Talk:Sailor Moon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sailor Moon article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Sailor Moon has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.

	Article milestones

Date

Process

Result

January 30, 2006

Peer review

Reviewed

April 8, 2007

Peer review

Reviewed

April 25, 2007

Good article nominee

Listed

Current Status: Good article

Sailor Moon is part of WikiProject Sailor Moon, a project to present information on Sailor Moon and related articles. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page (see Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ), or visit our Project page for more information!

	Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, which aims to improve and expand anime and manga related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page.
GA	This article has been rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale.

To-do list for Sailor Moon:	edit · history · watch · refresh
Reception section: Add feminist criticism - http://www.alltrees.org/anime/willowandoak/sm.resp.php is a response to the two major Sailor Moon academic essays. Allison, Anne [June 2000]. "Sailor Moon: Japanese Superheroes for Global Girls", in Timothy J. Craig: Japan Pop!: Inside the World of Japanese Popular Culture. M.E. Sharpe, 259-278. ISBN 0-765-60560-0. "Girl Talk with Sailor Moon" (1996) Animerica 4(8): 6-7, 18-19 Decker, D. (1998) "Beyond Sailor Moon", Animerica 6(11) 6-10, 25. http://www.corneredangel.com/amwess/papers/non_western_sexuality.pdf Evolution of Female Heroes: Carnival Mode of Gender Representation in Anime Grigsby, Mary (1999) "The Social Production of Gender as Reflected in Two Japanese Culture Industry Products: Sailormoon and Crayon Shin-Chan." In Lent, John A. (ed.), Themes and Issues in Asian Cartooning: Cute, Cheap, Mad and Sexy. Bowling Green: Bowling Green State University Popular Press. 183-210. Napier, Susan J. (1998) "Vampires, Psychic Girls, Flying Women and Sailor Scouts: Four Faces of the Young Female in Japanese Popular Culture." In Martinez, D.P. (ed.), The Worlds of Japanese Popular Culture: Gender, Shifting Boundaries and Global Cultures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 91-109. - in Sailor Senshi Orbaugh, Sharalyn (2003) "Busty Battlin' Babes: The Evolution of the Shojo in 1990s Visual Culture." In Mostow, Joshua, Norman Bryson, and Maribeth Graybill (eds.), Gender and Power in the Japanese Visual Field. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press. 201-28. Lee Brimmicombe-Wood and Motoko Tamamuro, "Hello Sailor!," MangaMax 19 (August 2000): 30. Animation in Asia and the Pacific, esp. chapter 2 Expand on Dave Barry Add Anime Academy review Find/Translate Japanese sources: http://life-cdn.oricon.co.jp/news/080401.html - a popularity poll which apparently places Sailor Moon as the eighth-best anime. TVシリーズ『美少女戦士セーラームーン』のDVD&ビデオを3月26日より発売、バンダイビジュアル - used in ja:Sailor Moon 「アニメソングの謎のヒット歌手たち」、『AERA』1994年6月13日号「ウォッチ・ジュリアナギャルやセーラームーン――人形たちに新顔が続々」『日経産業新聞』1994年1月17日付、15面。 - ditto 「アニメビデオも“女の時代”に――主人公、美人でカワイイ」『日経流通新聞』1994年4月19日付、27面。「人気少女マンガ『美少女戦士セーラームーン』原作者武内直子さん」『日経流通新聞』1993年6月3日付、23面。「低迷続く時計市場子供向け商品に各社活路」『日経流通新聞』1994年4月28日、7面。 Ask at Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Magazines and Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Reference Library for any relevant information and incorporate it.
Priority 1 (top)

Archives
2004-2005 January-April 2006 April-July 2006 / Redirected comments July-November 2006 November '06-April '07

Notice: This article is being polled for versions in other languages. As of the last check, the interwiki links below lead to non-existent pages. Please insert in the article only those links that lead to newly-created pages.

