Forum:Viz Manga Images

Look, the whole "RAW/cleaned/scanlator" edit wars are getting out of hand. People are so dead-set in their beliefs that without concrete rules this shit is just going to continue to cause a mess.

Here's the thing, with Shonen Jump Alpha (now called Weekly Shonen Jump) being released at the same time as the Japanese print, I feel that we need to change and open ourselves up a bit. Japanese raws are often dirty until cleaned, and even then the users here can't attain the same quality as scanlator groups. And when it comes down to it, Viz is just the official scanlator group. Their images are of higher quality (similar to Mangastream) and would be better suited for use.

Japanese elitists may claim, "But One Piece is a Japanese manga and as such we should use the Jap pages!" or "But then the pages will have English words and sound effects in them!"

Well yes, this is true. But in the case of most articles we're illustrating a scene, not the dialogue. What matters is the images themselves, the kanji means jack-shit. If we were illustrating the dialogue because there was a unique example only shown by the Japanese text which the English couldn't replicate, then sure we'd use that. But in most situations this isn't the case. We are an international wiki, and our images should not be sourced from a sole country, especially now that that sole country in question is not the only legitimate source of content.

To summarise, allow images taken from Weekly Shonen Jump (both American and Japanese) and stop edit-warring over the two. Accept the one of better quality, and if that happens to NOT be the raw, just accept it. 01:09, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

Discussion
I agree with what was said above. However, I do believe we should still consult the raw when it comes to translation issues. 01:13, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

There is rarely an edited scene in Viz's manga, so when that comes I believe a different scan should be used. Other than that, I agree. 01:24, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

I agree. We should. 03:58, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

We would still have to remove the text. SeaTerror (talk) 04:00, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

Why? 04:01, January 23, 2013 (UTC)

ST, I already explained in chat that including the English text isn't a copyright issue. 00:28, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Viz is guaranteed to complain about it. You'll most likely have to get permission from them first. SeaTerror (talk) 00:41, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

ST, that's what we have licenses for, and no, they wont waste the time on giving a shit. And who is gonna pay for the Viz chapters? Are they free?

They've complained about less. *cough* Narutofan domain *cough* Galaxy already has access to Alpha. SeaTerror (talk) 00:49, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

It's fairuse. We're using it for informational purposes. 01:00, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

@Sewil: No it isn't free. However, apparently Galaxy has access to it, so it's free for us. He can pay the rent. ;p 02:01, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

I disagree, since VIZ usually down-tones the true manga with censorship and add a shirt to cleavages. Besides, VIZ translation is still not the original RAW. It is just some official translators altering the original RAW to English, not much different from scanlation. 02:22, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

They don't do it that anymore Yata. The images are 100% uncensored.

Anyway, I think the forum is mainly calling for Viz Manga images being allowed until we have a good enough raw. Some raws are absolute crap unless cleaned, (and some don't get cleaned). Since when does the dialogue even matter in most images anyways? 02:25, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

No, the point is to allow either. Again, the point of images is they are images and the text is irrelevant. Yata, I'll quote from the introduction, "in the case of most articles we're illustrating a scene, not the dialogue."

The text means nothing in most cases. In the rare situation we want to highlight the text (such as for an SBS), then you can use raws exclusively. 02:29, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I think we should blank the text in any Viz images (if we allow them at all). Viz uses several different spellings than us, among other translation issues. If we want our own pictures to be able to be used as a source/reference, we should use a primary source (Japanese Raws) rather than a secondary one (English scans). It's harder for us to understand the Japanese text, but at least we'll know it's always correct. 02:30, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Do VIZ have watermarks? 02:38, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

I think it'll be hard to distinguish scanlator from Viz so we don't know if people upload Viz or just something a fan group translated.

Pretty obvious if they do. The quality is substantially different.

Also, no they don't Yata. 02:39, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Sewil's got a point guys. I mean just before he reverted to a version he believed to be higher quality, despite actually being MangaStream's scan with the Japanese text pasted over. It's an easy mistake to make.

In all seriousness, no. How many people here have actually seen a scan from Weekly Shonen Jump? We actually had this brought up on the Bleach Wiki some time ago, where it was shown to be clearly different. Unofficial scanlator groups tend to be very polar in their shades, thick black and whites. Scans from WSJ tend to be lighter in shading. 02:46, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

^Pics or it didn't happen. SeaTerror (talk) 03:04, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

MangaStream version. Shonen Alpha version.

MangaStream version. Shonen Alpha version. 03:17, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

I don't see any watermarks. I don't think that is mangastream's version. SeaTerror (talk) 03:20, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

I'm just going to ignore your comments from now on.

