Difference between revisions of "Talk:Kazumi Magica"

From Puella Magi Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Expansion)
(Expansion)
Line 102: Line 102:
  
 
Is this correct?  --[[User:Randomanon|randomanon]] 08:34, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 
Is this correct?  --[[User:Randomanon|randomanon]] 08:34, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 +
:A lot of wikis (like the Haruhi Wiki, which I'm currently managing) have two character formats, one for major characters with a format with lots of detailed information, and one for characteres we don't know much about and have a much more condensed format. Compare [http://haruhi.wikia.com/wiki/Kyon this] (major character) and [http://haruhi.wikia.com/wiki/Sasaki this] (minor character). Obviously this wiki would have a more organized format, but you get what I mean. <small>[[User:Aster Selene|Only dead fish]] [[User talk:Aster Selene|go with the flow.]]</small> 19:02, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
  
 
== Spoiler tags ==
 
== Spoiler tags ==

Revision as of 19:02, 8 May 2011

Is it "Niko" or "Nico"? The scanlations use the latter. -Universalperson 14:23, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Wait. Independent chapters?

I'm seeing Chapters One through Three of Kazumi on Mangafox. Yet the first volume is only coming out in May 12th? I am kinda nob when it comes to manga... so, does "serialization" means that these chapters are coming out in Kirara Forward each month, before they're packed together and released as a volume? BrickBreak 20:26, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Yes. Most manga series are published chapter-by-chapter each week or month in a magazine, with volumes being released whenever a set number of chapters is reached. 64.89.144.100 20:51, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
In that case, should we add each chapter's release date? BrickBreak 22:04, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
I believe a release date along with a summary of the chapters would be in order, with proper spoiler tags of course.

Runes?

I think there is some runic text in Kazumi chapter 1. Anyone have a translation? - Universalperson 13:23, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a scan or something? Might as well try and translate them, I'm pretty bored anyway. Also, we should probably make a page for them then, Runes:Kazumi Magica or something. --Homerun-chan 14:26, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
I see them here, but suddenly I'm not sure if they were added there by the scanlators or not. There might be some here as well, I'm not sure. - Universalperson 15:08, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, the first one is obviously added by the scanlator. It reads "scanlated by /a/non for /a/non, raws from [something I couldn't read due to quality]". --Homerun-chan 15:24, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
The mysterious characters on the second one don't look like any recognized runes to me. --KFYatek 16:51, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
In case you're talking about "入口は??", that's japanese. I can't make it quite out, but it should say something like "Entrance this way". --TATZL 16:57, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
Oh my. I know enough Japanese to know what 入口 is, but it's such an obfuscated font I'd never tell it's kanji. Thanks for pointing it out! --KFYatek 18:28, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
The last scanlator runeword matches the raw provider name in the watermark in the next page, and it's mixing archaic and modern.
Thank you all very much, sorry for the inconvenience. - Universalperson 17:44, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Juubey?

Where'd you get this from? O.o BrickBreak 13:37, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Juubey.jpg
It seems that scans leaked on 2ch. TATZL 13:48, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Now notice the shadow next to Juubey in the first panel. Juubey may not be an Incubator after all... -- Universalperson 14:02, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Jubey's definitely an Incubator. The girl on the second page (I forget her name) calls him/her/it "the fairy that made us into puella magi". It seems that Kyubey is present on the first page, though...--urutapu 16:30, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Exactly. Kyubey is a hive mind. Why would he need to talk to himself like that? I think the fact that it's a "fairy" is going to be a major point. -- Universalperson 16:34, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Even if there's a hive mind, that doesn't mean they can simply telepathically talk or instantly know what another Incubator is up to. Like the Human Interfaces in Haruhi.--urutapu 16:36, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Volume 1

Dumb question: I would imagine that since it's being released the same time as Oriko it might get lost in the shuffle, but is there anyone who's planning to look through it and see if there are any differences/additions to the original serialized chapters? -- Universalperson 20:09, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