- Denelson83 20:08, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New Game?

http://us.yesasia.com/en/PrdDept.aspx/code-j/section-games/pid-1004513672/post-y/mailtype-future_release/ Still is rumor status (i.e. don't you dare post on the official page), but it would explain the prolonged absence of Takeuchi-sensei. Does anyone have official news on this? --Hitsuji Kinno 03:06, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

If that came out in the USA i would SOOOOOOOO buy it, I don't care what kind of game it is! But seeing as we've never seen a single SM game... *sighs*. You might want to bring this up on the video games page though. --Lego3400: The Sage of Time 15:59, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

It's already there as of yesterday or the day before, I think. And yeah, I would too. America actually has had Sailor Moon games, they've just been crappy, a la the 3D Adventures of Sailor Moon. --Masamage ♫ 17:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

lets hope this new game wont be dubed to death i dont want to help sarena beat the negaverce ♥Eternal Pink-Ready to fight for love and grace♥ 08:26, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Seriously. They can have her. --Masamage ♫ 15:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok *Ties up Serena and gives her to the villans* :P Lego3400: The Sage of Time 15:20, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm just hoping that if it is dubbed theres a option to watch it in jappanes with ORIGNAL subs :} ♥Eternal Pink-Ready to fight for love and grace♥ 10:41, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

((((((Just to inform you guys that page no longer exists by the looks of it))))) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.79.123.179 (talk) 19:27, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article history

Could someone give us an 'article history' box listing the two peer reviews? I'm not sure how to do that. And if there's anything to put on the peer review pages themselves to sya they're concluded, that would be good too. --Masamage ♫ 18:52, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I've given it a go. Article history is really for GA and FA ratings. if we can clear up those last few things from the review, then we should nominate this for GAC. -Malkinann 22:41, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Japanese text template

{{Contains Japanese text}} - Don't the {{nihongo}} templates supersede this? --Masamage ♫ 17:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Not if the web surfers do not have the right fonts. -- Denelson 83 20:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Its a explanation for those without the fonts. I didn't add it to anyother ones becuse i wanted to see what you thought about it. I saw it on the Naruto Article and grabbed it.--Lego3400: The Sage of Time 15:20, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Interwiki

5 times B. Indonesia. Probably an error in a Template.Xx236 16:10, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Whoa, weird. I can't even find Indonesia in the list of templates. o_O --Masamage ♫ 17:18, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I think it was a noinclude error in the main anime/manga sidebox. I moved an interwiki link into a noinclude space in one template, and that seems to have fixed it. -Malkinann 23:39, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Ahhhh! Good call. --Masamage ♫ 23:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ready for GA nom?

Do you all think this article is ready to be a Good Article candidate? I've been thinking about it, and it seems like there's a very good chance. We do have a number of things we can add to the reception section, but while I think those will be needed for an FA nomination, I don't think they're likely to bar us from this. What do you think? Any objections? --Masamage ♫ 20:27, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Assuming no one disagrees, I'll nominate it tomorrow. I can take care of the reviewing-something-else, too, though if anyone else wants to do some additional ones that would speed up our chances. --Masamage ♫ 03:51, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I've found another review, which says that everyone else's characterisation bar Usagi's is bad, (which contradicts what we've got on the page now) the animation quality is bad, and a nice little line about it defining the magical girl genre. http://www.animeacademy.com/finalrevdisplay.php?id=189 -Malkinann 21:23, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

iv got to admit i do fast fowerd past the transformations and attacks sometimes :P ♥Eternal Pink-Ready to fight for love and grace♥ 10:15, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I think the lead should have at least a sentence summarizing the reception. Also this statement definitely needs references: "Recurring themes include astronomy, astrology, Greek myth, Roman myth, geology, Japanese elemental themes, and schoolgirl antics." Kazu-kun 05:57, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Well other than the schoolgirl antics (which IMHO are obvious from the school uniforms), I've linked to DIES GAUDII's intro which goes into basically all the mythology involved with SM. Kyaa the Catlord 12:28, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reference. Now, since this is the lead, and the lead is only a summary, we need this info to be elsewhere in the article; maybe we could write a "themes" section. Another possible solution is to include the themes in the "story". I have no time right now, but I'll give it a try later. Kazu-kun 17:17, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

