC)
Having seen what you did, I can say: I think it's very bad. There are way, way, waaay too many headers. I think having one header per character is a no go… and without one header per character, it may indeed make sense to subdivide some of those sections.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 17:08, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
I don't really know what you mean (like how you plan on dividing), but go for it.
- Oh yeah, I suggest you start on Gameplay Videos, as Story Videos has a lot of missing videos.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 17:37, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
Are you gonna start? I dont wanna rush you cause I tend to take my time too T-T but I don't want to start working on Gallery:Magia Record/Magical Girl Quotes before you change how the videos are separated.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 19:24, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
Sorry – I'm still not sure quite how best to divide them. Like, there are some obvious subdivisions (Crescent Moon Villa, Wings of the Magius, Nanaka's team, Mito's trio), but most of them aren't so clear; and even the ones that clear might be a bit too much.
Another option would be to not subdivide them at all – just make it an alphabetical list of all characters, like on the ages page.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 20:21, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
By the way – this isn't related to the above question, but I think it would be worth making an **Appellations** section part of the standard layout – like on Emily's page, for a more extreme example. It would cover both how the character refers to others (for example, Kanagi usually uses the surname with -kun, except with those she's especially close to, in which case she uses the surname alone), and how others refer to the character. ~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 18:34, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
That seems like useful info, but I think that info could just go into Personality and Traits? Emily could get a subsection just for her nicknames list but I feel like for others this should just go to Personality and Traits. Though maybe it should be a subsection of Personality and Traits? I don't think this is a bad idea, just not as its own section. - TheresaFrog421 (talk) 08:48, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
This isn't related to anything previous too, but should we have a to-do list on top of the main page? It would be clearer what's being done/what is planned, cause right now its not that clear. - TheresaFrog421 (talk) 11:16, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
Yeah, I think it makes sense for it to be a subsection of Personality and Traits. Emily is a bit of an outlier in that she has a unique nickname for everyone, but I think quite a few characters have unique nicknames for at least a few people, so I think it's worth a separate section. That said, perhaps there are some characters where it would amount to a single line and thus a whole section might be excessive… but regardless, I think it's good to get that info in there.
As for a to-do list, that's a great idea! ~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 12:59, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
Oh god I just remembered something we need to discuss, how do we make sure we dont edit pages at the same time and cause edit conflicts? I know we currently plan to categorize the pages that need fixing, so a DPL could be an easy list maker for us, but I was thinking maybe we should just make a regular list, that people can edit to write their username next to a page, save the edit, go edit the page, and when theyre done they delete the page from the list and claim another one. Again this probably has flaws im not thinking about right now, but I really dont want edit conflicts to happen. I also have no idea how many people will do this??? T-T The only ones talking here actively are me and Celtic. - TheresaFrog421 (talk) 15:06, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
I'd think the main thing to be worried about is someone making a small correction while you're rearranging the page, since there's no way to tell that you're currently working on it. The only thing you can really do about that is look at the change they made and manually make the same change in your copy (if it still applies).
The list you proposed for assigning pages to certain people makes sense if we expect multiple people to work on reformatting, but it looks like there may only be one or two people working on that, so it wouldn't have much of a benefit.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 19:29, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
Do you have any idea how to even check if other people want to do this too? I know I do, but with how we're the only ones talking here I'm worried T_T
(If you're not Celtic and you want to help, please say something... anything T-T)
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 19:38, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
I'd like to help, but it is a bit unclear what the template/format that's been decided on is. I specifically avoided this discussion because it got a bit too lengthy so I imagine others did the same too. Many pages have issues like having the side story section repeated multiple times, etc. Nobody would have issues with streamlining character pages at all. I'd like to ask:
- what is the ultimate decision on character sub-pages? Is it still necessary to have a page family for a character? I'll make up a version for Yu to use her as my example, just imagine she appeared outside Magia Record, has many alts in Magia Record and also in Exedra (and yeah I also know we're using the full name for her, but just ignore that for the example, also just to clarify this version is tedious and too much in my opinion):
- Yu
- Yu in Magia Record
- Yu (Kimono)
- Yu (Windrider)
- Yu (Scene 0)
- Ultimate Yu
- Holy Yu
- Rumor Yu
- Yu and Shi Duo
- Yu in Magia Exedra
- Yu/Winter Killer
- Yu in Magia Record
- Yu
Btw for this I just suggest we consolidate it into a singular character page, which will have the entries for magia record, exedra, alts, duos, etc. That's how every other wiki usually has them.
- Second Question: for the parts like character history, appearances, symbolism/observations, can we start with some pages just to showcase what we mean to achieve? We can use characters like Mami or Sayaka to show that of course, but I brought up Yu specifically because her page is much more complete than others' with her backstory, appearances, personality, etc.
As for the character edit order, we can just call dibs and split it by a weekly basis. We can just check if the characters we've chosen to do have been called dibs on by Sunday overall, then if not, they're free real-estate. We can also check if anyone has started working on them with edits that very day. A masterlist for the characters, and tasks which have to be done would be helpful too.
~ Sweet Beanie (talk) 09:00, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
Thank you for wanting to help.
For your first question we already decided to delete most of the pages, you can see how the planned pages will look on the main page of this project. We will keep pages like Ultimate Madoka and Holy Mami, because they are distinct enough, and restricting them to their main forms is unnecessary. The Magia Record units already have their own pages, separate from the X (Variant) or X in Magia Record pages.
For your second question, we already the Article Mockup on the main page, but if you mean a more detailed one (as in with direct and correct info), then feel free to either edit the mockup, or make your own based on it.
If you want to see more things that are planned, see the To-do list on the main page, Its still WIP, but its based off your original list.
(I forgot to comment on the edit order) I don't really know what you mean? Do you mean like people choose their characters on Sunday, or do they choose them throughout the week and only start working on them after Sunday, or something else completelly?
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 10:01, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
Yeah, I meant specifically something like "Hey I'll do Puella Care so don't touch those." but if we want to be more planned about it, by using a list of characters/pages to consolidate, and then a simple note next to it, and if it's not gotten started within the week noted, their name is removed and someone else takes it.
Like this:
- Iroha Tamaki
Iroha Tamaki in Magia Record - Sweet Beanie- Iroha Tamaki in Magia Exedra - Sweet Beanie
And then after the sub-pages are consolidated, then all of Iroha is done. There also needs to be someone who just fixes up the main character's page, but only after the alts are integrated in there. When that also happens we can do the del tag like I did with record. In the example I showed, I finished Record Iroha and am planning on doing Exedra Iroha next. If I haven't even started by Sunday, or whenever it is that someone else feels like is a long enough time, someone can just put their name there and get to it.
For this we can have a few stages with lists to keep up the quality for every character. Like we can have:
- to be selected (the pool of unselected articles)
- in development (someone puts their name here next to the moved page name, articles shouldn't be listed here without someone's username next to it)
- integrated into main article (for the alts mostly, some unimportant characters like Rion can staright up skip this cuz they only have the one unit in one game, but this can also be used for alt outfits and such)
- quality assurance (just final check, or we put an article here if someone else feels like they're done with it but you feel like it still needs work)
- done
As for the Shizuka Mockup, I can see that her New Years alt isn't there. I think that's a missed opportunity to not have a hundred pages with minimal information on them. It would easily fit below the "In Magia Record" section and the same goes for Kioku alts like say Hallowen Mami. But if we decide against it, we should list the alts in the main pages at least and leave those versions solely for gameplay stuff, since there are alts with different powers and stuff but who only appear once. I think that details like story stuff and different powers should be kept in the main character page regardless.
I also suggest that for characters with heavy symbolism like Pernelle, we can have the "Observations" (or whatever title we wanna use for that section) right above trivia, or below history. However that section may now be the Notes part so that may be unnecessary to begin with.
I hope this is coherent.
~ Sweet Beanie (talk) 13:32, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
OMG Wait I saw that NY Shizuka is there and so are the Mami exedra alts. Nevermind me I just can't read apparently. Maybe making the tabs colored to match the uni/alt colors would be nice but otherwise it's all gucci. Sorry again. ~ Sweet Beanie (talk) 15:21, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
Okay first of all, we're not working on the X in Magia Record and X in Magia Exedra pages at all, we're planning to delete them/make them redirects. This is why all the units are on the mockup already, the list will only consist of the main pages of characters.