If someone will upload the scans (raws are fine) of the tankobon somewhere (preferably as some DDL, but torrent is OK, too), then I can do that. But seeing how Kazumi is rather unpopular, I'm not so sure of the scan availability. I don't plan on buying Kazumi myself. Not in the slightest. --KFYatek 20:40, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, that's what concerns me. I'd do it myself, if I could get the scans, but...--Universalperson 21:33, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
It is? Uh... it's got half a million views in MangaFox, but then again, I guess that doesn't translate in the "Madoka is sold out EVERYWHERE" thing we had with the original manga. --BrickBreak 22:02, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
It's more that I'm worried Kazumi will be ignored when Oriko comes out. -- Universalperson 22:07, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Well obviously. Slapping the main characters on it = automatic profit. And Kazumi was just getting intresting :/ (well, to most people. I've liked it since the start. Though it might just be because I love Kazumi and real tech mixed with magic (the GPS, Yuuri's SMGs are almost Walther MPL's, etc.)) --BrickBreak 22:16, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Expansion

This is a question that also applies to Oriko.
Right now, we have a single page to cover everything in each manga release. Granted, they're nearly not the same scale as Madoka, and one of them is just a medium conversion with few changes. But still, there's more to it than just this. The most obvious example being a page for Kazumi herself, Umika and Kaoru, and another for the Pleiades Saints. And maybe then think about other stuff.
I volunteer to work on it, but I won't be able to until the weekend, university and fencing are keeping me locked up.
But that's not really my main question. That would be: should it be done? Okay, this is "Puella Magi wiki", not "Madoka wiki". But given the obviously huge focus on Madoka, and the apparent lack of interest in the spin-offs (so far), is it justifiable?
I certainly think so, but I want to hear from you. --BrickBreak 00:13, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

I myself am not interested in the spinoffs, but definitely think that Kazumi at least should get its own set of character pages and the like. My only problem is with Oriko: the current translation of the second volume's synopsis calls it the "concluding" volume, meaning that the series most likely isn't going to have enough content to justify taking up more than one page -- especially considering that any new insight into the anime characters can just be entered onto their preexisting pages. Momoism 03:39, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
I support Kazumi pages. Oriko at the very least should get her own page. It's approximately 8 chapters, which is relatively significant. Aster Selene 05:07, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
I think it's best to separate manga characterizations from the anime ones. Oriko is described as a spin-off, so events and characterizations may not be considered canon to the anime. We know even the direct adaptation manga has significant differences from the anime. For example, the manga shows Sayaka killing the men on the train whereas Shinbo in the anime chose not to go that route. Either interpretation was acceptable to Urobuchi who left the scenario open to both so neither are technically wrong but it would be confusing and a bit misleading to not clearly state what was in the anime and what was in the manga. This would also apply to the background information on Madoka's characters from Oriko. I'm all for having it included but the source should be clearly stated and preferably categorized so it avoids any confusion. As for Kazumi, as long as the pages stay under the manga section, it sounds fine, just don't want it under the characters page where people might get confused with them and the Madoka anime characters. --randomanon 05:39, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

SUGGESTION: Since the character pages all need to be cleaned up a little big in general (speculah about characters should be moved to a new speculah page for characters, for example, and be tagged right/wrong/uncomfirmed), redundant discussions need to be trimmed, etc etc, just add a "in the manga" section to each character page that will, as necessary, detail their involvement in the mangas. Furthermore, I believe that each major manga character (so Kazumi and Oriko, at least) should get their own page on the characters page. Just add a section for manga-only characters.