A better place would be in the 'manga' section, as then Takeuchi's ties to and interest in the various themes could come into play. --Masamage ♫ 21:57, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I moved it down there and replaced the stuff in the lead with a more general summary. The manga is way more deliberate about its symbolism than the other series, so this seems pretty good for now. --Masamage ♫ 03:15, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Incidentally, I've traded out a review for someone else (Battlefield Earth (novel)), so we're square on that account. --Masamage ♫ 19:21, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA pass

I have looked over the article and it has improved greatly since when I first helped with the peer review. All of the GA criteria have been met, so I see no reason why this article should not be GA. Some suggestions to improve quality:

Copyediting and tightening up the prose. The prose is okay, but not brilliant, and in some sections it made it difficult to read, but overall the prose was good. There are numerous single-sentence paragraphs which should either be expanded or merged with neighboring paragraphs too. Numbers between 0 and 100 should be written out in words; the convention is if the number can be written out in one or two words, then it should. Overall good work; congrats on the promotion and happy editing. --十八 06:05, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Wahoo! Thank you!! :D --Masamage ♫ 15:30, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Add This Reference

http://www.saveoursailors.org/

Long before the series was completed in english, the SOSH provided info on characters, episode guides, differences between the dubb & sub, live action shows, PGSM (Pretty Guardian Sailor Moon), the manga etc. & apparently still updates regularly with Sailor Moon info from Japan & around the world. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.19.236.220 (talk • contribs).

Currently in the external links section we've got a link to the DMOZ page (which includes SOS). Can you point out anything specific on the SOS site that we could use as an inline reference (as in "Such and such happened.^[1]") either in Sailor Moon or Sailor Moon (English adaptations)? Thanks. -Malkinann 04:33, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DVD's

If the liscence to shown Sailor Moon in america have been lapsed, does that men they can sell the DVDs? I saw them earlier today in a Hollywood Video. 71.106.88.181 01:06, 9 June 2007 (UTC)Syarasu

DVDs have been out for several years now. However, now that the license has expired, the DVDs are becoming rarer. -- RattleMan 01:09, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Right. They can't make more DVDs, but those who have them (including distrubutors) can still sell what they have. --Masamage ♫ 01:53, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

they can burn them like 100 times and sell fake ones ♥Fighting for charming Love♥ 09:26, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

But they usually don't. If we're still talking about Hollywood Video, that is. They have too much money to risk on bootlegging. Others do not feel so limited. --Masamage ♫ 17:07, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

eBay does my sis bourght me the move set they couldnt be botherd to put the right move on the right disk (ie. S move disk had R on it) ♥Fighting for charming Love♥ 17:58, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

That's why I don't buy DVD's on eBay. -- Denelson 83 19:15, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, no kidding. --Masamage ♫ 19:53, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I want to point out that I dont buy dvds off eBay it was my sister who got them lolz. ♥Fighting for charming Love♥ 20:38, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

XD --Masamage ♫ 20:40, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Absolutely Incredible

I was just browsing through various pages of my favorite animes, and I have to say that this page absolutely blows me away. The big box at the bottom used to navigate between the different articles about the subject (I don't know what it's called) is incredible. Good job to whoever built this page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.154.35.219 (talk • contribs).

I apologize. I'm still learning Wikipedia syntax. ^_^ 68.154.35.219 00:08, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

No problem at all! And thank Wikipedia:WikiProject Sailor Moon for the article shape :-) -- ReyBrujo 00:21, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

It's called a "template." -- Denelson 83 01:54, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Wow, thank you for the encouragement. :) That is really nice of you to come here and say, and really unusual. The page has been built by a lot of people over the last few years; I think Denelson here has been around the longest, of those that are still around. It's really shot up in quality since WP:SM started, though. Woo teamwork~ --Masamage ♫ 03:42, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question slightly out of curiosity

I dont see a "Media information" section in the article. Why is that? Is the "Media information" section like here and there (video game section)? I'm curious as to how to could a GA class article and not have this section. THROUGH FIRE, JUSTICE IS SERVED! 01:51, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