I agree with (and like) the list idea, should it be a table or just a normal list? A table would be easier to keep control of in my opinion.
Also... I should have asked this before, but should we focus on actually filling the pages with info, or just leave them as stubs, cause I know it would be best to just straight up finish them, but I don't know a lot of characters' personalities and powers, so i fear I would only format the pages but not actually write the things :(
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 16:15, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
Suggestion: If you go with a list where people claim articles, I'd recommend tagging the ones you're doing with your signature, ie by adding ~~~~ at the end of the line. That automatically drops in a date as well, so you can see at a glance when it was claimed. ~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 17:59, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
I forgot to respond to some things oops
I also suggest that for characters with heavy symbolism like Pernelle, we can have the "Observations"
A problem I think someone called out before, is that Observations and Trivia are mistaken for eachother (I know Im guilty of this too). I don't really know what Observations are? (as dumb as it sound), they just seem like assumptions, that might aswell be considered speculation at times. Sometimes its just analyses, which seems useful enough, and I think that makes it deserve its own section? Trivia is supposed to be facts, so things like analyses do deserve their own section imo too.
Maybe making the tabs colored to match the uni/alt colors would be nice
I don't really know what the units colors would be? A lot of units would probably repeat colors and just end up not making a big difference, I dont think we should do this.
Oh yeah, you mentioned this in the observations part, but what are Notes gonna be? I was thinking they're Notes like how Nighthawk has a note about the wiki using they/them, or how Crépuscule de La Reine has a note about the wiki using that page name for her, even when her name is actually Isabeau. So more so notes about the wiki's handling of characters than anything in universe (this is a question mostly to Celtic).
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 08:15, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
I guess having the symbolism stuff in Trivia is an option.
Specifically I said to have alt colors for the tabs because I missed them the first few times. I imagine a lot of people would read an article and miss it entirely in the same way. Frankly I think the wiki could use some more styling in general, but that's just me
I think the notes would be for things like Tart vs Darc, or Nighthawk's and A-Q's pronouns, but yeah most characters won't have any at all.
~ Sweet Beanie (talk) 13:18, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
I VERY MUCH agree that the wiki could use more styling (that's why I made the infoboxes have colors specific to the character). The problem is, tabbers are really annoying to work with, they dont accept ANY code into the tab titles (it will always convert it to pure text as if you used nowiki on it). So I'm pretty sure this is impossible T-T. I'm not sure if there's a way to update/upgrade the tabber extension to allow styling, but for now I don't see a real way to do that.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 14:22, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
What…? There's plenty of leeway to apply styling to the tabs without needing to put markup in the tabber. Sure, it's unfortunate that that's not supported, but it's not needed for simple styling.
The way to do it would be something like this:
<templatestyles src="WitchTabs.css" /> <div class="something"> <tabber> |-| Whatever = Content </tabber> </div>
Then on the page Template:WitchTabs.css, add code similar to the following:
.something > .tabber__tab {
put style rules here
}
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 17:24, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
I completelly forgot about this sorry T_T. But thank you for bringing my hope back, I still don't really know what colors the unit names could have? (and how the template would even get them). I did have an idea of my own, but I know little about css and I'm not sure how possible it is. The idea was that the tabs would be little boxes, with not only the full name of the units (cause right now they're shortened) but also card images as the box's backgrounds?
These are my (poorly made) prototypes to what I have in mind:
The problem with this system is that I have no idea how in the world the template would get the correct Card image, and how it would position it correctly (cause the examples I made are uniquely positioned). The only way I can think of making this, is having a template that would just be endless {{#switch}}'es that would have to be manually set for the card images and the positions. That's why I kinda think it's a bad idea T-T.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 09:59, 7 May 2026 (UTC)
I think in the same way that Witches have their own colors for their new "cards," we can just attribute unit colors so that they can be different from each other. Let's say Iroha:
- Standard - can remain colorless, since that's where we start out at, but alternatively it can just be the color of the girl's hair.
- Swimsuit - Light blue
- x Yachiyo - yachiyo blue
- x Ui - muted or light ui pink
- x Kuroe - Kuroe purple
- Anime - Iroha pink, or a darker tone because of the doppel.
- Infinite - Yellow/"gold"
It's not meant for official purposes, but just for the units to be differentiated from each other. The same way we all just kinda decided to have the new witch cards have the colors that they do, we will decide on the unit colors we decide on.
Even if it isn't done, I don't think it's important ulitmately, compared to the organization of info.
~ Sweet Beanie (talk) 10:39, 7 May 2026 (UTC)
Most of what you did there is probably doable, but I suspect putting an image background might be too much for pure CSS. It is certainly possible to use images as backgrounds in CSS, but I think that may not work properly in MediaWiki (I think I tried it before) when the image is a file asset uploaded to the wiki; even if it does work, it would break the "What links here?" mechanism (the link wouldn't be counted, so if the image is ever deleted, it could go unnoticed for quite awhile).
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 13:06, 7 May 2026 (UTC)
Yeah I fear my idea was too complicated anyway, could you try out Sweet Beanie's idea? The problem I see, is how the template would even know which colors to give what unit...
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 08:44, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
Any approach that gives each tab a different style is going to be tricky. You could do it using :nth-child selectors, but that means every page needs its own template stylesheet, which to me seems like a huge pain (though you could still put most of the CSS in a common stylesheet and only the colours in each page's own stylesheet). I'd recommend instead thinking of something where all the tabs are uniformly styled.
But if you're really, really attached to the idea of each unit having its own tab colour, I can give it a shot on one page as an example. Let me know (and preferably, suggest a page to use).
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 12:46, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
We can use pre-determined colors so that each page can use them. Maybe the six colors of the rainbow, then gray or something, or they just repeat. Or we could use the colors of the Holy Quintet to make them more iconic. Then we can repeat them or continue with Nagisa, Mabayu, Selma, Choka and the unnamed Kaiten Girl. That's just what I'd do. So it'd be pink, purple, yellow, blue, red, nagisa color, indigo, orange, green, kaiten girl color.
~ Sweet Beanie (talk) 16:21, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
I would choose the rainbow colors instead of the Holy Quintet ones, because yeah they're iconic, but I don't think they really make sense here?
Also I got another idea (T-T), maybe the template could take the tab name (so the unit name) and get the unit's icon by its name, then put it into that tab. It would basically look like this: [[File:{Unit name}_MR_Icon.png|100px]]. The Icon would appear above the name (probably shortened name). Again, I'm not sure how possible/annoying this is, just a suggestion 0.0
(Forgot to add something, if we make a page for Units and a page for Kioku, Icons would be needed anyway. Obviously we already have all Record icons, but they have frames that I don't like T_T)
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 18:57, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
Using a fixed set of colours is easy. Anything that requires differing setup per-page (like the icons you mentioned) would be a bit of a pain.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 03:25, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
Could you try both? Like write both options on one css page, then take the code of Template:Magia Record Game Info and apply the css maybe on the project page? (Or your Sandbox page). I suggest just doing it for Iroha, she has every type of unit. I still think icon idea is a good one, so I dont want to just let it go.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 14:04, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
I threw together a quick sample at User:Celtic Minstrel/Sandbox/TabStyling. After a bit of thought though, I think the icons probably can't be done in pure CSS the current software (unless they're uploaded independently of the wiki on the same hosting, like the fonts are, but that seems like a terrible idea).
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 17:13, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
I did manage to get the concept of the second version working, with the underline colours (it's very hard to see though because the Sanitized CSS model doesn't support setting the underline thickness, which is really annoying). If you wanted per-page customization, that would be the approach; but using icons or any sort of images for it probably isn't viable in the current software.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 17:27, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
Okay I'll have to abandon the icons idea :‹. But I think I do like the colors idea way more now that I see an example, just not the rainbow part... Obviously the colors were quickly chosen just for the test and will be less saturated, but I do NOT like the look of the rainbow here T-T. It reminds me very much of how kids books overuse rainbows everywhere in them, it looks very tacky. My best suggestion for the colors is the gradient from the MagiReco logo, the one on Iroha.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 17:41, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
Yes, I spent absolutely no time on choosing colours – I just selected named colours that roughly correspond to the rainbow. Of course, for the real thing we'd carefully choose each colour, and as you say they'd be much less saturated. The rainbow might still work with less saturated colours – I'm not sure.
