Talk:Megatokyo

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former featured articleMegatokyo is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 13, 2009.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 2, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
October 8, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
November 21, 2005Articles for deletionSpeedily kept
May 19, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
August 22, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
September 6, 2006Featured article candidatePromoted
February 22, 2016Featured article reviewDemoted
Current status: Former featured article

Miho[edit]

I imagine today's comic will cause another wave of speculation about whether or not Miho is really dead. I'd just like to remind anyone watching this page that speculation is still speculation and any unfounded or ORish additions should probably be reverted. Politizer talk/contribs 04:22, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment on articles for individual television episodes and characters[edit]

A request for comments has been started that could affect the inclusion or exclusion of episode and character, as well as other fiction articles. Please visit the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(fiction)#Final_adoption_as_a_guideline. Ikip (talk) 11:05, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

source of names[edit]

Whatever happened to the sources of names, that was in this article previous? (see /Archive 1, where the author verifies the source of "Megatokyo" and "Largo") 76.66.193.90 (talk) 07:45, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • We need a better source than that, I'm afraid. Hiding T 11:25, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lock this[edit]

This is a featured article. Lock the shit out of it.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.184.93.203 (talk)

That won't be necessary. It's typical for a TFA not to be protected; there are tons of people watching it and vandalism will be reverted within seconds. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 02:13, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Creative Commons friendly drawing for the article[edit]

I was contacted with a request for a copyleft image or picture of some sort for the article, and after much head scratching and reading through the appropriate materials, i drew up something that i am pretty sure i can release under Attribution ShareAlike 2.5. Since i do not have a confirmed wikipedia account, i can't actually upload the file myself (yet) There are two versions of the file, a small version and a full resolution (600dpi) version which i am happy to make available. Please let me know what i can or need to do to help (if anything more than providing the links to you).

--Fredrin (talk) 02:55, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Fred, thank you for creating this art. Are you Fred Gallagher? If not, I am afraid that this creation is fan art, and we cannot accept it (see why). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 02:58, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's him. The images are hosted on his site, something that only he and a handful of other people (tech team) can do. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 03:07, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can personally vouch for the fact that Fredrin IS Fred Gallagher, and that he has created and personally released this art under the license specified. I'm a friend of Fred, and megatokyo's system admin. Cortana (talk) 03:09, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And I should add that it is unmistakably his style; either he's a very, very good copy artist that also happens to be able to upload random files to Fred Gallagher's site, or it's him. I think the odds speak for themselves.  :-) I'll upload and tag. Thanks, Fred. — Coren (talk) 03:10, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, just to remove the guesswork, can one of you ask Fred Gallagher to e-mail you specifying that this image (and the diff of his message above) are really his, and then forward that e-mail to OTRS? That would be easier than guessing about it here. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 03:14, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm assuming reasonable good faith for now, I'll contact Fred via email and put it in OTRS (I've got access to the permissions list). I've uploaded the image at File:Mt-fredart-megatokyo small.png (the larger version is unwieldy for an article, but I'll upload it as well if he prefers the higher resolution image to also be available).

Thank you again for graciously sharing your art for the article, Fred. — Coren (talk) 03:19, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, he posted it, so I'd go so far as to suggest that he'd like it to be available. Kalium (talk) 03:21, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You guys almost have me questioning whether i am myself ^^;; I'll check my email and respond, that should do the trick. Sorry for any trouble or awkwardness i might be causing here. When you consider the hoopla caused by companies and people who edit their own wiki entries and then are found out from ip addresses, this is like the amusing other side of the problem. :P Also please excuse formatting snafus, i am not familiar with using wikipedia ^^;; --Fredrin (talk) 03:27, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(undent) It's more about making sure we don't rip you off if you're not you than not believing you are you.  :-) The procedure isn't very streamlined simply because we get relatively few submissions from the original artists (though we wish more were thoughtful as you have been). I've emailed you through the ticket-tracking system for the quick confirmation, you should have received the email by now. — Coren (talk) 03:35, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You'll have to give it a few minutes to work its way past the greylisting.Kalium (talk) 03:37, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
At any rate, there is secondary confirmation on the Megatokyo site proper (via the Twitter feed). I'm giving this the "all clear" to include in the article, and I'll tag the image itself with the final confirmation tomorrow since I have to go to bed now. — Coren (talk) 03:46, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
sorry about the email conf, i'll respond as soon as i get it. The greylisting can delay things for a while. I'll post the image and info regarding it (including the creative commons stuff) in the rant i am working on. Thank you :) --Fredrin (talk) 03:54, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean you'll blog about us Wikipedians? :) Looking forward to it :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 03:59, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, fame! Everyone will wanna talk to us! rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 04:01, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's overrated.-Kalium (talk) 04:02, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So now somebody familiar with front page formatting should probably add the image to Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 13, 2009 (which I think is the right link for that), so Fred's efforts in supplying us the free image for main page are not wasted :) PS. I have added an inactive image there based on yesterday's FA, I'll leave it to another editor to activate it and take the blame for crashing the main page :D --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 03:53, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, i finally received the permission email and i've responded to it. Hope that takes care of everything properly. --Fredrin (talk) 04:12, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image is up! Thanks again, Fred. :) --Masamage ♫ 06:42, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Fredrin" is, by the way, the nickname Gallagher has used online pretty much universally for I don't know how many years now. --Shay Guy (talk) 07:27, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is my fault, it's down to time difference. I contacted Fred and I can vouch for this. Apologies. Hiding T 09:18, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Semiprotection[edit]