What would a "Media information" section have that the Adaptations section (and the daughter articles) don't? -Malkinann 01:58, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

You only slightly answered my question. Your answer is that is kinda a part of the Adaptation section and daughter articles. Why not just move all that info into that section (not articles, info in main article relating to media)? THROUGH FIRE, JUSTICE IS SERVED! 17:37, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

He didn't answer at all, he asked you. Your answer seems to be that it wouldn't have anything new in it per se, just that we should reorganize everything. I don't see any benefit in moving everything around; the current organization makes a lot more sense to me. There's no GA or FA rule about exactly what all your sections should be named, and for good reason. --Masamage ♫ 18:20, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Two sections according to WP:ANIME that we don't have are a defined production section and a media information section:

Production: This is a difficult section to define, and can, if appropriate, generate several sub-sections and even whole sections. Topics that can reasonably be included are: the origins or inspirations of the subject; homages to other works or artists; notable production staff (typically: directors, leading voice actors, and sometimes producers or other personnel); music; issues arising from the transition from one medium to another (e.g.: manga to anime, anime to film, etc.) or from one language to another (such as alterations to storylines, international voice actors, air dates or dates of publication). Although this is an amorphous section, avoid making it a list of trivia. If tidbits of information cannot be cited or worked into a coherent discussion of the subject, reconsider including them.

We already kind of discuss production in each adaptation section and the daughter articles, although it probably wouldn't hurt to have more on production, and we do seek out production information. The WP:ANIME formatting guideline for Media information is

Media information: This can include lists of episodes, manga volumes, soundtracks, etc., and should be placed towards the end of the article. If these lists take up a large amount of space, consider moving them to a separate page titled List of (series) media.

So the reason why we don't have a "Media information" section is that it's just a section for lists. We already have a List of Sailor Moon episodes, which is very big, and we don't as of yet cover manga acts, but I don't want to get into soundtracks just yet, if ever. -Malkinann 22:34, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

We are experimenting what to do with the manga, since the info is together, but the question where to place them is not clear as of yet.--Hitsuji Kinno 01:11, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DiC

Along with Cardcaptor Sakura & Yu-Gi-Oh, this has to be one of the 50 worst dubbs in history; covering up lesbians by masing them as effectionate cousins, gender changes to cover up homosexual relations, music changes (though the music was good), missing episodes, one missing season, not-so-accurate translations, trying to pass off Japan as America by changing names & replacing Japanese text on buildings with english. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.161.122.193 (talk) 03:59, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

And don't forget the plotholes! Yeah, we've worked up an outline of that madness over at Sailor Moon (English adaptations). It can't get too much more detailed without being overly long, but if you see anything major that we missed you are more than welcome to bring it up over at that talk page. --Masamage ♫ 04:45, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I understand some of the changes they made, simply because of the fact that America wasn't open to Homosexuality, and it was something parents didn't want their children to see. As for the way they went about it, it was downright strange. Mathematicus 02:55, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a forum... do you have something to add about the article? Or is it a comment?--Hitsuji Kinno 22:29, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Character section

Should the characters have their names written out in Japanese text? Zemalia 14:41, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

It might make things a little crowded...? --Masamage ♫ 16:11, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Maybe I'll go sandbox it. I'll let you know the results. Zemalia 20:44, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

sailor uranus and sailor neptune should have their relationship termed as girlfriends rather than partners!

or mention something about lesbian pride!

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.64.11.208 (talk) 08:31, 17 November 2007

Its both partnership and girlfriends, I think the current statement, "finding her partner, Sailor Uranus, with whom she fell in love" is appropriate. --Cyfal (talk) 10:31, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Both characters talk about being "more than lovers", so they probably don't even call eachother their girlfriend. --Masamage ♫ 18:04, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

In a related note, I think Haruka's article should state that the director asked Megumi Ogata, Haruka's voice actor, to act as if Haruka and Michiru were married (source). Kazu-kun (talk) 20:52, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

You can do the honours, if you'd like. --Malkinann (talk) 21:35, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't we list the characters attacks and weapons and items instead of putting them essay form so that they are easier to read? In essay form it becomes too wordy, or just doesn't give a good description at all of the topic its describing. Its just a suggestion. --Jazz189 (talk) 21:02, 06 December 2007 (UTC)

You mean in the character articles themselves? We had it that way for a while, but alas, Wikipedia policy discourages lists and encourages prose. The exact names and types of the attacks are also considered (by those non-fans who review our articles) non-notable to the average reader, so what we do include we have to be a little sneaky with. In this specific way individual fan sites are more accessible than WP is. --Masamage ♫ 03:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What do we need for FA?