Basing it on that blue to pink to yellow/orange gradient doesn't seem like a terrible idea, but I don't know if you'd get enough different colours out of that? It's up to whoever does it though.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 17:46, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
Okay I got colors that I honestly like:
| #76cef0 rgba(118, 206, 240, 0.5) |
#7baeec rgba(123, 174, 236, 0.5) |
#a99ae9 rgba(169, 154, 233, 0.5) |
#eb95d4 rgba(235, 149, 212, 0.5) |
#f68dba rgba(246, 141, 186, 0.5) |
#faab8b rgba(250, 171, 139, 0.5) |
#fac768 rgba(250, 199, 104, 0.5) |
They are taken from the image, but more satured. I think they're really nice but I do think the second and fifth color are quite boring. - TheresaFrog421 (talk) 18:12, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
I made some alternatives, removing the boring colors. I also continued them until they circle back to the starting color so theoretically they could continue ad infinitum:
| #76cef0 rgba(118, 206, 240, 0.5) |
#a99ae9 rgba(169, 154, 233, 0.5) |
#eb95d4 rgba(235, 149, 212, 0.5) |
#faab8b rgba(250, 171, 139, 0.5) |
#fac768 rgba(250, 199, 104, 0.5) |
#d2eb7a rgba(210, 235, 122, 0.5) |
#93ec93 rgba(147, 236, 147, 0.5) |
#93ecd6 rgba(147, 236, 214, 0.5) |
#93ecec rgba(147, 236, 236, 0.5) |
#76cef0 rgba(118, 206, 240, 0.5) |
Alternative:
| #76cef0 rgba(118, 206, 240, 0.5) |
#a99ae9 rgba(169, 154, 233, 0.5) |
#eb95d4 rgba(235, 149, 212, 0.5) |
#faab8b rgba(250, 171, 139, 0.5) |
#fac768 rgba(250, 199, 104, 0.5) |
#feed7a rgba(254, 237, 122, 0.5) |
#93ec93 rgba(147, 236, 147, 0.5) |
#8ae5d9 rgba(138, 229, 217, 0.5) |
#76cef0 rgba(118, 206, 240, 0.5) |
Since the text is blue, I also made a version without blues:
| #a99ae9 rgba(169, 154, 233, 0.5) |
#eb95d4 rgba(235, 149, 212, 0.5) |
#faab8b rgba(250, 171, 139, 0.5) |
#fac768 rgba(250, 199, 104, 0.5) |
#dfef7b rgba(223, 239, 123, 0.5) |
#93ec93 rgba(147, 236, 147, 0.5) |
#97f1c0 rgba(151, 241, 192, 0.5) |
~ Sweet Beanie (talk) 20:27, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
If blue text is a problem we can always make it not be blue, just saying.
I like all of these colour sets.
Side note: Sweet Beanie, please stop messing up your dividing lines. It's four hyphens, not three.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 23:43, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
I agree, I think the second set is the best. I think we're ready to port this into the actual template? I was thinking of making different colors for the Exedra template (when my suggestion was using the Magireco logo colors), but since these colors stray away from that idea anyway I think it would be okay if we used them for the Exedra template too. Also I think it would be better if the tabs didn't have borders? Like just the color would look better in my opinion.
Not really on topic, but also kinda? I really do wish this wiki had WAY more styling, because wdym we don't have a logo or an icon. Like the "icon" we do have is just a P on my laptop because of the site name (for some reason the page Kuro (くろ) shows an Iroha icon that Ive never seen on any other page tho????). Also I wish we had a "theme"? Like a background and stuff like that, I know the Exedra wiki has that, but they use Vector (2022) as their main skin, and we use Vector legacy (I use 2022). For example the Stardew Valley wiki has a great look, and it looks like its in Vector legacy, I don't know if this is an extension or what, cause I haven't looked into it yet, but I do think this is something we should atleast consider doing.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 07:26, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
I'd like to weigh in cuz a simple styling we could use is the one used by the Exedra First Anni. Here's the files:
(Also I hope the hyphens are correct this time)
~ Sweet Beanie (talk) 08:35, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
I'm not completely sure (I think you might need to be logged in to see? Unless it can be determined from the developer console), but it looks like Stardew Valley is just using the Monobook theme.
Short of coding an entirely new theme, most customization to the MediaWiki theming is done by editing MediaWiki:Common.css. Since you don't have permission to edit that, however, you can experiment by creating a Common.css file in your user space, for example User:TheresaFrog421/Common.css. Once you get something you like, you can propose it to be moved to the main commons file. It's also possible to add rules that only apply to specific skins by creating pages like Monobook.css or Vector.css, if that seems necessary. (This works both in user space and global space.)
As for the wiki logo, I can agree this one's kind of lacklustre, but I don't really have any alternate suggestions. I think only User:0x99 can change the logo.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 15:17, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
Transcripts
Re: transcripts (or rather, fair use?)
Sorry for digging up this topic, but I sort of wonder if a transcript would cross the acceptable use line into an actual copyright infringement. The sad fact here is that I'm physically located in Japan, and there's use law here. There has been a case where a company successfully sued people for posting transcripts online (e.g. this Kadokawa's case, although another news source mentioned that this was due to the owners profiting from it). From this perspective, a summary or a synopsis is more preferable. (I appreciated the effort to put up the transcript, but I want to make sure the wiki stays clear of possible legal issues.)
Looking around in other Japanese wiki websites for social games, most of them use cards, event illustrations, and character sprites from the game, so I guess this is as far as acceptable use goes. (Since we're on this topic, we probably should review all the scanned material stuff in this wiki as well. A few pages or a snippet of a page is probably fine, but an entire scan may be a bit too much...)
-- 0x99 (talk) 16:00, 4 December 2025 (UTC)
- I had been wondering about that too. The game is free to play, and we're not profiting from it, and having access to the transcripts can be quite useful; so I do hope it's not a problem. But I can definitely understand the concern.
- And when it comes to scanned pages, I really think it's better to just cut out any images and upload them separately, similar to what I did with the anime guidebook scan here (I would've deleted the original scan, but figured some of the text that didn't make it into the crops may be worth translating first). If the page is entirely text, I don't think it should be uploaded at all (there may or may not be an argument for posting a transcription of the text, but posting the scan as an image is just silly). ~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 19:13, 4 December 2025 (UTC)
- Plenty of gacha wikis have full story transcripts:
- https://honkai-star-rail.fandom.com/wiki/Masquerade_Duet
- https://limbuscompany.wiki.gg/wiki/Intervallo_I:_Hell%27s_Chicken/Story_Episodes
- https://exedra.wiki/wiki/A_St._Magica_Academy_Christmas:_Part_Nice/Story/English
- https://magireco.fandom.com/wiki/Translated_Stories/The_Green_Jasper_Diviners/Part_1
- Hell, even some non-gacha game wikis: https://libraryofruina.wiki.gg/wiki/Netzach_Episode_1 (though I did expand their, heh, library of transcripts quite a lot, the whole thing started before I even set my gaze upon the wiki). Plus we've seen MUT get copyright claims that were entirely over music used. Hell, you even mentioned yourself that it was over profitting over it, this wiki doesn't even have ads.
- Plus it's had transcripts for years already:
- -EPF (talk) 19:51, 4 December 2025 (UTC)
- Plenty of gacha wikis have full story transcripts:
- My understanding is that the US law is more relaxed with this with fair use and DMCA, especially if the website is not making any profit. The operator is largely shielded from liability as long as they respond to a takedown request. The problem here is that the legal jurisdiction of a website is based on the jurisdiction of its operator (that would be me in this case), and Japan's version of this does not shield the operator from such liability. (Which is why it may be fine for other wikis, as long as they don't operate in Japan).