Given the particularly heinous nature of the continuing anon vandalism (much of with was so bad as to need oversighting due to BLP concerns), I have semiprotected the article until midnight. This is a simple admin action (and not related to ArbCom in any way), and may be reverted for cause by any admin without consulting me— but please do not do this too lightly. — Coren (talk) 22:38, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Miho Causing Zombie Raid?[edit]

Is there anything really confirming this in the story? Seems like speculation since the zombies had a permit for attacking, but attacked earlier than planned. --Licourtrix (talk) 05:26, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Schedule[edit]

I know from expirience that megatokyo doesn't really follow much of a schedule, its release dates are very erratic. I think we should change it to 'irregular' as opposed to monday, wednesday, friday. --DiRoccodoodeleedoo (talk) 22:48, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds fair to me. --Masamage ♫ 23:31, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed in fact even the MT FAQ says the schedule is 'erratic' (but ideally Monday Wednesday and Friday). I changed it to match the FAQ harlock_jds (talk) 02:04, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kimiko[edit]

The article currently reads, "Kimiko is a kind and soft-spoken character, though she is prone to mood-swings, and often causes herself embarrassment by saying things she does not mean."

'Often'? Isn't it, like, twice, or something like that? (I'm not a Megatokyo expert, so correct me if there's something I'm forgetting.) Taking things that happen once or twice in a comic and turning them into "often" is the sort of cruft-ish stuff that happens at a lot of the worse comics articles on Wikipedia, and we probably shouldn't be falling into that here...might we be able to reword it? rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 11:55, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good question... Hm. So there was the time she got drunk and rejected Piro hardcore and gave his rail card back. There was the calamity on the radio show. There was the time she almost flashed the fanboys. There was the time she quit her job. But a lot of these are things she meant at the time; "mood swings" makes them sound random and comic. It would maybe be less crufty to say that, when a bad situation forces her past her shyness, she is impulsive and does things she later regrets. She's pretty brutal when she lets her niceness-guard down. --Masamage ♫ 14:35, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Kimiko's a rather complicated character, but that's neither here nor there. The character descriptions should be brief thumbnail sketches, rather than in-depth character analysis. Kalium (talk) 00:14, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chapter 10[edit]

Is Chapter 10 complete yet? I want to know before I start reading it :) 91.107.187.8 (talk) 22:44, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet. But you can always find out by looking at the archive. If the newest comic in the archive is under Chapter X, that means Chapter X isn't done yet. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 00:01, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Chapter 10 is finished today! :D 91.107.188.184 (talk) 12:16, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Miho is no more"[edit]

I remember in the past there have been some disagreements at this and related articles over whether we should say Miho is dead or just seems to be dead. In today's comic, Gallagher makes a comment (which I assume can be considered canon?) that she "is no more". That might be useful, if there is still disagreement over what to do. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 07:19, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was the original "don`t-buyer" of the death of Miho and while i let it rest for a while on account of Politizer asking for it, i just want to say that i still don`t buy it, the comment that she is no more would be definitive but Gallagher goes on saying is a metaphor, allegory and wishful thinking, to me that`s ambiguous enough, i still think Miho is more likely dead, but nothing definitive so far. Zidane tribal (talk) 02:09, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(Just FYI, Politizer is me; I changed my username a few months ago.) rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 02:24, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, nice to re-acquainted you. Zidane tribal (talk) 03:03, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

SHE IS ALIVE, I KNEW IT, I KNEW IT. Zidane tribal (talk) 17:22, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I adjusted the text, as the strip has nothing but circumstantial evidence. Gallagher's comments of "being no more" can be considered sarcastic and pre-emptive at best. And canon or not, he has said on more than one occasion that nothing he says of that nature can be trusted. Sln3412 (talk) 00:16, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Anime and manga project scope[edit]

See WP:ANIME#Outside the scope which states, "Animated or printed works produced for consumption outside of Japan that nevertheless draw on or are similar to Japanese media in terms of content or form (such as Chinese animation, Korean animation, manhwa, manhua and Western manga-styled comics such as Gothic Sports and Peach Fuzz) do not fall under our scope." I'll also point to this previous discussion by the project where Megatokyo was determined to be outside the scope of the project. —Farix (t | c) 17:19, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Plot[edit]

