Talk:Wishlist

Keep track of items for sale on Amazon JP? See links on main page for now. Perhaps an admin would like to tack on referrer codes?

What do you mean exactly? Create a page with all the products and links to the Amazon page?

That's basically what I meant. By referrer codes I meant this Oatmeal 10:31, 18 January 2011 (CST)

Fanarts

Do we, will we, have any restriction on posting fanart in character galleries? (bandwidth, legal, otherwise?) --Sayaka 13:14, 21 January 2011 (CST)

Did not notice this post, I don't think we should include fanarts in wiki. --0x99 22:12, 25 February 2011 (UCT)

Review?

Just wondering, is there any point in keeping the changes that have been done in the wishlist? Easier review? --Homerun-chan 22:08, 25 February 2011 (UCT)

Yup. So that you can know someone has already finished this task, rather than it being removed from the wishlist for unknown reason. Cleanup after a week should be enough. --0x99 22:12, 25 February 2011 (UCT)

Theories illustrations

The theories that still need some illustrations are :

• Speculah:Archer theory (should be renamed too)
• Speculah:Homura Identity Swap Theory
• Speculah:Puella Magi Don't Age
• Speculah:Witches as Fallen Magical Girls Theory
• Speculah:Human Soul and Magic
• Speculah:Witches are generated by Magical Girls
• Speculah:Magical Girls as Devil Pacters
• Speculah:The War Between Good Guys Theory
• Speculah:The Time Travel Theory
• Speculah:Make a Wish (not necessarily)

--Homerun-chan 17:56, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Done Prima 05:10, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Remove false character speculahs?

"Clean speculah section in character pages and remove those proven false by canon." - why should we delete them? I think what has been speculated is somewhat valuable information. Just like we still have false speculahs on Theories page, I think we should keep false speculahs on character pages, just mark them with red X's or maybe even move into separate sections ("Speculations proven wrong") or something like that.
But yeah, I agree that it needs cleaning either way... --KFYatek 14:41, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Going over the character pages, it looks like the only ones that really need cleaning up are Homura and Kyuubey's. (The other pages have relatively small and accurate speculah sections.) It's been a while since this conversation, but should we get started on setting up "Speculah proven wrong" sections? Momoism 18:00, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

In accordance with the guidelines used throughout this wiki, I changed the entry to "(...) and properly tag those proven false (...)". As discussed in other talkpages, all speculah are usually considered useful information, and should just be marked as debunked if relevant. Still have to make a template for these tags though. --Homerun-chan 21:24, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

First try at a theory categorization. I fear the headers will be too big/visible for the actual pages. Opinions? (it's still a work in progress, remember) --Homerun-chan 21:44, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

TV / NicoNico / BD Differences

I think it would be a good idea to make a page which shows the differences between the different versions of each episode. Maybe as a seperate page or on the page for each episode. Keksus 03:20, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

KFYatek is at it. See the page in his namespace (I don't have a link right now, will post it this evening) --Homerun-chan 07:49, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

User:KFYatek/Episode revisions. Also, feel free to contribute there if you feel like it. --KFYatek 07:51, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Documents Pages Need Re-organization

I'd like to see someone take on the two pages for Documents. They badly need it re-organized so it's easier for people to find things...plus, it's a popular section for fans. Right now, everything is just getting dumped in the Discussion page because no one knows what else to do. I really don't know how to do proper wiki formatting but I can assist on what sources came from where and when etc. on the majority of the stuff if someone is willing to look through and set up a proper structure. Also adding the benefit of having the information set up well will help with people doing research for analysis and speculah. I anticipate more interviews coming down the line where things in the anime will be explained. --randomanon 19:27, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

