Talk:Toei Animation/Voice Actors

Why did you remove the nicknames of some of the characters (i.e., Pearl the Iron Wall or Gin the Deam Man). I find that unnecessary... - BattleFranky202 13:29, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Mass Deletion
I think all articles about voice actors and seiyu should be all deleted. Most of them are stubs, and they don't really have much relations to articles of One Piece, other than minor references. If we want to link to such articles, we should link them externally to Wikipedia, rather than create a small, insignificant article in One Piece Wikia. Yatanogarasu 17:45, 19 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Also they are largely responsible for the high number of red links. I think the stub pages shall be redirected toward the wikipedia pages if it exist and the link removed if it doesn't. Kdom 12:43, January 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree. A Wikipedia article about a VA will always be better then our one because they should include a full list about their roles in other anime or dubs which is completely unrelated to One Piece. El Chupacabra 14:36, January 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * That's about 190 articles you guys are asking for deletion. Kinda of a lot of hard work was put into making them and kinda a lot more hard work to delete them. Practically an entire section of the entire wikia.


 * From what I gather from some of these actors, many of them aren't covered in Wikipedia. Mostly the Japanese cast I believe.


 * For the red links of the actors, they are primarily red because they are kinda wanted. Not everyone who writes down an actor's name knows a good enough deal about them to make a good article. Those that do however can click on the red link and aid the community.Mugiwara Franky 14:54, January 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * we are not speaking of deletion but redirection toward wikipedia articles which have more chance to evolve than here. Also I'm pretty sure it would solve half of the Red links (I tried 4 randomly and their wikipedia page exist) Kdom 15:11, January 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * Which pages are these again?Mugiwara Franky 15:16, January 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure I understand your question... Kdom 15:33, January 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * Okay, I tried using the redirecting code with Mayumi Tanaka so that it would redirect to her Wikipedia article. When I wrote her name on our search engine, it just led to the redirect page on our wikia not her Wikipedia page. So even if the goal is redirection, we are still going to have to delete 190 articles.Mugiwara Franky 15:25, January 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * Why not keep the redirect page ? The actor names are also in the character boxes and probably in other articles too. Even if the search engine does not provide a direct link, it is not that difficult to access to the information Kdom 15:33, January 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * That's the thing, a redirect page is a page that supposed to redirect people to the proper page directly. If the page is just going to redirect you a empty page with just a link then it's basically a double redirect which a bit of hassle for some people. I'm going to test it out again for short while though to see if it redirects people to the right page via normal linking.Mugiwara Franky 15:42, January 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * No go either. If I go to Luffy's page and then click on Mayumi Tanaka, it'll just go to the redirect page on our wikia. For it to truly go to her page on Wikipedia directly, it will have to be a direct link on Luffy's page to Wikipedia. This would have to apply to the other articles as well. That however will mean not only deleting 190 articles, but also changing 190+ links that go to 190 articles within our wikia to 190+ links that go directly to Wikipedia.Mugiwara Franky 15:47, January 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * Well if you prefer having 50% of the 190 pages with only Mr x is born then and this much high. In One Piece he dubs xxxx and yyyy only to please some lazy guys... Maybe we can ask the Mediawiki staff is there is a solution for that redirection thing Kdom 15:57, January 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * If the state of the articles is the problem then the solution to it would be to create a committee or something to help improve the articles. Saying delete or redirect almost right off the bat to a rather massive problem like this is kinda like choosing a quick lazy shortcut instead of investing some time to fix the problem. True fixing the pages would take a very long and exhausting time however construction would certainly be better than deconstruction. The wikia wasn't built in a single day and it's still not finished in a way.


 * You know, this same type of problem occurred with the Episodes and Chapters. There were all one time or another asked to be deleted I believe. However since they were given enough time, they're currently looking greatly improved than what they looked like before.Mugiwara Franky 16:13, January 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * It is impossible to create a redirect from a wikia page to a wikipedia page. It will be necessary to rewrite all the links on the pages. However, the amount of work will be not larger then categorizing all the templates and images. This will not be problem. Most of Voice actors who have articles hare have articles on wikipedia as well. The lack of article sources in the lack of information about Japanese seiyuu in the english-speaking community. Perhaps we should link them to the Japanese wikipedia. P.S. If we'll decide to delete all the VA articles, we should delete the articles on the sciptwriters and animation directors as well. El Chupacabra 16:31, January 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * Links to English and Japanese wikipedias as well to other sites would probably boost the pages a great deal I guess.


 * For deletion, it's really going to be a bit overboard if scriptwriters and animation directors are going to be put up for deletion as well. If this goes much further, Oda himself is probably going to be the only person involved with the creation of One Piece left. And even then his own article here might be put on the chopping block if not handled carefully.


 * The One Piece wikia kinda needs to be more than just the story itself. It kinda needs to cover the hard working people behind the franchise as well.Mugiwara Franky 16:39, January 30, 2010 (UTC)

For main voiced actors (Straw Hat) we have enough material to write and expanding their articles. For example SBS interviews must be on theirs pages. And I am pretty sure that Wikipedia don’t have interviews. That we don’t have is time.

@El Chupacabra; the tactics to merge or delete small articles doesn’t help no one. I don’t understand your problem with red links the red link exists because the article doesn’t exist.