- As for existing transcripts, I know that some do exist on the wiki, but there were few enough (amusingly, I wasn't aware of Madoka Online ones until now), and some are more of a quotation (e.g., The Rebellion Story/Transcript). However, having transcripts for the entire Magia Exedra may put the wiki in a less defensible position. There's also a Null Magical Girl translation (and other translations) that might also cross the acceptable line, which likely needs a similar discussion.
- To be honest, I really like what you're doing with these pages, and I think they're super helpful; the reason I'm starting this conversation is that I'm a bit unsure if having these will put me in a jail (and closure of the wiki). -- 0x99 (talk) 03:55, 5 December 2025 (UTC)
- Let's continue this at Puella Magi Wiki talk:Wiki Cleanup 2025/Acceptable use policy -- 0x99 (talk) 04:33, 5 December 2025 (UTC)
Monster Pages
I was planning on starting this topic later, but I'm impatient and wanna get opinions on this - I think "Monster" pages should look way more similar to our planned character pages and use the same infobox. Last year I created Template:Witch Card which was because of complaints about Template:Card, and while I like the template, I don't like a lot of parts that come with it. For example I don't like how pages like Kriemhild Fausut and Paola have (imo) worse images at the front just because of how we make the pages look (the whole appearances/descriptions divide).
So in my opinion, when we start changing the character pages, we should change those pages too. I have a conceptual infobox on my sandbox page, so please take a look before just rejecting the idea. Also sections like Appearance and Personality and Traits would be really good for Witch pages.
Now obviously there are a lot of issues that come with this too.
- Descriptions
The descriptions would definitely not go into the infobox, for obvious reasons. I think it would be easy to make a collapsible template (or just a plain table) that would easily store them.
- Familiars
This is a bigger issue, and Im not fully sure how to approach it. Right now my plan is to keep them as a part of the Witch's page, but have them be way more detached than they are right now, with their own sections and infobox. Im worried this would look very messy, but thats my solution for now. They would only have their own Appearance, Personality and Traits and (maybe) Powers and Abilities sections, as the others would be better if they were general.
This is an even bigger change than last year with the Witch Card, so please let me know what you think. I'd rather have this idea be shut down than ignored. - TheresaFrog421 (talk) 17:15, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
I forgot one more issue -
- Multiple forms
I can't deny that the current look supports multiple forms of a Witch way better than my proposed one will, but my solution to this would be just putting the images in a tabber tag. What forms count towards this is imo something for discussion, cause for Homulilly I wouldnt put the first form of the Nutcracker Witch into the Infobox (only second form and the og witch from portable) but I would put both forms of Charlotte. Also would the less serious forms count into this, like Patricia's Excercise Witch or the Christmas Gertrud.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 19:41, 17 April 2026 (UTC)
I can't say I'm overly a fan of this idea. At first, when I saw your sample, it seemed mostly neutral (but I was still more attached to the status quo). But once you noted the "Multiple Forms" issue, I realized that the infobox is just too small to handle that well. I don't understand why you'd exclude the first form of Homolilly?
Incidentally, for what you call "less serious" forms, in my opinion they're best treated as entirely separate witches that just happen to resemble the base witch. Maybe they don't deserve a page of their own; but a separate section at the bottom of Gertrud's page for "non-canon variants" or whatever you want to call them could be good.
I don't have an issue with adding Personality or Appearance sections to witch pages though.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 17:08, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
You're right about the multiple forms problem, as its the worst one here, but I still think basing the way we treat Witches/Monsters by how many descriptions they have feels wrong... I guess this is a personal opinion, but the more I spend time with the current template the more I dislike it, its kinda uncontrolable (like squishing Candy's page makes her weirdly move), the backgrounds can be a problem (imo Shin and Zenobia blend too much into their backgrounds), and overall why do only Monsters get Appearances in their infobox? Like I said originally, I made the template, so I know Im complaining mostly about things I created, but I did highly base it off of the older template/the way the cards were being created, and obviously those were flawed too. I know there are 100% other ways to fix the things Im complaining about, but in my opinion, it would be so much more cleaner to use similar infoboxes to characters (obv with some different parameters). Again, the forms are a big issue, but its not like human characters dont have this issue too? The Holy Quintet all got redesigns for the new movie, and I was thinking that those should go into their infoboxes too once (or if) we get clean renders. I genuinely just think that there's too many issues with the current template and I think the infobox is the way to fix them, Im open for different (and maybe better) suggestion, but I really wanna sort this out.
- I forgot about Homulilly, what I meant was, that basically I would only put 2 images into the infobox, titled Mortal World Witch and Nutcracker Witch, with only showing one form of the Nutcracker Witch. It is more correct to put both there, but I was thinking of being more minimalistic with it, right now I'm kinda conflicted with it...
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 17:37, 18 April 2026 (UTC)
Y'all please don't ignore this (not only adressing Celtic), I genuinely think the Witch/Monster pages need cleaning up. I mean Ai has a list of voice actors, but since she doesnt use the character infobox it has to be in trivia, which I think is ridiculous, the same goes for Izabel (/Michaela) and Bebe. In my opinion the way we treat the Monster pages fits for a wiki like the Magireco wiki or Exedra wiki, but in our case the Monsters arent just enemies, I mean Ai could have a full infobox, but since we dont treat her like we do with humans, she’s stuck with the template that stores less information. I mean the only thing that separates Ai and Sakurako is how they’re treated in Gameplay of Record and Exedra, so why does that affect how we treat her (and every other monster).
Back to the forms, I was thinking of ways to keep the infobox idea and separate the forms properly… I was thinking of splitting the pages if the Witches were distinct enough (So Kriemhild Gretchen would be split to Salvation and Despair, Homulilly to Mortal World and Nutcracker), but that would mean Shitori Egumo would be split too, which feels wrong? I dont think its the best idea, but its an idea. Like on my sandbox page, I would just put them in one infobox under tabbers.
Again this is an issue that could be fixed a different way, without using the same infoboxes as humans. - TheresaFrog421 (talk) 13:50, 24 April 2026 (UTC)
Well, there's no reason we couldn't add an infobox for Ai and Sakurako (maybe even the default character infobox), but how does that extend to redoing all the witch/monster pages? Most of them aren't really characters, just faceless enemies. ~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 17:44, 24 April 2026 (UTC)
I just don't think we should separate them that much. Most Witches have a personality, and a lot have a story and importance, I wouldn't really NOT call them characters. Now I do understand some parts where we dont "count" them as characters (like them not being under Category:Characters), but like I said before, we're not a wiki where their role is an enemy. I understand why the Magireco wiki uses that look for their Witch pages (example), because in the Game Magia Record, they're just an enemy. That wiki doesn't care about them as characters because theyre just enemies, but we're not a game wiki, so I don't really see how them being enemies in the story doesnt make them enough of characters to have a completely different infobox look.
--TheresaFrog421 (talk) 18:16, 24 April 2026 (UTC)
Todo List
Some comments on the new todo list…
- For Phase 2's "Delete the Meme Pages" I'd argue that it's already handled by the Community namespace, so we can remove that.
- Instead of "Category:Cleanup Needed" I think it should use a dedicated category, like "Category:Wiki Cleanup Project".
- The style guide would go in the "Project" namespace, or possibly the "Help" namespace.
- Phase 3 step 1 says "we all know the ones". That's an incorrect assumption. You can't assume everyone knows everything. This step may involve extensive discussion.
- I think it's reasonable to use the speculation box on the same page, but we should at least make sure there isn't any speculation outside of a speculation box (with the possible exception of very, very obvious logical deductions, but even then, be very careful, because what's obvious to one person may not be obvious to another).
- Why are Magia Record and Magia Exedra treated so differently in phase 5?