The character pages do need clean-up however I don't think Kazumi or any other manga-only characters (like in Oriko) should be included with the Madoka ones. The website is dedicated to Puella Magi (or Mahou Shoujo) Madoka Magica. That means the character pages should really only be dedicated to those characters in the anime. The manga only characters belong in the manga section as something in addition that might interest people, but isn't the main focus or draw to this site. --randomanon 07:41, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
I agree with the sentiment, but why have a wiki for the anime and a wiki for the manga when we could have a single unified wiki that properly identifies what comes from the manga and what comes from the anime? This just seems like it'll split the fanbase between working on a manga wiki and working on an anime wiki... and guess which one will get more attention and which one will be incomplete and barely worked on if that happens? I'm not seeing the harm in adding manga material, as long as it is clearly identified and marked which is what. Not only that, but knowing that the mangas are being produced by the same company, they may reveal things that will fill in the blanks for the anime. If a decision can't be reached by single individuals, though... why not hold a poll?
Actually, the wiki is called "puella-magi.net" (as opposed to the previous one who was madoka-centered), and the homepage states "(...) as well as any subsequent works.", so like the guy above me (who didn't sign his comment by the way), I think manga characters do have their place here. Why not just add a new row "Manga characters" in the Characters's table? (just like Madoka's family and classmates) --Homerun-chan 10:25, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Let me see if I can explain my thinking in clearer, more straight-forward fashion. The most logical way I see to fix the issues discussed is for: the manga to have its own subsection (equivalent to setting, products, media etc.) and in that section, each manga would have a separate listing under it. Then, you can break out the manga into a chapters and character page. This is a simple way to solve the issues of growth and also clearly separates what happens in the anime from what happens in the manga. You can also then provide a link from the anime characters pointing to the manga character page(s) to give additional information/discrepancies between what occurred in the anime and manga, but having separate pages makes it easy to see what characteristic was derived from which source.
On the other hand, if you'd did it the other way people are suggesting, adding manga-only characters to the character section, it could easily become confusing to someone who is not familiar with both the anime and manga. It's also inconsistent with the format of the section under settings where location, glossary and (of course) episodes are all anime-specific. Then you may open up the can of worms where people start adding manga-only items to location, glossary, etc. If you say well why does any of this matter? It's because there are always discrepancies between "canon anime," "canon manga," and "spin-off manga," that are viewed as different level of authority by fans and it's important to them to know the distinction. Anytime those lines start getting blurred, you'll get a host of questions and arguments that could have been avoided by knowing that X came from this source and Y came from this other source, and OK the first source is canon and the second one isn't. Speaking from the painful experience of seeing this happen many times before with other franchises--well, it's always good to keep source material as clear as possible.
One final comment: It only takes one or two dedicated fans to update the wiki on a manga volume and it seems Kazumi has those fans. I don't see why people are concerned it'll get neglected. Even if Kazumi updates are delayed because of Oriko's premiere, that would only be reflecting the fanbase interests and the wiki doing what it's suppose to: providing the info that's most interesting and timely to the fanbase. --randomanon 15:02, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Okay, I get your point better now, and it makes sense indeed. We just have to be careful to link the pages properly to give the "Manga" part of the wiki the attention it desserves, and to carefully state what should go where. The easiest way to do so would probably be to use a new namespace, "Manga:", for all those pages, right?
Also, another advantage I see in your way of separating things is that character pages (as well as others) won't grow any bigger that way. If we merge both the anime and manga info into one page, then it'd grow into a wall of text even bigger than it is now. --Homerun-chan 15:29, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
In all seriousness, have you ever seen any wiki related to some fictional work to have many pages about the same character for different media he/she appears in? The only example I am aware of is Asuka from Evangelion on the EvaGeeks wiki. Since her name and biography is quite different in the Rebuild movies, they chose to just mention her Rebuild version briefly in the main article (Asuka Langley Soryu) and make a separate article for the Rebuild character (Asuka Shikinami Langley).