I have the reverse problem. I'm willing to restructure it when I have the time, but I'm too lazy to skim through the documents to sort them out. So maybe you can do the sorting, and I (or whoever wants to help of course) do the formatting?
Also, how about splitting that page in subpages? It's already pretty long right now, and it's not gonna get any shorter with all the stuff that's in the talkpage ... --Homerun-chan 20:01, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Urgh, well organization and formatting are not my strong points and I'm already far behind on my queue for the Madoka things I do in my spare time...I can't commit time right now to an overhaul, only assist with some of the research end of what came from where. Hopefully someone else will be willing to step up to the plate. I do see subpages would make sense, like one for all the tweets. --randomanon 21:14, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Regarding the (sub)pages, how about we split them like this:

• Interviews with the script writer (Urobuchi)
• Interviews with the staff (Shinbo, Inu Curry, Miyamoto, Ume-sensei, ...)
• Interviews with the voice actresses
• Tweets

("Tweets" getting its own page; the rest either staying as sections of the general page, or becoming subpages too)

Then of course we'd find a way to keep track of the source, the date/month when the article got published and a summary (as it is now). Probably order them chronologically, or by theme...
That way it shouldn't be too hard to organize if someone gives us the sources, and it doesn't seem to hard to find an article back either. --Homerun-chan 09:19, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Are there enough interviews with Urobuchi to make a separate page just for it? Aren't there any interviews featuring both Urobuchi and Shinbou, for example? The idea is good, but I think there are quite a few things that can go wrong. --KFYatek 11:50, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

I count 4 interviews involving Urobuchi on the page, didn't check the talkpage. If that's a problem (joint interview, etc.) we can still put him in the "staff" section/page. And I don't think there is any interview involving both the staff and the VA cast, so the problem shouldn't show up (and if it does, we can still link the article properly) --Homerun-chan 15:32, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

I am comfortable seeing it organized however someone sees fit...some suggestions off the top-of-my-head: I think it should be done by primarily by category over chronology now. Timing made sense during the anime run but now I think categories is more intuitive for someone to organize things and for users searching for something specific. It also helps since we're going to be getting document drops on the manga series now too and not just the anime. Another great thing to have some way of marking/labelling things that are raw scans that could use translation and/or verification, or to ID a source we're not sure about. Something like that would be good to see with each item. I also think maybe a breakout of a table where one can have the scan or source listed, then a translation in the next box etc. Something consistent would be better than the sort of the hodge-podge we have now of go to this link, view this scan, awkwardly long comment below an image, etc. Just some thoughts I had. FYI, having construction near my home that's disrupting my internet at odd times, so unsure of my reliability in the near future. --randomanon 18:20, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Having a table with the raw scan, a translation and additionnal information is what I had in mind too. I also agree with you about the organization in categories, however that's not that easy to do in practice since it's pretty subjective (see the fanworks and media talkpages). Either that or the ordering by interviewee should work though.
On the other hand, I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "some way of marking/labelling things that are raw scans that could use translation and/or verification, or to ID a source we're not sure about". Could you develop? --Homerun-chan 20:07, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Basically it's a convenience for someone like me so I have some way of looking at all the items and seeing which ones still need 1) translations, 2) verification based on an unsure/unreliable translation, 3) an identified source. The way I have to do it now is click on everything and look through it. Some kind of visual cue (tag, color, something) would really save me time figuring out which needs what. Also for translators too--just direct them to a page and figure out which items could use translation rather than needing someone around directing them to each individual item.

As for categories, it's actually OK to do it by topic, in a variety of ways (rather than mostly by chronology like we've been doing), because we can have a column for cross-links. From a user perspective, they're probably looking for something by topic than where or when a source originated. That only makes sense if you've been very involved and know exactly what interview you're looking for...but most users are thinking about a topic/question like, "hey, what's the deal with the black cat?" and wouldn't know which month, who said what, etc. about it. The most user-friendly way, imo, is to list some common categories based on the info we have and what seems like the kinds of categories people might seek out. If there's a good structure put together with some standard categories, I can work to fine-tune categories and put in cross-links and so on. --randomanon 21:07, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I propose we try different things here, and when we feel like it's okay we'll move it to the main namespace. However, when making the page I realized how unfamiliar I am with these documents, to the point where it's been difficult for me to come up with categories, or even find an instance of files with missing source or mistrusted translation. tl;dr I fear I won't be of much help on this one, except for more technical/administrative stuff ... --Homerun-chan 15:29, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Cleaning up the list

There are some stuff that are old as fuck in this list, so maybe we should remove them?