I would like to know what's left to make this FA...? What are we missing?--Hitsuji Kinno (talk) 21:12, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

The reception section needs expanding, although we have all the info we need. Also I wonder if people will object to the extensive character section; e might need to get a general List of Sailor Moon characters done before this page will be thought acceptable. I don't know. --Masamage ♫ 22:04, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

There are a few paths we could take to begin preparation for a FAC - work through the items on the "To do" list (why do we care so much about Dave Barry's editorial???), look at the three anime FAs (Madlax, Serial Experiments Lain, and Excel Saga) to check if there's anything we're really missing here, use the scholarly sources more if possible, or consider if it'd be worth it to make some of the really important subarticles (I reckon Sailor Moon (manga), (anime), or (English adaptations) would be prime candidates) into GA and then rework the summary style here. -Malkinann (talk) 01:21, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

The reception section could use some enhancement from more scholarly sources. Sailor Moon is one of the few animes that have really stirred up feedback from the academic world. In fact, Sailor Moon was a topic of discussion in one of my college sociology class. Also, the article lacks a section dedicated to the design aspects of the series. Examples would be character design, music production or themes found in the series. After referencing some of the other anime FAs, it appears as having all of those would not be a requirement; however, it could help provide some more depth to what the series is rather than how is was marketed. --JadeFox (talk) 00:48, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Do you have access to more scholarly sources than the ones presently incorporated in the article? The ones I've found so far tend to focus on it as a marketing giant, and rarely cover anything after the first arc, or any history of the series in English-speaking countries post-1998. I'd be really keen to get my hands on more sources (the list up the top is kind of my wishlist, haha). -Malkinann (talk) 22:40, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

There's more design info in the Sailor Moon (manga) and Sailor Moon (anime) sub-articles. Should we include some of it here, too? --Masamage ♫ 22:45, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

(Sorry for the length) I have readily available the Japan Pop! (sparsely used in the article) and The Worlds of Japanese Popular Culture (not used at all in article) books. I'm sure I have one or two other articles in my records from a past Japanese Cultural Interactions class I took although I can't remember if it would pertain to Sailor Moon or not. I took a quick look here: [[1]] to get a rough idea of what's out there. I have access to a couple journal databases with my school, I can see if I can pull something noteworthy. Let me know if something jumps out at you (no promises though).

As far as design info, I'm hesitant to suggest just start adding in information (afraid of bloating the article). I view the main Sailor Moon article as a sort of high level explanation of what Sailor Moon actually is with its significance on fiction, culture, and society. That being said, I'm wondering if the article should be restructured from Japanese manga, English translation, Japanese anime, English adaptation and massage the manga and the anime together. If this could be done, 'snippets' of the design aspects from the manga and anime articles could be added. I think this would flow better as well as allow the respective manga and anime articles to explain the details.