But look at the page about Shinji. There are several paragraphs about him in the original series and The End of Eva (treated jointly), and then subsections "in the manga", "in other Eva-base manga", "in Rebuild of Eva". They have no speculah section, but a trivia section titled "Notes", so it kind of evens out ;)
Anyway, the Madoka manga does not really differ that much from the anime. Even though I kind of outdid myself spotting almost every single difference, most of them are fairly insignificant in terms of character development. Knowing the exact wording of Mami's wish or not? Sayaka killing the men on the train or not? Charlotte looking different in her caterpillar form? Kyubey having facial expression or not? Do they really justify making separate pages for anime and manga versions of every single character? I don't think so.
The only appearance of Madoka character in Kazumi is Kyubey's cameo and Madoka's silhouette as an illustration of a Puella Magi, which are totally insignificant for anything other than noting it. I don't think we'll ever see other anime characters in Kazumi, since it takes place in a different city. And Kazumi isn't in conflict with anime canon in terms of "the laws of the universe".
Oriko will be a different beast, because many of Madoka's main characters are also Oriko's main characters. But even if it will be in direct conflict with the anime canon, I vote for just having an "In other media" section, and then subsections "In Madoka manga", "In Oriko manga" etc. We don't have two separate Madokas (or Mamis, Homuras, Kyoukos, Kyubeys), it's the same character. And having many timelines doesn't change it (can you seriously imagine having separate page for eg. Keiichi from Higurashi for every arc?). --KFYatek 16:07, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
So in the end it all comes down to how much difference there is between sources. If existing characters start changing a lot in one of the series, then they may need a separate page, but not if it's just minor changes/no changes at all, where a single section would be enough ... (note that there isn't much difference between both solution if the pages are linked proprely)
Anyway, I have to admit I don't follow any of the manga series, so I'll leave the debate to you guys. Just one last suggestion: why don't we do as usual, i.e. solving problems when they're here? We could just add stuff to the existing pages for now, and start thinking of another organization if it gets too messy in the future right? None of the pages look like they'd need a refactoring in the near future to me, and we still barely know anything about Kazumi/Oriko Magica so it's a bit hard to anticipate at this rate ... --Homerun-chan 16:36, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, sorry, I saw this discussion as a future direction, e.g. after Oriko and Kazumi's new volumes are out. Right now even the manga pages aren't even half as long as say, Homura's character page. So they're fine as one-pagers at the moment.
Hm, I think you're misunderstanding in thinking there'd be a "Manga Homura" page versus "Anime Homura" page. What I'm proposing is a "Manga Character page" for each manga so for instance, Kazumi would have a page listing all its characters. Madoka and Oriko's manga would provide for anime characters: a blurb description, a link to the anime-specific characters page, then list things unique to that manga. Then for Oriko it would list all the manga-specific characters like the three new girls, witches, etc. This to me is far clearer and easier for users than adding all the manga-only characters in Oriko and Kazumi to the already long list of characters, and then add more sections to the already lengthy anime character pages. I hear you about the wikis with the Eva examples and that makes sense when you normally have brief, general summaries that you can put together where there's consensus, and easily see where there's major differences from different sources. I personally prefer that format for character pages and I'd be for it if things were rolled up in summary format. But I see Madoka's wiki is different with very detailed levels of information for well, everything (like the summary paragraphs of all the manga vs. anime differences...that's not something you normally see on a wiki), and people seemed inclined in only adding and not trimming things back. When things are that detailed, it makes sense to separate out pages to reduce length and confusion. Madoka's manga doesn't have much but if people show as much interest in detailing things for Oriko, those character pages can really get out-of-hand. --randomanon 16:56, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
OK, I think I see your point now, and it seems we don't really differ much, if at all ;) --KFYatek 18:13, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Full-blown discussion engaged. Just as keikaku.
Don't mind me addressing initial ponderings, I was away all day. First, of course a proper separation is needed. I never in any way doubted that. The issue was "how", not "if", and you handled better than I would have. So, two main lines of thought, so far: a strong separation between anime and manga stuff, or a higher level of interaction, while asserting their differences. I must go with the last one. Character pages for at least the major manga characters (well... it's not like Madoka follows that rule), "In other media" sections for anime ones, and a "manga characters" section at the Characters page.
But I do absolutely agree that the differences in canon must be properly stated. Maybe some sort of header on both saying:

(NOTE: It is unclear how canonical the events of the manga editions are towards the anime. Use caution.)

Or something of the kind (shorter, of course).
As for things getting out of hand... that's what were here for, no? Although I do not believe things will go down that road. If they didn't with the anime (or rather: they did, but we rode through the storm), I find it hard to believe it will happen with Oriko, no matter the popularity. --BrickBreak 23:02, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Here's a suggestion. Stop me if I'm wrong. Character pages, IMO, should be divided like this:

  • Brief Summary, First Appearance
  • Personality (Brief Overview)
  • History (backstory+role in the anime; this section would clearly point out that a character is NOT from the anime in the case of manga characters)
  • In the Manga (information may not be canon; use section to give an overview of what they do in each manga series, if applicable; for example, this would be a good place to note things like 'in the manga, <so and so forth>'s weapon is slightly different' or 'in the manga, <so and so forth> actually kills <unimportant characters on a train>')
  • Powers, Weapons & Abilities
  • Trivia
  • Gallery
  • Link to Speculah Page

As it is right now, I won't lie, character pages look like shit. They're full of weird speculah, people have a tendency to use the various fields as mini-forums for discussion (instead of the talk pages), the official info sections are basically heaps of stuff, and the pages are NOT easy to read. Compare this to any other established wiki with dedicated character pages and... yeah, this is definitely a weird way to do it. More to the point: people need to stop using the character pages as discussion forums. They need to use the talk pages for that. If I'm wrong, then I guess it's no use hanging around and offering contributions now and again; I must have some odd, incompatible way of thinking for the people on this wiki.

Well I agree to the rest we should make a character page. However we don't had much official images of the characters from Kazumi. Like separating the character tablet of Madoka and Kazumi. -Dandan550 07:20, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
I agree that the character pages need a cleanup, and actually, it's in the wishlist. I also agree that the speculah section should be a little more formal, and not "I think this ... I disagree with him ...". I don't see a problem with people adding sub-points to a point of speculah, tvtropes-like, but we should just be careful not to turn it into a talkpage (i.e. we should avoid personal opinion and prefer neutral speech for instance).
As for the speculah section, if they're written correctly (and maybe cleaned up, like Homura's page), I don't see a reason to move them to another page. Since you're talking about other established wiki, just look at the Touhou wiki for instance: there is also a part of speculah on the characters pages, even though it's far smaller than here (I don't think that delirium about Yukari's name is canon, but I may be mistaken).
So yeah in conclusion I agree with you, except that I'd leave the speculah on the page if I were you. Also, I'm nitpicking here but I'm not sure "weapons and abilities" need a section on its own. What is there to write, except "Madoka uses a bow and has the ability to throw random stuff when things go downhill"? There's also a page detailing what the weapons are, and so on.

tl;dr I agree with your way of doing things, with some minor changes. --Homerun-chan 08:59, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
'Powers, abilities, etc' could link to the magic/magic speculah/weapon pages for more indepth outlooks. But for example, such a section on Homura's page would list out her shield, how it works (hourglass/one month), the timestopping, etc. The alternative would be to start including manga characters' stuff on those pages, which... risks making them swell and swell.
Thinking about this again, I'm starting to think we may want to make character pages for all of the characters, not just the major ones. Whether or not they are "significant", they are still part of the franchise, and the wiki should keep organization even if it means making an article for a character nobody cares about. At least, even a supporting character in, say, Kazumi would be more important than, say, the Hospital Staff in Madoka. Only dead fish go with the flow. 06:43, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
I agree. I wasn't sure what the reaction would be, so I just put everything about them in the Pleiades Saints page. There is just one problem: with the small amount of info we have so far, it'll be impossible to use the new character page setup. --BrickBreak 13:42, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Just wanted to verify if I'm understanding the new proposed structure correctly, regarding the structure of the character breakdown.

Setting - All Anime specific

  • Characters - 1) Character Summary Table[1] -> 1.5) Individual Characters pages, now added manga sections ex: [2]
  • Locations
  • Glossary
  • Episodes

Manga - Manga specific

  • Madoka - 1) Chapters subpage
  • Kazumi - 1) Chapters subpage, 2) Manga-specific Characters Summary table -> 2.5) Individual Characters pages
  • Oriko - 1) Chapters subpage, 2) Manga-specific Characters Summary table -> 2.5) Individual Characters pages

Is this correct? --randomanon 08:34, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