I am against of any deletion or merge proposal.Tipota 16:50, January 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * I forgot about the actor interviews. For sure Wikipedia is not going to cover any actor interview on One Piece. Our own articles of the actors can cover those interviews. I'm not sure where I myself can a hold of such interviews. However, those are a definite must to be on our pages.Mugiwara Franky 16:57, January 30, 2010 (UTC)


 * Nobody questions the fact that some of these articles are useful. The question is more that the majority of them are 5 lines length and a lot are yet to be written because there is not much more to say about them either (when links stays red forever, we have to question about their pertinences). These state is not really satisfactory and it would be good if we could agree to a decision. Kdom 00:04, January 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree with Kdom! MasterDeva 00:26, January 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * The state that they're in can be improved by investing some time in improving them. It's basically the same thing with the rest of the other articles found in the wikia. Just because a page is stubby does not mean it should be a candidate for deletion or otherwise.


 * When a link stays red for a long time, while it could mean no one wants to create it, it can also mean that the right person has yet to come across it to create such an article. Seriously I too kinda don't understand the problem with red links. Red Links are just red links. It's really superficial to get cringey about wanting to get rid of them all especially in old archives and discussions. The special Wanted Pages part which seems to be the origin point of this problem, was not made to show that the red links are annoying, it was made in the prospect that such red links could be important. While not all of them are important, a chance that a certain red link can be important is always there.Mugiwara Franky 01:52, January 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * I disagree, the special page looses completely its purpose if you keep them, in particular the ones of the pages that have been deleted. How can you find the important link you are talking about when they are in the middle of hundreds of fake ones (in particular since the link order on this page is completely random) ? Also when a page contains a high number of red links like this one or the Events, it can hints a problem, hence the discussion we have now.
 * Also, if I judge by my experience on the uncategorized files, the special pages are limited to display 1000 links, if we continue to keep them, this page will definitly be useless Kdom 11:00, January 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * An excess of red links does not make the special page any less useful. If you were to take out every deleted or unwanted link, you would still have alot of red links. The special pages also normally do not have a limit to which they can list down and show. The only limit they have is how many they show at one time. They can only show 500 pages at one time. For the rest, you have to use the next function.


 * For pages like Events, it can be a problem as it seems to be a page created almost with no planning at all hence the red links are a problem. Alot of red links in the Special Wanted Pages however is not a problem. The special page was designed list down every red link in the wikia in case some of them would be important. It is meant to be full of red links. The randomness of the program is expected as it is automated. Putting effort into making the red links lower in such a page maybe good however it shouldn't be at the expense of putting alot of articles for deletion.


 * This problem with red links is really connected to this discussion from what I can see. Because you guys see alot of red links in a page that's meant to be full of red links, you wish to reduce them. A good number of them are about actors. Since filling in the blanks seems out of the question, you guys propose to delete the rest of the actors as it would be consistent with taking out the red links. A choice which is a bit absurd as the actors with pages kinda outnumber the actors without pages I believe, and such an action will only create more red links.Mugiwara Franky 11:34, January 31, 2010 (UTC)

I've counted the red links in this page and they're about 44. While they seem alot when on this page, they are small in comparison to the 190+ existing actor pages. So which exactly is the relatively easier task to reduce red links when faced with this. Delete 190+ pages due to 44 non existent pages or create 44 pages instead.Mugiwara Franky 11:43, January 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * Once again, it is not because this paragraph is called mass deletion than it is the solution we proposed (I added a commentar long after Yatanogarasu made its posts). Since the redirect solution is not proper from your point of view, to create the 44 non existent pages is indeed a solution. I just wanted to emphasize that they will probably just be stub articles.
 * Concerning the red links, I assure you that the pages are limited. If you have not a blank page when you follow this link then it is a problem of my side (believe me there is more than 1000 uncategorized files). Also why do we make the effort to have empty pages for the uncategorized/orphaned.... pages, and not do the same for the Wanted Pages ? If you can tell me from the 800 links that belong to it so far, which ones are the one that are important to fill and the ones that are not I would agree with you, I personnaly cannot. My point of view is that too much red links kills the purpose of this page. Kdom 12:25, January 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * With the uncategorized and orphaned pages and files, it is acceptable to try to make the special pages empty. For the Wanted pages, it is acceptable also. However not all of it emptied out by simply taking out the red links in certain situations. The actor ones for example should be filled however sometimes not everyone can think of an appropriate article for the actor. Like it's been said, sometimes the only thing a person can think of when dealing with the matter is making a stub or worse due to lack of information of the subject at hand. However just because no one doesn't know how to make a proper article for the actor at the moment, doesn't mean that someone else in the future might have an idea.


 * Let's look at this in another way. A character is revealed to be related to Luffy. A user writes this down and even provides a link to this new character. However due to certain situations like lack of information or know how, the user cannot create a proper article for the character. Now because this character is important, more links are made to his page but the page itself is not made for some reason or another. Now more characters related to this one are revealed and linked to but their pages are not made likewise. Now this creates a large number of red links. The pages for these characters are important but nobody does anything about them. Does that mean their red links should be taken out of the Wanted Pages. No because they are in essence wanted. Having them in the special wanted page gives them the chance that somebody would create such a page. Not everyone who comes to the wikia know which articles already exist or which require creation.


 * The likewise can be said for the actor red links. They can be filled but due to the likelihood that they will be stubs, they can't exactly be filled right away by some people. They however belong to the Wanted Page as they can be filled in a later date by people who either have the time or resources.


 * For other red links like those created from Deleted articles, they really aren't that much of a big deal as the pages don't exist. Taking out the red links of them on normal articles is fine but taking out the red links in other areas can be a breach of documentation. I don't really mind that the links in the deletion archives are taken out but it does violate the archival nature of the documents to a certain point.Mugiwara Franky 13:48, January 31, 2010 (UTC)