Does anybody actually interested in pursuing a proper discussion about this have an opinion? 03:38, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

So you post images directly linked from a wikia without even showing where it was discussed? If you're going to be like that then I will just flat out accuse you of lying. Show the proof or just shut the hell up. SeaTerror (talk) 03:56, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Because the original discussions have been deleted. As you very well know the Bleach Wiki are shockingly strict about their closed discussions. All the actual discussion entailed was "Can we use Alpha" then a straight "No". Again, you're just being hardheaded and trying to subdue another forum that wasn't created by yourself.

Anybody other then ST want to have some input? Or if the majority is happy we can just jump to a straight up poll. 04:27, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm cool with any quality image, as long as it's unaltered (besides basic cleaning). I don't think we should ban any source of quality images, be it raw or Viz. I still think we shouldn't have any form of english text though. 04:33, January 24, 2013 (UTC)


 * Alright, so Poll: Part 1 should be,
 * "Should manga images taken from Weekly Shonen Jump also be allowed?" - A. Yes, B. No, C. Neutral
 * And then Part 2 as,
 * "Should English text be removed anyway?" - A. Yes, B. No, C. Neutral.


 * Just as a base example. 04:39, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a damn fine poll design to me. 04:44, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

I agree with the poll. Maybe go ahead and set it up, and give 2 days for people to object? 04:47, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

We should also allow scanlations with removed text then. There's nothing wrong with it. SeaTerror (talk) 04:42, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Nope Scanslations are the one thing not covered under fair use. 04:50, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

I meant with removed text if we are going to vote to remove text on Viz. It really isn't much difference. SeaTerror (talk) 04:54, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

It should say "Viz Weekly Shonen Jump" to avoid confusion so that people don't think you mean the Japanese version.

Saying "Viz Weekly Shonen Jump" will bring confusion. It's not even the actual name. 06:38, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Not to mention we don't need sources THAT detailed. It would be fine just saying what chapter it is from and slap the Fair Use template on it and leave it at that. SeaTerror (talk) 06:41, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

He means the wording of the poll.. 06:45, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, real life called. Onto the poll. 07:38, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

I know it is too late for the poll but what about allowing blanked out scanlation images? SeaTerror (talk) 07:48, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Not. Covered. Under. Fair. Use. 07:56, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Prove it. You're the one who said Alpha manga has the same quality as Mangastream. There wouldn't be a way to prove which is which in a situation like that if the watermarks are also removed. There isn't anything wrong with scanlation images anyway. SeaTerror (talk) 08:44, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

I'm troubled to find that KuroAshi98's claims regarding the supposedly "MangaStream" versions he posted aren't challenged by anyone besides SeaTerror. I made the effort to compare the images he posted and I discovered that neither one is from MangaStream but from MangaZone (chapter 485) and MangaPanda (chapter 502) respectively. The later image was edited to remove their watermark. MasterDeva (talk) 09:55, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but does it f***ing matter?? They come from a scanlation group either way. Deva, it isn't that "nobody challenged it", it's that nobody else cared that much to which group they actually came from. The main point of those images was, "Look at the difference between scanlation images and the official Viz images". 10:49, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Mind your language KuroAshi98 or else, I'm warning you! You claimed the images were from Mangastream which release MQ to HQ scanlation images. Just because people did not notice it doesn't mean they don't care about it, don't force your own assumptions as facts. If you want to make a fair comparison between the official Viz images and scanlations use MangaStream or Mangarule to do it. Plus there are always the tankōbon releases that offer higher quality still than single chapter releases. That's the whole thing to it, and you clearly missed it. MasterDeva (talk) 11:11, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

I just noticed the sound effect. Not sure how I missed it earlier. If we are removing text from the pages then all text should go. It wasn't even mentioned anywhere to leave sound effects in. You also never even proved those came from Alpha. If the discussion was deleted then those images would have been deleted too. SeaTerror (talk) 11:00, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Poll's up. If you're only defence against this change is to pettily point out mistakes I made (such as whether it was a Stream or Panda image) then fine. You and ST have fun because I won't be a part of your argument. 11:17, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Feel free to dodge my arguments, making up things out of thin air seems to be better than backing up your case with facts. Especially since we cannot distinguish if it is fiction or reality what you are claiming above. MasterDeva (talk) 11:25, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Fine, you want a direct response?