- If Magia Record Characters is going to lose its unit focus, I think there should be a new Magia Record Units page which is almost exactly what Characters is now (but omit the minor characters, which don't have units, and possibly the enemies, which likewise don't have units). The same could go for Magia Exedra Characters.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 19:42, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
- If the template had
approxage, simply change it toage.- If the template had
agenote, take the text out, put it into parenthesis and put into theageparameter.- If the template had
witch, make it a link. If it hadwitchlinkthen make that the page it links to. If it haddoppelinstead, dont change anything.- If the template had
witchnote, take the text out, put it into parenthesis and put into thewitchparameter.- If the template had
origin, change the parameter name toresidence, the text in the parameter should be changed IF it only has the character's birth place/hometown, to where the character lived/lives (Can be multiple places if they moved).
What's the reason for all of this? I don't think there's any reason why the infobox couldn't support all of those same parameters with the same meanings, and it would make the migration much easier if it did.
Regarding origin/residence, I'd argue there's merit in keeping both. They're often the same, but sometimes they're different.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 19:47, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
I'll respond to the things I directly changed/added:
Why are Magia Record and Magia Exedra treated so differently in phase 5?
Well, because they don't work the same, if you mean the redirects, then thats just because of how Magia Record characters ARE units, while Magia Exedra characters arent units directly, they just have units. I don't see anything wrong with making them link to the character's first Kioku though. For every other point about the games in phase 5, its just because of how the Templates work/were made.
If Magia Record Characters is going to lose its unit focus, I think there should be a new Magia Record Units page
I agree, but there's a few issues. If it went into Magia Record Units, all the unit pages would be subpages of it, and would have a link at the top of their page, which I think would be very ugly... This could be fixed if we maybe moved the unit pages to a namespace called "Magia Record Unit"? (obviously we'd have to do the same thing for Kioku). Also what about Magia Exedra Characters already displaying Kioku? I know it doesnt go into details but still.
As for everything in your second message (I dont want to put all that into a blockquote T-T).
It's just for easier use, right now in the new infobox, the age parameter's content doesn't link to the Characters by age pages, rather the first cell of the row does, I did this because of one character - Yuma (Mami Tomoe's Mundane Everyday Life), her age directly changes in the manga (like you can see on her talk page), this doesn't happen often (this might be the only character we know this happens to lol) but we should accommodate the template for that, that's why I just fused all the age parameters into one (well, all but agepage).
I just kinda did the same thing for the Witch parameters, the difference from age is that this parameter needs to link, but I think that just makes the parameter simpler. There is a problem with the Doppel though, cause it wouldnt support a note the same way the Character Details does... (I was thinking of maybe making it that so you can still add a note if you put the doppel name into square parenthesis and the template would somehow detect the name and separate it, the same way Magia Exedra Stats does it, but I havent looked into it and have no idea how it even works).
For the origin thing, its just that I dont really understand why someone would care about the characters hometown and not where they live currently, not like every page listens to that anyway (Iroha has Kamihama listed in there), changing the parameter would just keep it easier to see, and I don't think it's that hard to do.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 20:06, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
Well, because they don't work the same, if you mean the redirects, then thats just because of how Magia Record characters ARE units, while Magia Exedra characters arent units directly, they just have units.
This doesn't make any sense whatsoever. I don't see any reasonable evidence for the claim that "Magia Record characters ARE units". There are clearly multiple units for the same character. I think I'd say that X in Magia Record should generally redirect to the character page, but X (Variant) could redirect to the unit page, and in some cases where there's more than one X in Magia Record for the same character (Homura mainly), perhaps those could point at the unit page too.
Making X in Magia Record redirect to the unit page isn't the worst thing to do, but in that case, it's still weird that X in Magia Exedra doesn't do the same.
There's also the option to just delete all the X in Magia Record and X in Magia Exedra pages. They're not really needed even as redirects in this system, right? The only reason to keep them would be to avoid link rot, but I bet there aren't that many places linking directly to them, so maybe those places can just be updated and the pages can be removed.
If it went into Magia Record Units, all the unit pages would be subpages of it
Huh? Why? I mean, that certainly could be done, but it's not a given. Is there a reason for it? Your phrasing makes it sound like you think it shouldn't be done, so why are you assuming we'd have to do something you think is bad? I don't see what namespaces have to do with this, either.
It's just for easier use, right now in the new infobox, the age parameter's content doesn't link to the Characters by age pages, rather the first cell of the row doe…
I don't understand. This all seems tangential to the actual question… what, exactly, does fusing them make easier? Not fusing makes it easier to maintain a consistent style for notes. Fusing them makes this harder. Based on that it seems like fusing them isn't a good option, but maybe it brings something else to make up for that – what is that something else?
The same goes for the witch parameters. I don't understand how the change is an improvement. (I will admit that the witch parameters are quite weird though, so I'm open to some sort of change; just not sure that this is the one.)
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 00:38, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
There's also the option to just delete all the X in Magia Record and X in Magia Exedra pages. They're not really needed even as redirects in this system, right?
I was gonna argue about how they are still units and all, but I do fully agree with this. I know having redirects is useful, but I don't like redirects that are exist because of a previous way of handling things. We already have redirects that I think should just be wiped like the old Kioku pages (ex: Kush Irina in Magia Exedra/Seraphic Trial).
Huh? Why? I mean, that certainly could be done, but it's not a given. Is there a reason for it? Your phrasing makes it sound like you think it shouldn't be done, so why are you assuming we'd have to do something you think is bad? I don't see what namespaces have to do with this, either.
Okay I'll try to be more clear? I meant that if the page that collects all units like characters goes directly under the name Magia Record Units, then all the separate unit pages would be that page's children, because they're all named Magia Record Units/{Unit name}. This would create a link on the unit pages back to Magia Record Units, which like I said, wouldnt be good. The thing is, I don't think any other name for that page makes sense, that's why I suggested the custom namespace for the unit pages. I honestly would like to move them to a separate namespace, if I made it seem like I don't want to do it then I did something wrong cause I think its a good idea T-T. I'm not fully sure how custom namespaces even work, from what I remember they just kinda do nothing but help separate pages from the "main ones", and I think that would be a good thing for the unit pages (Obviously everything I just said also applies to Exedra and Kioku).
what, exactly, does fusing them make easier?
I understand why we let the templates do the formatting at times, like the Infobox I made separates name_en, name_jp and name_romaji, when in theory (and by the logic I apply to age and witch) they could be one parameter with the Nihongo template being made by the user directly on a page... but obviously that's not the case, because that just makes it more annoying and unnecessarily complex, when a template is supposed to make things like this easy. So... why do I think this logic DOES apply to age and witch? Because its just... text, for witch, we already link a lot of stuff in the infobox like relatives and places, whats the point of forcing the Witch parameters to be so weird, where instead of:
|witch=Yes |witchlink=Maybe |witchnote=No
We can just have:
|witch=[[Maybe|Yes]] (No)
Is it an opinion that this is better??? Because I think it is, it allows way more flexibility in what's written there, and while I know that this might mean that more mistakes will happen, like someone not linking to the witch page correctly, but its still way more flexible and controllable. All of this applies to age too but it's not the exact same, what I meant by:
right now in the new infobox, the age parameter's content doesn't link to the Characters by age pages, rather the first cell of the row does
In Character Details the age is either forced to be a single number, or it's not counted as an exact age. I fused it to just be way more flexible too, because (like I said) there are characters that change ages, and no I don't think we should just type one of them as the main one and the other as a note, that's limiting ourself for no reason. I know that the direct age helped to link to the Character by age page sections, and while I think that's good, there's no point in limiting ourselves just for something that's not that important. Again, the Doppel parameter does really complicate things, but I fear we first need to discuss this before we get to that.
If things still sound confusing or I missed something Im sorry T-T
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 06:14, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
Okay, so I think I get what you meant with the Magia Record Units thing. You're assuming that the Magia Record units will be handled identically to the Magia Exedra units, where all units fall under one subpage. But then you say it would be bad for the unit page to link back to the list of units? Why would that be bad? Actually, it would probably be good if Magia Exedra Kioku also had a list of all units.