Since the anime and manga are closet in relation, a sort of Themes section could follow. My reasoning is that the other adaptations are more of a family oriented version without the secondary themes (assumption don't know for sure). After that, I feel talking about the Musical, PGSM, and Video Games should be done as is. For the most part I think the Reception is close to done. If a Themes section were added, the reception section could be enhanced to address the reaction to those themes. The biggest example I can think of is that the Themes section could contain information on the non-traditional gender roles the Sailor Moon characters play while the Reception section would specifically address the criticism (thoughts/too similar?). Of course I wouldn't suggest starting something like this unless the sources were there. I know this is potentially a large task, but I feel the existing article structure is limiting expansion. --JadeFox (talk) 03:03, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your offer of assistance. :) Just recently, I've been putting stuff about the Sailor Senshi's characters (sexuality etc.) into the Sailor Senshi article, which does use Napier's The Worlds of Japanese Popular Culture chapter. (I've spun it out from the lead and called it "Critical attention", just for lack of inspiration on my part...) An interesting thing with Allison's Japan Pop! article is that she accepts the corporate line as to why Sailor Moon failed, whereas in her "Challenge to Hollywood" paper, she is more questioning. I can't tell for sure which was published later, but I think Challenge to Hollywood might have been, cos I figure that book chapters are usually written well in advance of the book being published. Still, there may be some good stuff still in the Japan Pop chapter for the Sailor Senshi article about gender roles etc. I'm wondering if you've got access to the books Themes and Issues in Asian Cartooning: Cute, Cheap, Mad and Sexy or Gender and Power in the Japanese Visual Field??? Even old newspaper articles might be useful (English airdates etc.). I'm really not sure what you're proposing to do with this article - putting together in one section the manga, anime and the english adaptations of both??? -Malkinann (talk) 09:49, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Why would you want to merge the manga and anime sections????? The japanese and english version are total different (changed episodes, modified plot lines, etc..) They should be treat different. If you were paying attention too the article that contains information on the english changes is up for deletion. If that goes this article is the place where that info is found then. Would you even have enough information to address the themes?? Don't forget that even the anime was stripped down from the manga in terms of lesbianism and shifted gender roles. If you want that information soo badly, add it to the anime and manga articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.148.142.159 (talk) 18:54, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Missing a genre or two?

I know magical girl and romance fit this series perfectly, but I believe it is also missing two critical others: action (not 100% sure though) and supernatural fiction (pretty sure of this). I noticed that nobody answered Masamage's question here and thought that we should get this over with. I hope all of you are familiar with WP:MOS-AM#Content, which tells us to utilize at least two or three genres for each article, however, we might consider the possibility of four. Discuss away, Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Someone's been trying to add comedy, too, which is certainly fitting but which keeps getting reverted for reasons I haven't really kept track of. Both of those things you mention apply, although I didn't know supernatural fiction was a genre per se. I'm fine with adding these things in general, but if we have upwards of five genres in the infobox, won't it start getting crowded? Also, how do we keep the addition of particular genres from being completely subjective? --Masamage ♫ 02:55, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Here's what I'm thinking: [[Action genre|Action]], [[Romantic comedy film|Romantic comedy]]; [[Magical girl]] [[supernatural fiction]]

A similar format was done to Rurouni Kenshin by Erachima here and I have since followed this example. Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:33, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Is everybody okay with these edits? I also plan to add categories which match my genre proposal. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:57, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm fine in general, but I don't feel quite like my question was answered. Why these genres in particular? A romantic comedy is very different from a romance and a comedy, as detailed in its article. How do we keep this from being totally subjective? It's possible to argue that Sailor Moon is not only magical girl, romance, comedy, action, and supernatural fiction, but that it's also bildungsroman, slice-of-life (school, friends, sports, boys, hobbies, family), surrealism (extremely bizarre monsters), drama (especially Stars), and science fiction (laboratories, time-travel, and alien attacks). Obviously there's not room for all of those, so who decides which of the possibilities are more "important" or "applicable" for any particular series? Do we have to cite an important critic who has said so, or what? --Masamage ♫ 04:21, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

We'd have to go with our best interests in this situation. If you were asked what the three main genres (which includes categories, themes, etc.) of Sailor Moon were, what would you say? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 04:49, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Let's think about it. In some cases a reference may be appropriate. It doesn't need to be an important critic though; just a reviewer would do. But puting that aside for now, I think we all can agree that SM is primarly a Magical Girl story. With that set, we can start to rule out the genres with redundant meanings, for example Supernatural fiction, as Magical already takes care of the supernatural aspects of the story. In any case, the genres of a story indicate its most prominent aspects. MG is a given, and there also Adventure. I'm not sure about Romance or Drama, as these are not main themes during the whole story. Kazu-kun (talk) 05:03, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Magical Girl is definitely the biggest one, and that can be sourced to about a million places, so no problem there. But for everything else, I just don't know. One could easily argue any of them.

