Talk:Kannazuki no Miko

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Vandalism?[edit]

I note someone has removed the seiyuu and voice actor information for the mikos. I will be restoring that information now. Let's please keep an eye on the page so this kind of vandalism (?) doesn't occur again, unless there was a valid reason for its removal. Art is life and life is an art. 06:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any valid reason. The editor just doesn't understand the standard {{Nihongo}} template when displaying Japanese names on the Englih Wikipedia. --(十八|talk) 03:20, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The really odd thing is that whoever it is removed only the mikos' info and left that of the Orochi in place ... Art is life and life is an art. 06:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I noticed that as well. Maybe they just have something for the Miko...:/ --(十八|talk) 09:51, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clarify[edit]

"These themes are exacerbated in the manga version where events that are implied in the anime are made explicit (sometimes graphically so) in the former."

I think I have a very good idea of what this means, but nobody who hasn't seen the show is going to have a clue what that's implying. I'm not going to edit that, since I havent read the manga, but I think it'd be helpful-- and wouldn't really cause clutter or the such-- to elaborate on what kind of "events that are implied" are shown. It could mean a whole lot of things to someone unfamiliar with the anime, and I think that definitely sounds like something imporant enough about the manga to explain a bit more clearly. --Chris Love 22:25, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I did not want to explain, because it is such a major plot point in both, though far more graphic in the manga version (it is believed that is one reason why the manga license has yet to be picked up). There are probably others we could give as an example (Chikane is far more ruthless in the manga than the anime), but the instance you're probably thinking of is the one most people would as well, IMHO.--Mitsukai 03:57, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
That's very interesting. How much do you know about the manga... enough to warrant the creation of section comparing it with the anime? It is a huge plot point, but I think a section marked off by a spoiler tag on the subject would be quite informative, especially to the "most people" who have only seen the anime and would only think of one thing after reading that sentence. --Chris Love 14:40, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'll see what I can do. I no longer have my copies of the manga (lent them to a friend and he lost them all >_<), but hopefully I can find something out there.--Mitsukai 18:25, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

2nd Neck Errata[edit]

I doubt The Second Neck has seen World War II. Planes that destroyed its city were most likely Tu-95 Bear. I believe it was some war that only exists in the anime. Of course, I may be wrong.

The manga hints strongly (also without telling) that it is WWII. This might be a graphic discrepancy that should be addressed in the differences between manga and anime.--Mitsukai 20:18, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The time period and the second neck's apparent ethnicity indicate that it MAY be the Gulf War, or a war based on it, I highly doubt that there were a large supply of christian Churches in Imperial Japan. We also can't forget age, she doesn't look old enough to have seen WW2 since all indicators seem to put the series in a modern or perhaps 1990's setting. WW2 really doesn't need to be considered. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elefantpanzer (talk • contribs) 04:36, 21 September 2008 (UTC) It wouldn't be any earlier than 1968, I know this due to the scene with Tsubasa destroying a flight of F4 Phantom 2s, which the Japanese forces didn't aquire until that year, so she has definitely not seen World War 2. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elefantpanzer (talk • contribs) 22:23, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

clarify[edit]

The way it's written, the comparison between this show and Marimite is a little over stated. There are a lot of shows where the lesbian relationships are lightly implied or entirely imagined by fans. Mariasama ga miteru characters, I think, never kiss. There are actually fans that, despite the lilies and everything, don't see any lesbian undertones to that show. In Kannazuki no Miko, you'd have to be actually out of your head to not undertstand what's going on. Girls kiss each other on this show, and the description makes it sound like it's implied or imaginary the way it is in other shows. 66.41.66.213 04:13, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


By the way, I do wonder if people actually think this show has anything similar with Yami to Bōshi to Hon no Tabibito either? After all, Chikane and Himeko really do not resemble Hazuki and Hatsumi at all. Both their character designs and personalities are significantly different, from what I can tell. And not even the hairstyle matches. Rexas 18:57, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The characters are similar enough, though, that the connection has been made some time past. Also, I don't believe it was said that the two shows were the same or extremely similar, just that it was thought that Kannazuki no Miko was the spiritual successor to Yami to Boushi to Hon no Tabibito. The theme of a dark-haired, tall bishoujo going to extremes for her love of a blond while denying herself is a fairly strong constant between the two series, anyway.