As for the age/witch question…
it allows way more flexibility in what's written there
Well, keep in mind that part of the point in doing it the other way is to remove flexibility, in favour of keeping the format consistent. So saying it allows more flexibility isn't really an argument in and of itself. Do you have reasons why you think the witch info needs more flexibility? I think you did give at least one reason for the age info…
there are characters that change ages, and no I don't think we should just type one of them as the main one and the other as a note
I'm not really sure what you mean by "change ages"? Magia Record/Exedra (in general) doesn't really have a progression of time – the girls don't age. Even if they did, it would seem a bit weird to give multiple ages in that case. And if you're talking about Yuma, the MTEL version is arguably a separate character who shares the same name. Or, do you mean that they might be a different age in other works? For example, you want to give Mami's age in MTEL or Different Story (1 year younger), or Yachiyo's age in Beginning Story (is that the right title?) or Crescent Memoria, etc.
Still, even if we need it to be more flexible, that doesn't necessarily mean we need to make it completely freeform.
I do agree that the witch/doppel situation is weird. The doppel parameter presumes the existence of a specific section on the page, after all.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 18:09, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
The unit pages already have links on the top, to add another one would just be ugly. Do characters have a link at the top back to their character pages? no. Do Episodes have a link at the top back to their anime? no. This seems useless and would just disrupt the look of the pages in my opinion.
For ages - the MTEL Yuma is a different version, yes, but that's not important, in MTEL Yuma directly ages, she goes from 5 to 6, and I think that should be noted in the infobox like:
5 (chapters # - #) 6 (chapter # onwards)
I do agree that giving all ages to characters might be too much? Like with Yachiyo, I would 100% put both 12 and 19 in her infobox (because they're the most important), but I dont think we should put the other ages, at most for Crescent Memoria (which happens like 1/2 years before the main story right?). Obviously putting things like:
1 (Opening scene #1) 4 (Opening scene #2) 6 (Opening scene #3) 14 (Madoka Magica)
Is... no, but if the aging happens DURING the story like with Yuma, or we have stories with characters with known different ages (I think by that logic Breakpoint would count for Yachiyo and Mifuyu too), then yes, I believe they should be put into the infobox.
About the flexibility, yes that's what I meant with my "name argument", that the names aren't that flexible, but I think age and witch should be. Age and Witch in my opinion just have too many parameters, making any age that isnt a direct number use approxage just doesn't really make sense to me. Yes, uniformity is something we NEED, its a part of the wiki's big problems, but I dont think this would ruin it?? Most parameters ARE freeform already, and that's what makes the infobox comfortable to work with. The images are freeform, but they could be forced to lose the File prefix, the size and just be done automatically, but they're not as to not force weird situations where the image is too big and comes out small, or just ends up weird. We're already planning big changes to the wiki, so in my opinion we should fix small annoying things like this too, I understand why you dont like this idea, but I just think it's gonna be way less annoying to work with in the future (apart from doppels but well...).
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 07:41, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
The unit pages already have links on the top, to add another one would just be ugly. Do characters have a link at the top back to their character pages? no. Do Episodes have a link at the top back to their anime? no. This seems useless and would just disrupt the look of the pages in my opinion.
???
Episodes having a link back to their anime sounds like a good thing, though? Why would that be considered bad?
What on earth does a character linking back to their character page mean? They are the character page… aren't they? There'd be a link to itself?
Anyway… so how do you propose we link to the character ages page? Doing that manually is going to be way more annoying and error-prone than doing it automatically, if you ask me. I get that you want to support multiple ages, but that could also be done with age_1, age_2, age_3, agenote_1, agenote_2, agenote_3 etc.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 12:26, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
What on earth does a character linking back to their character page mean? They are the character page… aren't they? There'd be a link to itself?
Okay my bad, I didnt make it make sense cause I was writing this while tired T-T. What I meant was like if Iroha had a big link to Magia Record Characters, because that's how it would look right now with the units. I still think the Unit and Kioku pages should be moved to special namespaces... I would be up for doing that, but it would be nicer to have someone who can move without leaving a redirect do it (Im not about to ask for admin permissions o_o).
Doing that manually is going to be way more annoying and error-prone than doing it automatically
Yeah, that's just the truth... But doing the age_1, agenote_1 would just be dumb. Most characters dont age, so the only thing to do would be moving their agenote to the age parameter, and changing approxage to age if its there. The characters that do age would be more complicated and error-prone like you said, but its still a very easy system. There's only 3 people wanting to work on this right now, and I doubt any of us would make those mistakes really, especially if the code would just be something like 12 (Event Name)<br>18 (Breakpoint/Crescent Memoria)<br>19 (Main Story).
I guess I just don't see the issues you see with these ideas.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 14:15, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
Seems like you missed my point? Your example doesn't even link to the characters by age page. Automating that link is the primary reason I think merging the age field is a bad idea.
Why is age_1, agenote_1 etc dumb? It means you can put several in there and they all follow the same format automatically.
Another option though would be to technically merge the field, but write in the documentation that "content should be one or more invocations of Template:Age". Then make Template:Age that looks something like {{Age|42|estimated}} which expands to [[Characters by Age#42|42]] (estimated). Maybe allow not using that template if the age is unknown or approximate, or maybe add an approx=true parameter for that case (depending on whether we want a common styling for it).
For the witch field I think it's not that big of a deal to merge them, having considered it a bit. The only question would be how we want to handle the doppel case (if at all) where there's no dedicated page for that witch, but… it could always be handled by redirects that just redirect back to the proper section on the same page, I guess.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 17:32, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
Seems like you missed my point? Your example doesn't even link to the characters by age page. Automating that link is the primary reason I think merging the age field is a bad idea.
Yeah before in this conversation I said that the link to the Characters by Age page is on the first cell (the cell that just says "Age"). I would argue that this is better even if it makes it so that the link doesnt put you on that age's section, but honestly the idea of Template:Age might just solve this.
Maybe allow not using that template if the age is unknown or approximate
Template:Character Details already doesn't support putting "not basic" numbers into age, so wouldnt we be able to just check if its a basic number?, if it is - it would link to the appropriate section, and if it isn't - it would link to the Unknown section the same way approxage does it on Template:Character Details.
For Doppels, that would be an easy solution, but I would prefer to keep it without the page reloading... I still don't know how that would work (and like before my only idea is to have the template somehow find and separate the name of the Doppel and everything else so it knows what should link and what shouldnt).
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 09:45, 7 May 2026 (UTC)
Oh yeah this isn't related to what we're talking about, but I think it would be a good idea if we had a Staff Template. Basically it would just be a big {{#switch}} that would change between any real person related to this series and choose a link for that person. The reason I think we should have this, is just to be consistent with links. I've seen it before where some pages link voice actors to japanese wikipedia, some to the english wikipedia, and other to different sites. It would be way easier if they were all in one place, and pages would just use the template like {{Staff|Chiwa Saitou}} instead of having to link every name on every page.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 11:19, 7 May 2026 (UTC)
While I wait for the response on my idea for Template:Staff I have more questions about Magia Record Units and Magia Exedra Kioku.
I'm still set on the namespaces idea for the unit pages themself, I already ran the "linking to the root page" argument to the dirt, but also why would they be subpages of that page, it felt okay when we didn't plan on even creating pages like these, but now it just feels wrong to have them be subpages of a page that collects them. Again, for the moving of the pages into that namespace, it would 100% be the best idea to get someone who can choose to not leave redirects to do it, but again I think that's only you, and unless you can give me permissions temporarily, then its either you do it or we leave redirects behind T-T (and break the existing ones). If I could get the permissions I would also just delete the redirects that the pages already have, as I remember moving them quite a lot. One more thing, after those pages get created, should Magia Record Characters and Magia Exedra Characters still use the special character cell templates? I can see the argument for Exedra to stay the same, but Record definitely shouldn't.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 12:54, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
I still don't really understand your arguments at all. It might be a bit unusual for every unit page to have a breadcrumb link back to Magia Record Units, but I don't see why it would feel wrong – linking back to the collection page seems completely normal to me. The only thing that might be slightly odd is that the link is a breadcrumb link, but I don't think that's really an issue?
About the character cell templates, I think they're basically made for the unit focus, so they should be used on Magia Record Units; but when it comes to Magia Record Characters, perhaps the basic character cell template is better? I think the same applies to Magia Exedra, probably.