 * I said Stream when it was actually Panda... and? I simply mentioned the issue being brought up on the Bleach Wiki as an offhand comment of "well I've seen it discussed before."
 * I wouldn't expect a barely-active administrator to know how the community feels, but as an active chat moderator who sees most recent discussion on a day-to-day basis, and personally knows most of the users here, I understand that the majority of users aren't so petty to care about a minor confliction. I don't pass anything off as "fact", everything I state or anybody here is mere opinion.
 * You really expect us to wait several months for the tankōbon release? Really? Even then they'll be scans, when the Viz release is the digital copy. They don't need to cleaned because it's the exact original that's being printed on paper.
 * Excuse me for being so off-handed in my replies to you, and the user who just came off a global ban spanning several months for causing trouble on forums and other wikis, being that you are the only two who are objecting to this based on "Ooh, he said Stream instead of Panda!" and, I quote from your good self, "we cannot distinguish if it is fiction or reality." Despite your title and his edit count, let's just say your reputations precede you both.

There, I'm done. I've replied to your arguments, I've explained my attitude and am now going to sit back and watch the poll develop. 11:45, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. Now that's how you make a proper argument, however there are some things to note. Since you've cleared things up by stating that the above was just your opinion I will retract the comments I made above regarding that. SeaTerror has done many things to deserve some of the enmity around here but throwing mud to someone to support an argument is comparable το what politicians do. Not to mention me not participating in chat talks means that I don't know what happens to our community, that is not true. A word of advice. You should reflect on how your actions affect yourself before you talk about others. Attempting to use Ad Hominem or anything close to a fallacious argument is a no. Me and other fellow editors have been around this wiki since its first steps and have spend more than five years trying to keep the place together and help it expand. So please, drop the attitude.

The reason I mentioned the difference above was because of the difference in quality between scanlation groups. You can't honestly compare the smudged releases of MangaPanda with those of MangaStream or Mangarule. You made a case of comparing apples with oranges. They are not the same. Especially since you went ahead and provided pics to support your argument.. A proper discussion should take place before mindlessly voting on a poll. That was something that former user Mugiwara Franky pointed out was happening after his absence.

You made a fair point about the quality of the digital releases by Viz. Although they have a direct line to the source material their releases are processed and edited too, they are not unaltered. Putting aside the translated text, the onomatopoeia signs are getting replaced completely by text which goes against our Image Guidelines. This is something to be considered if we are to go ahead with this. MasterDeva (talk) 12:32, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

I think that if we actually follow our current guidelines there shouldn't be any point in allowing VIZ images, because those raw images that looks like papyrus-manga, aren't actually allowed, since we set a minimal quality check over the images. In those case, scanlations are to be preferred (without text of course). So, I don't see any points in using VIZ images unless you want to add the text as well, plus if we allow the VIZ images there will be even more edit wars then before in my opinion.

The poll does not need a neutral option, it's just throwing away votes and doesn't do anything useful. I'm removing it, and those who already voted on it may recast their vote as they see fit. 19:03, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

What. "Only because that's just one extra source we can take. They could be the lowest quality but hey, there's no reason not to have an extra choice if it's available". Viz is the higher quality option. 22:45, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Will they always be? There might be times where a different source will look better than Viz. There shouldn't be a set source we HAVE to use. There should always be options. Use the best quality scan, not the one scan. 22:49, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Trust me. Viz's scans are ALWAYS better than scanslations. 23:00, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Upload an random Alpha One Piece image somewhere to prove that statement. SeaTerror (talk) 23:22, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

(viz), vs. Now stop trolling. 23:28, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

I'm not really against them being "introduced", I consider them the same as a scan, I'm just against the "and made priority if no higher quality raw can be found".

There isn't any evidence that the image you linked came from Alpha. Not to mention the first one you said is Viz is lower quality than the 2nd link. Also please learn what trolling is. You really do not know what trolling is. SeaTerror (talk) 23:34, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

Galaxy, if you can tell the future, please tell me how the rest of the series looks. You know that Viz will always have higher quality scans, and it is physically impossible to ever have a scan of higher quality ever. 23:57, January 24, 2013 (UTC)

It came from Alpha ST. Deal with it. Nada, stop being a fool. Alpha's quality is consistent weekly. It will always be better than scanslations. 01:13, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I'll just assume you're lying since you won't prove it. Not to mention you ignored the fact that the image you claimed was Viz's is lower quality than the other one. SeaTerror (talk) 01:25, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

I'll go under the assumption that the images provided are indeed from Viz. I'm all for having additional options for the images we can use, however, I'm definitely against having them as the only option available. Since we do not know what the future holds we should be open up to consider all possibilities. MasterDeva (talk) 01:53, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