Art is life and life is an art. 20:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On that note, even My-HiME could be considered to be a "spiritual successor" to both these shows. Well, whatever, I was just wondering as the article claimed the characters to be "almost exactly same looking", which is why I had to ask if that's all the connection there was. Suppose I understand a little better now. Rexas 10:08, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Translation of title[edit]

Is there any specific reason why this series' title has been translated as "Shrine Maidens of the Godless Moon"? According to Japanese calendar, 神無月 is the traditional name for October. Obviously there is no exact English equivalent for 巫女, but what about "October Priestess"? Sounds a lot more natural to me.

I guessed I should ask it here first, because I am in no way familiar with this anime, and maybe I'm missing something :-) Robin F. 11:22, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I originally wrote the article, so I'll address this point-by-point: It's supposed to be "Godless Month", not "Godless Moon." I don't know when that got changed, but there is no good reason why that should be there. I'll change it right now. As to why the word is translated literally rather than simply as October-- I was originally just following the precedent set by other translators, although I'll look up their motivations later-- I would say it's because indeed there is no English equivalent, and "godless month" has a thematic meaning in regards to the whole show. I would imagine that's why they picked October, and as stupid as the translated name sounds, you lose a lot of meaning by just calling it October. It's the same reason why using miko and priestess interchangably doesn't fly.
It doesn't really need to sound natural in this case, either. The show title, even in the North American release, remains untranslated, and while that would be a good line of thinking for giving the show an English title, "Shrine Maidens of the Godless Month" is a much more useful translation in the context of an encyclopedia article. --Chris Love 17:41, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First, 神無月 is not October because the former is in the lunar calendar, which does not correspond strictly to solar months. Second, the name is significant, as it's the godlessness that allows Orochi to run loose, more or less. Putting a link to an article about 神無月 would be useful, but changing it to October would be not. mathrick 23:30, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Problem is, 神無月 does not mean "godless month". It means "month of the gods". While 無 does indeed translate, usually, to "there is not", indicating the absence of something, in this case, "na" is an ateji. I strongly recommend frequent editors of this article to read Japanese_calendar#Common_names and related references, as they are probably more aware of how the article needs to be modified accordingly. SpecB (talk) 22:33, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Flashbacks?[edit]

Can someone tell me when all the flashbacks take place?

For the Orochi, it's mostly during one of the last episodes, I think number 10, when Orochi shows Chikane what motivated Rehto, Korona, Nekoko, Miyako and Girochi to become so disappointed with the world. The Souma-Tsubasa flashbacks take place earlier, as do the various Himeko-Chikane flashbacks. Art is life and life is an art. 07:19, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Manga ending[edit]

So ... can anyone confirm the ending of the manga is what has just been added on the main page? I've never even clapped eyes on it, so I don't know. Art is life and life is an art. 21:06, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The manga does end with both characters staying in the shrine instead of being reborn - Himeko decides she wants to stay with Chikane anyway. They then are, ultimately, reborn as sisters, although their love remains. Could be worse, but the anime ending is far, far better.
That could be said for the anime in general. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elefantpanzer (talk • contribs) 22:29, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reception[edit]

Parking links to reviews here, until someone gets a chance to swot up a Reception section:

Feel free to add to and/or use if no one's gotten to them. —Quasirandom (talk) 17:52, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was just about to ask about a reception section. Chikane's rape of Himeko has been heavily debated by fans, for example. And I know that it's been slammed by president/founder of Yuricon Erica Friedman. This anime seems to be either fully loved or fully hated, with hardly any in between, although many fans who love it also object to the rape scene.
I just watched this anime yesterday; it definitely pulled me in. I'll probably start on the reception section soon. Flyer22 (talk) 20:20, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Friedman's reviewed it several times, and as a yuri expert, her posts counts as a reliable reviewer for this subject. —Quasirandom (talk) 21:09, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, I've read one of her reviews of it, where she alluded to two other reviews she made about it. I figured she counted as an expert, and felt/feel that the way her feelings about Strawberry Panic! are summed up in that article is pretty decent. I've got to see how many times she reviewed Kannazuki no Miko; I need to read those reviews thoroughly so that I can get a better grasp on how to relay her feelings about this anime. Summing up her feelings about it with one word is not enough, and putting almost everything she said about it is too much.
Anyway, thanks for all the links. If there are any more valid reviews about this anime, I'll summarize those in the reception section as well. Any tweaking you feel needs to be done to the reception section, once I add it in, of course feel free to do so. I'll try to get around to adding this in next week or the week after that. I will not take long. Flyer22 (talk) 22:18, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Coo. I'm happy to help out with editing, but I've got too many other projects in-flight to take on summarizing the reception of this myself, at least for a while. —Quasirandom (talk) 00:06, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I apologize for taking so long to get back to this. I hate when I get sidetracked like that. I said that it would not take long, and yet here I am on December 16, 2008 with the reception section still not there. Don't worry, I'm still going to do this (the reception section). Flyer22 (talk) 21:16, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not to worry. I'd forgotten about it myself, being the eminantly distractable sort as well. —Quasirandom (talk)
Okay, finally, after putting this off again and again, I am about to start the Reception section for this article. That is a definite promise. Just give me a few or several more days. I've never forgotten about doing this task; I've just been lazy. Flyer22 (talk) 00:01, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I added the Reception section just some minutes ago. It needs more expert/criticism commentary from other sources, though. I'm not sure what other sources are viewed as reliable for commenting on anime. Any others, list here.
Also, are Chikane and Himeko reincarnated as sisters in both the manga and the anime? From Friedman's review of the English Volume 2 of the series and response to a poster, that seems to be the case. However, I was under the impression that the sisters angle at the end does not happen in the anime. I mean, Chikane is reincarnated, but Himeko is not. If they are reincarnated as sisters in the anime, it is not shown (and it happens later offscreen). I'll go and tweak that part about Friedman's response to the ending...until I get an answer about this (that poster probably made a mistake, and Friedman probably mixed up the manga with the anime). Flyer22 (talk) 01:15, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Chikane and Himeko are reincarnated as sisters only in the manga, not in the anime (I have both, the manga and the anime, so I'm 100% sure!!!).
Anyway, good work on the Reception. The rest of the article needs a lot of improvement too, but I'm going to do that myself; I already stated to work on it in my sandbox. Once I have it done I will come back to you for some feedback. Kazu-kun (talk) 04:22, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. And thanks for answering. As noted above, I saw the anime as well, and was confused by those comments from Friedman and that poster (regarding the sister matter).
Any more tweaking you see needed for the Reception section, go for it, of course. And any further improvements you make to this article are needed, as we know, LOL. I will definitely appreciate it. Flyer22 (talk) 22:25, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most reviews here seem to be rather negative, if it's going to say it recieved mixed reviews (meaning negative and positive) then at the very least we should see some generally positive reviews as opposed to purely negative ones. Also, an aquaintance of mine has told me it was a large success in Japan, if information regarding that and it's commercial statistics can be found it should be put up.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Elefantpanzer (talk • contribs)

The current reviews in the reception section are a blend of negative and positive, even though with a slant more toward the negative; it is not like the reviews are purely negative (and the slant certainly was not my intention for the article). However, I stated above that the section "needs more expert/criticism commentary from other sources" and that I was not "sure what other sources are viewed as reliable for commenting on anime" (though I know of another source accepted as reliable for anime here at Wikipedia since then). Kazu-kun said he or she would be improving this article, and I took that to mean "soon" and figured other reviews would be added to it by now. If you or anyone else can add more positive reviews, then feel free to do so, of course. When I get a good chance, I will attempt to add more reviews as well. If there are not reviews from reliable sources for this anime slanting more toward the positive, then there is nothing we can do about that.
Whether a large success with critics or not, most of the general public who has seen this anime seems to have enjoyed its stories, even the ones hating the fact that Chikane rapes Himeko within it. Flyer22 (talk) 09:47, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I seem to recall some amateur reviewers giving a positive view of it which would substanciate that opinion, as well as that having been the case for my circle of friends (and we're the biggest cynics ever). Given that all reviews are subject to personal opinion then the only really "legitimate" source would be metacritic which is an accumulation of many user reviews based on their experience with it as opposed to 1 guy who knew he was going to hate it anyway scaring people away from it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elefantpanzer (talk • contribs) 03:38, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In compliance with the to do list's apparent lack of trust towards ANN, I wonder if someone should remove the ANN section, or if that is being held off until a reliable, possibly more balanced, source is found.Elefantpanzer (talk) 07:28, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you mean ANN's reviews, those are solidly reliable (done by respected critics). It's the encyclopedia section (which is user-editable) that does not count as a reliable source for Wikipedia. —Quasirandom (talk) 14:11, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(BTW, when you do something like remove an external link to an official site, please mention in the edit summary why you did so -- if the site's dead, for example. —Quasirandom (talk) 14:13, 3 August 2009 (UTC))[reply]
It was already established that the link was dead I was just doing janitorial work. the list said to "fix" the link, since 404 means the page just is no longer in existence it seemed prudent (and well overdue) to remove the link.Suspension of disbelief is not a free pass. (talk) 03:51, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I hadn't noticed it was in the to-do list. Still, it would be helpful to mention what you're doing in the edit summary, so someone can tell what's up from a watch list. —Quasirandom (talk) 04:01, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The process of their lives[edit]