I've tried to clean up the flow and some of the details into a more neutral telling, going by what has been shown in the webcomic. I also updated it to include details up to the March 30, 2010 issue. Perhaps somebody more familiar or involved with this can further clean it up, including my overly detailed and lengthy addition to the end. Sln3412 (talk) 01:25, 6 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A plot summary of what, if anything, has happened in the last five years might be useful. A paragraph would suffice. --John Nagle (talk) 22:07, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The plot section is now getting very long. MOS:PLOT recommends reigning in plot length: "The length of a plot summary should be carefully balanced with the length of the other sections. Strictly avoid creating pages consisting only of a plot summary." Even WP:CMOS#PLOT reminds editors that: "Plot summaries should not become so enlarged as to become separate articles.". Although web comics such as Megatokyo often don't have chapters, they can be broken down into distinct storylines. In Megatokyo's case, these are already published as separate physical volumes.
I'd like to suggest that we put a shortened overview (as per Nagle's idea above) into the plot section of this article, and then move the rest of the detail into a published volume table, breaking it into sections in the same way we do for manga volumes (A good example can be seen here). This way we don't loose the well-written text summary, we meet the Manual of Style guidelines, and we can spin-off the volume table to a separate article... should the need arise. Let me know what you think of this idea? David Bailey (talk) 10:46, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a good idea to me. Tezero (talk) 14:43, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikitokyo[edit]

{{Requested edit}}

I have just removed the link to the Wikitokyo fan wiki, because it has been dead since January. I was an Admin there, but I have been unable to contact the owner of the server, and I'm now fairly certain it has been abandoned for good.

I did however have a database dump, so I have been able to restore most of it on my own site.

Even though I believe my fork is just as good as the "original", I consider this to be too much of a COI to add the link myself; so I ask someone else to add the following link to the external links section:

  • Wikitokyo², an unofficial wiki dedicated to information about Megatokyo

Thanks, dapete 20:42, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hey Dapete, my issue is that Wikipedia:External links lists fansites in links to be avoided. I removed the other fansite, but I hope to hear your response. You can remove tld from the template when you respond if you would like to get another view. Ryan Vesey Review me! 19:15, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge?[edit]

See Talk:Alternate universes and omake theater in Megatokyo. Tezero (talk) 22:46, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chapter 11[edit]

Chapter 11 is now finished.[1] Five years after the end of chapter 10. John Nagle (talk) 06:42, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And it only took eleven months for the next chapter to start! This is the best attention-span-lengthener in the world! (^_^) Double sharp (talk) 14:15, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Megatokyo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:35, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Issues[edit]

Looking at the current state of the article, I don't believe it should be considered Featured Class. I'm planning to bring this up in a WP:FAR, but (as recommended on that page) it might be possible to fix the issues I have with it, so I'm bringing it up here first. It would be a shame to lose our only Featured Class webcomic article, but I find it even worse to have a faulty article represent the work group.

The main issue I have is the current plot section. I counted fifteen passages detailing the entire story of Megatokyo, without any kind of sources. I've placed the two tags there a while ago, but barely any change seems to have been made. I don't know if WikiProject Comics has a specific guideline for this, but judging from other WikiProjects, I don't believe we would need more than five paragraphs to explain the comic's plot. I usually find that you only need to explain the plot as well as the reliable sources do.

Other issues I have are as follows:

  • I have a hard time imagining that this entire sentence can be verified using primary sources without it being original research. Has Gallagher described these influences in comments or something along those lines, or are trope-savvy people simply pointing out what they're seeing? I'm talking about this:
    • "a Japanese school girl, Yuki, who has also started being a magical girl in recent comics;[38] and Ping, a robot girl.[39] In addition, Dom and Ed, hitmen employed by Sega and Sony, respectively, are associated with a Japanese stereotype that all Americans are heavily armed.[40]"
  • Is the following part notable? It is only supported by a primary source, so I have no idea whether "anyone cares". I'm talking about the following:
    • "Characters in Megatokyo usually speak Japanese, although some speak English, or English-based l33t. Typically, when a character is speaking Japanese, it is signified by enclosing English text between angle brackets (<>)"
  • One citation has a bare link in it, which simply looks ugly: "http://dccomics.com/dccomics/graphic_novels/?gn=14558"
  • In the "Some critics, such as Eric Burns ..." paragraph in the reception section, it can be unclear what is and isn't supported by the "You Had Me And You Lost Me" source. Did Burns point out the "Shirt Guy Dom" strip or is this original research?

That's what I got for now. The bloated plot section is the biggest issue, though, and I hope someone could fix that. ~Mable (chat) 18:06, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Starting FAR, as I don't believe this article is higher than B-class as it is right now. ~Mable (chat) 10:25, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Megatokyo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:27, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Megatokyo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:07, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Megatokyo. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 22:20, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Megatokyo. 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 12:10, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Megatokyo. 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) 18:51, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Megatokyo&oldid=1208968431"