To respond to Sesshomaru: if you asked me that, I would say, why three? And why me, rather than someone else? ^_^;;; And I'm really not trying to be difficult here, though I know I am--I'm just struggling with the inherent subjectivity and ORishness of genres in general. It seems like both something we need to say, and something which breaks the rules by definition. Maybe there's a WP-wide guideline about this? I'll ask around. --Masamage ♫ 05:08, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Didn't you guys see WP:MOS-AM#Content? I mentioned it above when I first started this whole discussion. Masamage, I asked of you three because the guideline tells us to use only two or three (which prevents bloating). And I have a question for Kazu-kun: isn't it more of an action series than adventure? We needn't worry of WP:OR for now because no articles (with the exception of Ranma ½ and maybe others) have sources confirming. I wanted to add romantic comedy because I thought it'd clear some discrepancies Mamamage had said earlier regarding comedy (and romance, I think). Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:18, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Action instead of Adventure? Let's see what Wikipedia says about it. Action: "greater emphasis on exciting action sequences"; Adventure: "the protagonist or other major characters are consistently placed in dangerous situations". So, no. I think it's more of an adventure series. And no, I don't think it's a romantic comedy. All the romance in SM is dramatic, and unrelated to the comedy aspects of the series. Kazu-kun (talk) 05:30, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Wait, where did you read those? Also, I'd like to hear what three genre categories you believe are the most suited for this page. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:41, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I read that here on wiki: Action genre and Adventure (at the bottom). And I think MG, Adventure, and Romance would suit this page good enough. Kazu-kun (talk) 05:52, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Huh. Now that you mention, I think you're right that adventure makes more sense than action. I mean, most of the fighting in the series is from the end of a stick with a heart at the top. Romance is definitely big, too, but it's unusual in that the romance is ongoing rather than constantly being tense and on the edge of happening. Although it's one of Usagi's biggest motivators, it's only a major plot point for the first series, and stops being a concern at all by the fourth. This makes me wonder if it counts? Any thoughts? --Masamage ♫ 06:00, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Superb thoughts! Here's what I'm seeing now: [[Adventure film|Adventure]]; [[Magical girl]] [[Romance film|Romance]]

The first two are a must. What do you mean romance stops being a concern by the fourth? You mean the SuperS arc? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 06:20, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Kazu-kun, I just realized something: is adventure by itself is a genre? If so, that article should clarify this. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 06:23, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, because by that time the writers stop trying to play the "will they or won't they??" angle, because it's just obvious to everybody that they will and do. Usagi and Mamoru kiss and have a relationship, but it's not a plot device anymore; it's a character trait. (Actually, this is mostly just the anime, where in fact the romance stops being a subplot by end of the R series. (Also there's the one-sided romance of Stars, which may or may not count since it's never reciprocated.) In the manga, there's some discomfiture with Usagi/Haruka and Michiru/Mamoru there first, and a subplot of lack-of-communication in the fourth arc, and then he's dead in the fifth.) --Masamage ♫ 06:38, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

So does that mean no romance? I'm curious to read Kazu-kun's response. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 07:26, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

About Adventure... it is indeed a genre. The Adventure article says "In the context of a narrative, the adventure genre is typically applied to works in which..." Regarding Romance, it's true that it's not a central element during the entire series, but after MG and Adventure, it's certainly the next big thing. I think that if we're aiming for three genre categories, Romance should definitely be there. Kazu-kun (talk) 08:06, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Guess I'll categorize it as a genre basing it on this discussion. Let's finish this up: what's the difference between Adventure and Adventure film? Which one applies more for SM? The page One Piece uses the latter so it might have to be changed according to what you said. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 15:16, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, Adventure is IMO the actual genre whereas Adventure film seems to be a derivative term to identify films of the Adventure genre. SM is not specifically a film, and since we lack an Adventure (genre) article, we should go with just Adventure instead.Kazu-kun (talk) 19:58, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I have created Adventure genre, a more suited article. We can conclude with this: [[Adventure genre|Adventure]]; [[Magical girl]] [[Romance film|Romance]]