Galaxy, all I'm saying is you should consider the possibilities. Just because it's from Alpha doesn't necessarily mean it will always look the best. Maybe it will, but truthfully, that's an opinionated thing. Even if Alpha does end up being better-looking than any other one we can find, that still doesn't mean what you say is true. I'm not being foolish for opening up possibilities. There's always a chance somebody will come out with something better. Saying one will always be the best is biased and unsourced, since you can't tell how future images will look. Scanlators will evolve and start looking better, even if it's a slow process. I don't know how much clearer I can be. Leave possibilities open, Galaxy. That's all I'm saying. Don't make this into an argument. 01:57, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

Lol no ST. Stop trolling. 03:39, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

Learn what trolling is. You're making yourself look ignorant. SeaTerror (talk) 04:34, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

I know exactly what trolling is. If you can't tell the difference between a scanslation and viz quality, then please get new glasses. 04:44, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

I do have a bad feeling about this, if we use VIZ images, licensed or not, they would probably raise hell on us, and eventually, use copyright issues to shut us down or something. I mean, Megaupload ran successfully for nearly 7 years before it was shut down and the founders arrested for copyright infringements. Even if we get away from prison, we still face shut down, more or less. 09:53, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

Hosting viz image rather then jump ones is not that much different in terms of copyright. Anyway don't worry, if they will ever complain (which they will never do, since we are not hosting full chapter) they will contact Wikia, and worst thing may ever happens is that they will delete such images. That's all.

Nada, you keep forgetting that Viz SJ is the exact same as the one being printed on paper. It doesn't ever need to be cleaned, and scanslation quality will never match it. 19:01, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

You have still yet to prove that the image you claimed was Viz's was actually Viz's. Just upload a random Alpha page on image shack or something to end it once and for all. SeaTerror (talk) 19:09, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

I'm not forgetting that. But what if a scan comes out that's higher quality, and is the exact same as the one on paper? Anything can be improved, Galaxy. That's why God invented "possibilities". SeaTerror, there's no way to give a direct link to Alpha unless you have an account. If you want the evidence that badly, you'll need to make an account and see for yourself. 19:12, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

... Nada... Scans. Cannot. Be. Higher. Quality. Than. The. Viz. Manga. Because. They. Aren't. The. Same. As. The. Paper. Copy. Viz's. Copy. Is. The. Exact. Same. As. The Paper. Therefore. It. Will. Always. Be. Higher. Quality.

Hate to type like that, but it was needed.

Here ST.. 19:16, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

Possibilities. 19:19, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

Unless Viz goes ghetto and starts using MangaPanda scans, then no. 19:21, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

Poll
The following poll was opened on the 24th of January, 2013 and will remain open for voting until the 7th of February, 2013. In order to vote you must have been active for three months, and have a base edit count of 300. Please, don't try to privately persuade other people to change their own votes.

Part 1: Should the use of manga images taken from Viz Weekly Shonen Jump be allowed, and made priority if no higher quality raw can be found?

A. Yes, we will allow it.
 * 1)   07:38, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * 2)  07:42, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * 18:48, January 24, 2013 (UTC) (Only because that's just one extra source we can take. They could be the lowest quality but hey, there's no reason not to have an extra choice if it's available)
 * 19:03, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * 04:31, January 25, 2013 (UTC)
 * 04:31, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

'''B. No, we shall not. We will keep our current guidelines (raws or blanked scans if the raws are low quality).'''
 * 07:52, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) MasterDeva (talk) 09:57, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * 2) (people forget that it's not RAWS ONLY, there is a quality order between scan and raws. So introducing viz images is pointless, since you will only add another version to choose. There will be even more edit wars, since you won't rule out raws if they have good quality)
 * 23:32, January 24, 2013 (UTC) (With all due respect, I hate it when English dubs take over a Japanese series, due to censorship words, they change the sound effects to English, which SHOULD be kept in Japanese, and etc.)

If the majority pf votes are "A" from the above poll, then the winning option in the following poll shall be enforced.

Part 2: When using images taken from Viz Weekly Shonen Jump, should we blank the dialogue or leave it?

'''A. Yes, blank the text and leave empty speech bubbles. (Translated sound effects are excluded from this).'''
 * 07:52, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) MasterDeva (talk) 09:57, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * 13:06, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1)  13:22, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * 2)  13:52, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * 3)  19:03, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * 4)  04:31, January 25, 2013 (UTC)

B. No, keep the text as its inclusion doesn't matter.
 * 1)   07:38, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * 2)  07:42, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * 3)  18:48, January 24, 2013 (UTC)
 * 1)  18:48, January 24, 2013 (UTC)