one part of the article claims Chikane and Himeko don't remeber anything other than they're feelings, but clearly Chikane brought their memories back so it's not that they don't have they memories, it's more that they're hidden. That's why i'm chaning some parts of the article i hope everyone understands. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Supremecouncil (talk • contribs) 03:25, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Saying that their memories are hidden and are later unlocked in some unknown way is speculation. As I stated in my edit summary when changing what you added, "We do not know about any memories being unlocked. It is rather that they can sense they are meant to be together, just as Himeko could sense the truth behind the pics."
It was/is not clear to me at all that "Himeko brought their feelings back." How did she do this? By running to Chikane at the end of the anime? All the audience was/is told on this feelings/memory matter is that Himeko still remembers her love for Chikane, but does not remember their past. Yes, she runs toward her at the end of the anime. But why should we not believe that she simply senses she is supposed to be with this person, just like she did earlier with the pictures without remembering her past with her? They have been through this before, remember, where they previously and clearly did not remember their past with each other. Flyer22 (talk) 08:14, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Title[edit]

I decided to be bold and move the page back to the original title for a couples reasons. First, the primary material is the manga, and per WP:MOS-AM it is recommended to go with the official English title which is most commonly known. Tokyopop have licensed and released the manga under Kannazuki no Miko: Destiny of Shrine Maiden, or just Kannazuki no Miku, since as evidenced on the manga cover, the second portion (Destiny...) is just a subtitle, and barely visible I might add. Second, the anime series was recently released under the title Destiny of the Shrine Maiden, instead of Destiny of the Shrine Maidens, which is what User:Hugosworld92 had moved it to, which is of course incorrect. I believe further discussion should be done here before any more pages moves occur.--十八 05:29, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with remaining with the official English title of the primary work, until such time that it can be demonstrated that the anime English title is decidedly better known. —Quasirandom (talk) 17:10, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Spoilers[edit]

Is it possible to put a spoiler tag at the top of the page to let people know that the page contains spoilers? I was going to read and watch but now theres no need to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.57.104.229 (talk) 03:56, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:SPOILER, spoiler warnings are not allowed. See also WP:NDA.--十八 07:44, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Number of Orochi followers[edit]

In the section titled Orochi, the first paragraph states that Orochi has eight worshippers and followers. In the second paragraph, it states that "[e]ach of the seven Orochi fit easily into archetypes." In the next sentence, the seven followers are described. Are there seven or eight followers of Orochi? //Blaise Mitsutamatalk 01:10, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalization of "Miko"[edit]

In some places, "Miko" is capitalized as a proper noun, while in other sections "miko" is not capitalized. Which is correct? //Blaise Mitsutamatalk 01:16, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Does the manga/anime capitalize it? Gabriel Yuji (talk) 01:43, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure because I've never seen the manga or anime. I was only making copy edits. However, if I'm able to find a copy of the manga or anime, I'll post another response here. //Blaise Mitsutamatalk 04:11, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In the English language, regular nouns that appear as part of a name of a person, place, or thing are capitalized. Kannazuki no Miko is a title, the name of a thing (specifically an anime series) and as such, every regular noun in it must be capitalized. Remember that the English-language wikipedia must follow English-speaking rules unless explicitly stated otherwise in guidelines. Kazu-kun (talk) 04:38, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Improvement of article[edit]

It seems that there are multiple issues need to be solved in this article, therefore, I am currently planning to complete the following steps: check if there is any spelling, punctuation, or grammatical error; improve the format of the article; review the "talk " page of Kannazuki no miko and find where it needs improvement on content; get access to new useful information about Kannazuki no miko, add it to the article and cite it. This is my sandbox page, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Zuokai_Zhang/sandbox&action=edit&preload=Template%3AUser_sandbox%2Fpreload&editintro=Template%3AUser_sandbox&redlink=1, and I'm going to post my edited version of this article in the sandbox hopefully today, no later than next couple of days. I'm looking forward to any feedback. Thank you. Zuokai Zhang (talk) 13:26, 06 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kannazuki no Miko. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:30, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A request for explanation[edit]

A request for explanation of the translation has been added. An explanation of the translation can be useful for better understanding the translation. Here, does the translation mean "Priestesses of the month without God" or "Priestesses of the month without divinity"? If someone wants to answer, add your answer please! 123470C123a (talk) 18:52, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kannazuki_no_Miko&oldid=1203194134"