Through the Looking-Glass theory from 2ch.

I for one don't even know what that is, but given that it sounds like speculah and dates back from early February I don't think it's really capital to have it ...

Update all romanization to Hepburn romanization.

Isn't it done yet?

Pages to update after the finale

Are they all up-to-date yet?

Put all we know about Walpurgis Night (be it the real thing, anime speculah, references from real-life works, and so on) on this page

Can we consider it done yet?

Also, reorganizing that list by order of priority... --Homerun-chan 20:05, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

1- Agreed. Got no clue what that is...
2- ...Can't comment this, I'm not the man to ask
3- As far as I can see, yes, even though they might be in the middle of a huge clusterfuck, it's there. Unless we consider tagging all speculahs as of the last episode info as part of this.
4- I believe so. --BrickBreak 21:17, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

About the romanizations

As far as I know the wiki, most romanizations are either in proper, "Wikipedia-style" Hepburn, ie. with long vowels as ā, ī, ū, ē, ō, eg. Shinbō, Kyōsuke, Kyūbē, Tōkyō, Ōsaka etc. - or in what I'll call "fansub-style Hepburn", with long vowels written directly as they are written in kana, eg. Shinbou, Kyousuke, Kyuubee, Toukyou, Oosaka etc. The only notable occurences of a different romanization system are: Kyubey's and Jubey's names - understandable, since it's sort of an official spelling; transliteration of Japanese written in runes - also understandable, since we use the spelling used by authors directly.

Moreover, from my observations, "fansub-style Hepburn" is used in normal text, while proper Hepburn is used with the "nihongo" template. So the situation is not so bad and quite consistent. I'm not advocating neither on switching to proper Hepburn everywhere, since macrons are hard as hell to type on most keyboard layouts (BTW: tip for Linux guys with US or very similar keyboards: try AltGr+} (or AltGr+Shift+] if you prefer) and then the letter), nor to "fansub-style Hepburn" everywhere, since the proper one look more professional and gives a familiar look and feel to all users of Wikipedia ;) So I personally think it can be considered done, but YMMV.

Through the Looking Glass

I don't have a clue what the "Through The Looking Glass" theory is; it's probably long obsolete, but it still would be nice to have it for the sake of completeness. I thought I can give a try translating it, digged into 2ch archives, found that it is discussed in thread 71, made some rough looks with Google Translate and... well, it got to me that it won't really be easy for me, because I just... haven't read anything from Carrol's Alice universe. Shame on me, I know.

So well, when someone feels like it, it can still be translated for the sake of completness, But I consider it such a low priority that yes, it shouldn't be prominently displayed on the wishlist.

The rest

They won't ever be really complete, but yes, they are complete enough to be removed from here, I think. Organizing the pages should be there, though.

--KFYatek 11:50, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Not sure about the character pages

I'm not really sure what pages need work. According to the guidelines, Sayaka's isn't really done properly, and the whole article is bullet-pointed information, but on the other hand it does say everything about her, albeit in a broken up and bare-bones way that has little in common with the given example of a well-written character article. Should this sort of page be rewritten in normal prose? This is something I'd happily do, but then I don't want to jump the gun on it. Then you have stub pages, such as Madoka's father. While this initially seems to need more work than a "Sayaka-type" page, there's not much more to be said about him anyway, and he's a pretty minor and low priority character in general. Would it be possible for someone who's worked on this Wiki longer, and has a clearer idea of what the finished products should be, to do a tier list of the various character pages in order or need for rewriting/additions? Bersayaka 23:50, 25 August 2011 (UTC)