You don't need to worry about redirects. The redirects can just be deleted later. I think you actually have permission to delete the redirects yourself? But do make sure to update anything linking to them first (using the What Links Here feature – click on the redirect, click on the "redirected from" link at the top, and then click on "What Links Here" in the toolbar).
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 15:23, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
By the way, where to the witch, uwasa, and kimochi lists belong? Do they go on Magia Record Characters, on Magia Record Units, or on a new page? ~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 15:24, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
The only thing that might be slightly odd is that the link is a breadcrumb link
Yeah that's my main problem, tbf I can just move the pages myself and deal with the redirects, I mean I'm the one who sees a problem with this so I should do it. I'll probably put all the redirects under the deletion category though, I want them gone T-T.
perhaps the basic character cell template is better?
Yeah, it would make more sense there now. For Exedra characters I'm not really sure though, since the Exedra character cells are meant for Characters, not Kioku.
By the way, where to the witch, uwasa, and kimochi lists belong? Do they go on Magia Record Characters, on Magia Record Units, or on a new page?
Definitely keep them on Magia Record Characters. Unless you mean when treating them like Enemies... I think pages like Magia Record Enemies and Magia Exedra Enemies could make sense, but I think they would only if we had something similar to the unit pages but for enemies. Idk what info would go there though? Obviously the descriptions and sprites, but there's not that much left, so that's why even though I've been thinking about this, I've never suggested it.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 15:42, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
Well, to be quite honest, if you dislike that breadcrumb link that much, then there's a very, very simple solution – just don't make them subpages in the first place. But I really don't think it's that much of a problem.
I went ahead and did some edits on Magia Record Characters, so it's now solely characters and not units; the original unit list, unaltered, is now on Magia Record Units.
I do agree that it would be nice to have Magia Record Enemies and/or Magia Exedra Enemies if we have enough information to gather about them (we should have it for Exedra, not sure about Record). If we don't have enough to make dedicated pages for each unit, I think it could be sufficient to just gather all that info onto the list page? That said, the enemies are mostly witches or familiars, so those do have a page.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 16:04, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
Yeah I know the breadcrumb links are my fault T-T, for now I'll just leave the pages be, but I still plan on changing them into a namespace.
For Magia Record Characters, I think the variants that we consider "major" should stay, as in Holy Mami, Infinite Iroha, Uwasa Tsuruno and so on.
The cells for the units and Kioku should definitely be changed (well maybe not changed as they should just be new templates imo), they need:
- Proper linking, so in the template you just write the name, and it links to the page with the prefix.
- Rarities
- Elements
- Roles (Kioku only)
- Characters (Kioku only, though this isnt that important really)
Yeah as much as I'd like to have separate pages for enemy info, there's really little info. I mean what would Corbeau have apart from her sprite T-T. If I remember correctly the Fandom Magireco wiki had enemy pages that also had items attached to some of them (I have to say remember cause I cant check, fandom is down for some reason), so I guess that's extra information, but again, it's not a lot.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 16:13, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
Um… I hate to break this to you, but… adding a new namespace isn't something you can do – it can only be done by editing the wiki settings directly, which means direct access to the server is needed. You could ask [User:0x99]] to add one, but having separate namespaces for each game seems kind of silly? Unless your plan is to "fake" a namespace by just adding a common prefix to each page name.
I'm of two minds on the variants in Magia Record Characters. They aren't really separate characters, so I think it's better to remove them. (Possibly, even Ultimate Madoka and Devil Homura.) But they certainly are more "major" than all the simple alt units, so I could probably accept putting them back.
Feel free to add new parameters to Template:Magia Record Character Cell and use them however you think is appropriate. I think perhaps we should add a description= parameter to Template:Simple Character Cell as well, to add a bit more info for the side characters.
Side note: if Fandom is becoming unstable, perhaps we should get someone to archive the Magia Record fandom (it can be done from here but I can't seem to work out how to make it gather every page on the entire wiki). It's working for me right now (though I can't sign in for some reason), but we definitely don't want to lose all that information just because Fandom goes crazy or whatever. Without signing in I can't tell if people have still been editing it though.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 17:45, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
Okay yeah if the namespaces take this much effort then I'll just leave them be T-T. Honestly I'm used to the breadcrumb link right now, and I don't mind it as much as I did before, so for now I don't plan on changing it.
As for the Enemy pages, I have a lot of thoughts. I still want them to be separate pages that would be transcluded on the pages of the characters like the Unit pages we have right now. I've recently changed how we list enemies on the Main Quest pages, and added enemies to event pages, all those boxes could easily link to the enemy pages, and even be good for collecting an "appearances" list, it works right now with using a dpl to check which pages use the icons, but if they just linked to the pages it would be easier. For Magical girl enemies, yeah we shouldn't have pages for them, the boxes could just link to the unit pages, as I know Record has a lot of units that act as enemies (at most Rebellion Mami from Exedra might be a problem, cause she doesn't have a unit). I still don't know how the template should look, as I tried a lot of looks and I haven't liked them very much T-T. I think someone else should make the template...
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 06:40, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
Oh yeah also- I think we should (in the future) change all of the Magia Record Event pages to include the enemies and memoria just like the Exedra event pages do right now.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 06:47, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
I think technically the magical girls as enemies are actually unique enemies that just happen to look like the magical girl (that is, they're not reusing the data from the playable character). But even assuming that's true, we don't need to reflect that in the way our wiki is laid out – I agree with just making the enemy boxes link to the playable unit pages in that case. ~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 19:43, 22 May 2026 (UTC)
Making the Magireco enemy pages is way harder than Exedra ones I fear ._. A lot of enemies just don't have the same sprites, from what I know there are 3 types of sprites we could use:
- The Archive ones, the ones that are named
Enemy #### l.png, these are the fewest but are also the best ones, as they always have the full enemy in and when it has multiple versions it has all of them in one sprite, but a lot of enemies just don't have them. - The ones that are named
Chara #### ## b.png, these are way more common, and even special variants like the New Year's Commoner's Horse have them, but they sometimes cut out parts of the full enemy. - Put-together textures, as in a texture file put together by code and made into an image, but obviously, we don't have them. I don't know how to even make them, but I guess it would be something similar to Live2Ds, and we have a lot of those here. This would be the best, as EACH enemy gets a full sprite, but... We're probably not gonna have them...
Right now I guess it would be best to use the Archive images for the enemies that have them, and the Chara ones for the ones that don't. Also- do we separate the special variants the same way Exedra does? (like Christmas Oscars and FM Kamihama) Exedra separates them, but I think Record doesn't, and I know they share ID's with their normal forms, so that's an issue too.
(Adding stuff I forgot...)
There are also enemies that just don't have either, like the Tart Magica Soldiers, or the Puella Historia enemies. I know the Magireco wiki has sprites for some of them, but idk if that's done with the third sprite type I described or it's actually somewhere in the files.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 21:19, 23 May 2026 (UTC)
Okay, I'm a little unsure what you're getting at here. Can you give some specific examples of the issues?
- An "Enemy" one that has multiple versions in one sprite
- A "Chara" one that's cropped
- The texture sources of an enemy that could be put together. (External link, if possible. No point in uploading it to the wiki only to delete it again.)
- Enemies that "just don't have either"
Did sprites in Magia Record use Live2d? If so, then we should definitely not upload any of the source textures, and should instead upload a render of the Live2d model – just like we do with conversation models. I think someone linked to a site that has these sprites awhile ago, but I don't remember who or where. It would probably be fine to use the other types as a stand-in where available, though.
Next, about special variants and IDs. First of all, I don't really care if the special variants have the same ID as their normal forms. The ID is an internal detail that doesn't matter in the slightest, so let's ignore that. (If you want to put that internal detail in the article, fine, but don't make strange decisions based on it.) I don't know what you mean by claiming that Magia Record does not separate them, but if they're logically a different enemy, then I'd say they should have a different page. Just because it's a reskin doesn't mean it's the same enemy – Matasaburo is a reskin of Candy but is clearly treated as a separate thing.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 21:36, 23 May 2026 (UTC)
Okay for examples:
An "Enemy" one that has multiple versions in one sprite
By this I meant how some enemies have multiple looks in one sprite like:
I don't think this is an issue though.