A lot of wikis (like the Haruhi Wiki, which I'm currently managing) have two character formats, one for major characters with a format with lots of detailed information, and one for characteres we don't know much about and have a much more condensed format. Compare this (major character) and this (minor character). Obviously this wiki would have a more organized format, but you get what I mean. Only dead fish go with the flow. 19:02, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Spoiler tags

I'm posting this in the Kazumi Magica talkpage, but it is not limited to Kazumi, but rather to the whole wiki. Kazumi Magica page can act as an example, and also helps me bring attention, since much of the wiki work now revolves around it ;)

Anyway - I feel the inline spoiler tag is quite overused. I am using ir myself, following the common practice, but I somehow feel this is wrong. I even have a feeling that the inline spoiler tag is not well suited for the structure and character of this wiki. It works quite well on TVtropes, which has a more constant structure of pages, but... have you ever seen something like that on any other wiki? (what's more, our inline spoiler tag being black makes it less visually neat than TVtropes' white tag)

The idea is noble, but it leads to some weird situations. Here on Kazumi Magica page, having "Pleiades Saints" header spoilered, or even entire Chapter 4 summary doesn't look like it is what we've wanted...

I was talking about other established wikis above. The EvaGeeks wiki has only a spoiler warning box, and even more - uses it just for "recent media" (eg. the Rebuild movies). Wookiepedia doesn't seem to have a spoiler tag at all (likely due to a line of thought that a wiki of some fictional work is primarily for people familiar with said work - it actually makes sense to me). So Ra No Wo To wiki, which may have been some kind of inspiration for ours (SRNWT being the original speculah anime) also only has a spoiler box... and doesn't use it anywhere. Spoiler boxes are also only kind of spoiler tags found on Touhou Wiki mentioned above and. Wikipedia actually got rid of all spoiler tags they once had.

tl;dr - I propose on cleaning the wiki of most (or even all) usage of inline spoiler tag and strongly discouraging its use in new content (or even deleting it altogether). --KFYatek 09:13, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

As the one who used Spoiler tags on this page, I'm personally following a "Avoid spoiling major events of the previous two chapters" rule for Kazumi just in case no-one has seen it yet. Once Chapter 5 comes out I'd remove the Pleiades Saint spoilers, for example. --Universalperson 10:17, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
Actually, it's possible to put a reference in the spoiler box. It only works with the anime episodes right now, but I'll edit it so that it accepts manga chapters too. Anyway, nothing refrains you of adding a spoiler box at the top of the section/page, which explains what is spoilered. See Template:Spoilers (subject to change in the following minutes/hours). --Homerun-chan 10:23, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, I started a discussion going in the same direction on the ep12 talkpage, which is basically a black page at the moment. I agree with you in that spoilerish paragraphs should be tagged with a box, not with the inline tag. As its name states, the inline tag was at first meant for ... inline spoilers, i.e. words or parts of a sentence that could be spoilerish, and difficult to tag otherwise. Using them for a whole paragraph, or for headers, is just wrong usage. I wouldn't go as far as completely removing this tag, but we sure need clear guidelines regarding its usage.
On the aesthetic part, I can try making it white if you find it less visually aggressive (the Episode 12 page isn't really visually pleasant at the moment, I agree). Problem with the white spoiler tag is the opposite as the black one: you miss one more easily. --Homerun-chan 10:21, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
Changed the spoiler tags to something TVtropes-like, i.e. white with gray bottom border. Tell me what you think about it. (I didn't find how to hide the links though, "a" and "a:visited" don't seem to work for some reason ...) --Homerun-chan 11:27, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
Links weren't hidden in the black version, either (though they were barely visible as dark blue on black). For the links, it works when you'll use .inline-spoilers, .inline-spoilers a { color: white !important; } .inline-spoilers:hover { color: black !important; }. However, then the tags won't get un-spoilered on hover, so you'll have to add something like .inline-spoilers:hover a { color: #0645ad !important; } and so on for other link classes (a.stub, a.new and also the visited and active versions, if you care), which is kind of ugly as per design robustness, but... works ;)
As for the aesthetics of the white version, it looks great, at least for my tastes :) --KFYatek 21:02, 7 May 2011 (UTC)