A "Chara" one that's cropped
Easily the sprites of the Kimochi are very visibly cropped, because they dont have the "Enemy" sprites, just the "Chara" ones
-
-
Only the tail but still
The texture sources of an enemy that could be put together.
Here is The Uwasa of the Anonymous Mail, obviously we have a sprite for this so we don't need to do anything with this. But this Christmas Oscar is one we don't have a sprite of, and I wish we had (though probably not for the enemy page itself just for the gallery). For an example of an enemy that doesn't have the first two types od sprites, is Magical Girl (Executive), this is a link to her page on the record wiki where she doesn't have a sprite, and this is her texture. I dont think they're considered Live2D, I just compared them cause I think it works similarly (I dont know how it works so-)
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 21:52, 23 May 2026 (UTC)
I dont think they're considered Live2D
It would be very strange for them to use a 2D skeletal animation system for the conversation sprites and a different 2D skeletal animation system for the battle sprites (though it's totally possible I guess). Live2D can totally animate small sprites like the ones used in Magia Record – I hadn't heard that they used it for that, but it sounds like they probably did.
The magical girl executive you linked appears to be a conversation sprite, not a battle sprite? Though maybe the texture you linked to is a battle sprite.
Anyway, if Magia Record was using Live2D (or similar) for their sprites as well, then what we should really have on the wiki is a render of the Live2D model. When "Enemy" or "Chara" sprites exist that work, we can use them instead (at least temporarily), but in general, I think we should prefer the proper render. And by the way – I don't think the ones with multiple sprites in one are good to use. They can be fine on a temporary basis, but again, I think we should prefer a direct render of the Live2D model.
I found this, which has the executive, but doesn't have any of the enemies. (Note: the certificate is expired, so you'd need to override the security warning to view it.) I think it could be possible to download that and view enemy sprites locally as long as you have the assets.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 00:44, 24 May 2026 (UTC)
I agree that we should use the renders, I look at the "Enemy" sprites the same way I do at the Chamber of Light enemy images from Exedra, where it's just a good sprite to represent the enemy, but it's not perfect. If we do get the rendered sprites, should we have all of them on the enemy pages? (like all the Oscars on their enemy page) Because if we do, then we definitely use tabbers, and that has another problem- the tab names, though... I feel like it should be okay if we use a the same character for every tab (maybe something invisible like ⠀) and make each tab a different color with css like we did with the Kioku and Unit tabs.
Also two more questions, should the descriptions go into the enemy pages? They would fit there, as descriptions are directly tied to enemies, but at the same time the Witch and Uwasa pages already have them in their boxes, and a lot of enemies wouldn't have those descriptions. The second question is- should Template:Magia Exedra Enemy Small be also used for the Record enemies, as in rename the template and add a 'game' parameter to link correctly. I think it would be better than making another template that would mostly look the same, but I don't know what types of enemies are in Record. I know there are enemies that are said to be Bosses, but that's it.
About the renders again, I know I won't be able to make them, as I know nothing about this kind of stuff T_T
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 11:20, 24 May 2026 (UTC)
I might be missing something, but I don't understand why you want tabs here. Do each of the variations of the enemy have different stats or description or something like that? If we're only showing off the sprites themselves, a gallery would make more sense.
By descriptions, do you mean the witch descriptions? I guess those go on the witch pages.
Reusing the template exactly seems like an odd choice to me. We could do it, but it's not like we have a guarantee that all future games would forever fit the same format (though we can just not use it in the future if that happens).
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 14:49, 24 May 2026 (UTC)
I want tabs only for the sprites if the enemy has multiple of them, it's useful in cases like the Bartels in Exedra where they have 3 main appearances, so putting only one would make it look odd.
For the descriptions I meant all enemy descriptions so for Uwasa and Familiars too.
About the template its okay to just have them be separate, it won't change that much (Though I still want to rename the template idk what I was thinking with Enemy Small).
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 14:58, 24 May 2026 (UTC)
Okay so- I found a possible way to render these sprites, and some work! But... not all of them
-
Echo -
Echo -
Coco
The Echos look perfect but the Coco... yeah it's been through stuff. I think I know why, it's because the texture of the echos don't have any alternative sprites for when they attack or something, but Coco does, so they all render at the same time. Also the brain of the Coco renders weirdly low, idk i'll try to get this fixed but right now I'm flopping. (Also dont delete these files I or someone else will just upload new versions of them when the sprites are fixed)
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 19:59, 24 May 2026 (UTC)
My first guess would be that the method you're using is missing a step that selects the pose to use, so it's coming out as the equivalent of a T-pose (meaning the Echo sprites could also be a bit off). But, without more information about what you did, I can't be certain. I might be able to offer some other suggestions if you explain what you did, though.
Also, as a side note, for some of these sprites I've been wondering if it would make sense to render them in multiple poses – especially the ones where there are dramatic transformations during attacking, such as Candy's head turning into a mouth full of teeth.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 20:32, 24 May 2026 (UTC)
I won't go into that much detail, but the script I use takes text from the .plist file of the enemy and using it assembles the sprite. The plist details which parts of the texture go where, it has 8 parameters: width, height, originalWidth, originalHeight, x, y, offsetX and offsetY. The script takes the x y, goes to those coordinates of the texture, cuts it out with the width and height and then positions it with the offset parameters. I believe the problem for the placement is the fact that I ignored originalWidth and originalHeight, but that's just because I have NO idea what those are, they sometimes seem random and sometimes are the exact same in every part. About the too many parts showing up problem, parts are usually labeled by numbers, but some also have letters (so like 'parts00' and 'parts01a' 'parts01b') I'm pretty sure that I should be able to easily find which ones are the idle/normal ones, but I'm not sure (I've already tried the a ones and it didnt work)
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 21:39, 24 May 2026 (UTC)
I have 2 theories, either the plist is just not enough to make a sprite in some cases, as sprites like the christmas Oscar ive sent a link to before have all of their parts in the same place, or the originalWidth and Height affect position/scale of each part. I can't tell if im stupid or its complicated, but I know that the first Echo i sent a render of, each part has the exact same originalWidth and originalHeight, while cases where the parts look wrongly arranged usually each part has a different originalWidth and height. Please give me all ideas you can think of how to affect the scale/position of the parts using the original parameters cause I'm losing it over here.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 10:11, 25 May 2026 (UTC)
I think I'm giving up T-T. Nothing I tried even came close to working, If you want to I could share the files (I did it all on Godot, a free game engine), but I fear I literally don't know how to continue. I think that my theory about the plist not being enough was right, and that maybe the ExportJson file would be, but its too big and my laptop takes too long to load it in.
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 15:13, 25 May 2026 (UTC)
Hmm. Since you mentioned a plist file, I found documentation of the Cocos2D spritesheet format hoping it would help, but what you described doesn't appear to conform to that format, so I'm not sure where to go from here... are the files on rika-ren? If you could point to them, perhaps I could take a quick look.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 18:49, 25 May 2026 (UTC)
Also, side note – you mentioned using Godot because it was free, but it can't hurt to try downloading Cocos Creator and see if it can just open them. No idea if it would work, but someone said somewhere that Magia Record was made in Cocos2d, so it might work. And AFAICT Cocos2d is also free.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 18:54, 25 May 2026 (UTC)
The textures and .plist files are here on rika-ren, there's a lot more than just those two, like the ExpandJson I mentioned, but I thought the plist would be enough. I'll experiment with the Cocos2d app, but I also used godot because I knew how to code in there, while I won't know how to code here, so I make no promises (you should try too).
- TheresaFrog421 (talk) 18:59, 25 May 2026 (UTC)
Hmmm okay, I'm not sure. A couple observations though…
- I notice that the ExportJson and the .vfxj lack a 0 in the filename that the plist (and the png) has. No idea what that means.
- The plist does look like the general structure is the same as the Cocos2D sprite format, but the content of each frame is completely different. Maybe it's an older version of the format? I dunno.
~ Celtic Minstrel (talk) 00:18, 26 May 2026 (UTC)