Agreed? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 04:54, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm okay with that. We can always tweak it later if we think of anything better. ^^ Oh, but you'll probably want Romance (genre) rather than Romance film. --Masamage ♫ 05:00, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, and following the same format as Romance (genre), I moved Adventure genre to Adventure (genre). Kazu-kun (talk) 05:12, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Romance (genre) is a much better choice (I didn't know it existed). Um, if you're gonna start moving some pages, can you get the rest of these? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:18, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

That made me realize wiki should have a guideline on genre articles' titles. Oh well, feel free to move it back if you want to. Kazu-kun (talk) 05:26, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, aside from the Romance one, there's Thriller (genre), True crime (genre) and Mythopoeia (genre). We can move the pages safely. Did you want some help? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:34, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I think the parenthetical form is most likely the correct one, because the genre's name isn't "Romance genre"; it's just "Romance". --Masamage ♫ 05:42, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) - Yeah, that's what I meant. We should move the others to their parenthetical forms. Do you guys want to help me nail these? Three heads are better than one. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:46, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, I moved only Action genre to Action (genre). I didn't move pages such as Film genre, Literary genre, Genre fiction and Music genre because these articles deal with a different concept. These are not articles about specific genres, but about characteristics and groups of genres for specific fields. Kazu-kun (talk) 05:47, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Did you double check? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:52, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I found Cross-genre. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 05:54, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I did. And Cross-genre is another article we shouldn't move. Aside from that, articles that don't need disambiguation, such as Erotica and Fiction shouln't be moved either. Kazu-kun (talk) 06:02, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand, why did you change my comment? Per the guidelines, we aren't allowed to alter another user's comment(s). Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 06:11, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll bet a virtual fudgesicle it was a copy-pasting typo. Anyway, sounds like you guys are on the ball with this. ^^ --Masamage ♫ 06:13, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Oops! Sorry about that, it was as Masamage said. Kazu-kun (talk) 06:29, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah, ok. I was hoping that was the case. So, it appears we're finished. I have to admit, I've never had this much fun talking before. Shall I do the honours in the genre box? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 06:33, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Sure, go for it. ^_^ This was your initiative, after all. --Masamage ♫ 06:50, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I was awaiting the other person to give the go but I'll just do it now. If there are any qualms, they can be reverted and/or discussed here. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:07, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Isn't the romance genre also implied by magical girl? -Malkinann (talk) 00:27, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

No. For example Nanoha is a Magical Girl series and it's not Romance. Other, more typical (shoujo), examples include Akazukin Chacha, Corrector Yui, Fancy Lala, Futari wa Pretty Cure, and more (a lot more). Kazu-kun (talk) 02:50, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use images

I was afraid this would happen. But an individual picture for each of the eleven major characters listed here really is probably too much to ask for, especially since all of them are in the group shot at the top of the page.

On the other hand, because of that group photo and because each character has good images on her/his own article, linked to right next to the images we currently have, maybe it's really not so bad to remove them entirely. Any thoughts? --Masamage ♫ 02:53, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I think that's a good idea. In fact I think that would be a must for a possible FA nomination. Kazu-kun (talk) 03:22, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I'd say remove them to prevent likely copyright problems. There was a similar discussion on Talk:Bleach (manga) about their images in case you guys are interested. Like you even said Masamage, the group shot at the top already depicts most of these characters. We could do like YuYu Hakusho does (see group picture). Thoughts? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 03:33, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Disagree. Do you really have to go through eleven articles to find out what each character looks like, or just one article? -- Denelson 83 04:46, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Anything's better than violating WP:NONFREE, if I'm understanding you correctly. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 04:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't get me wrong, I think those pics should be removed, but IMO people suggesting pic removal should give an actual explanation as to why they think so. Just saying "it's violating WP:NONFREE" is meaningless. Anyway, like Masamage has said, there's already a group shot at the top of the page. This is the issue really, as the fair use policy requires each pic to be essential to the article, and obviously pics with redundant content don't fit in this criteria. Kazu-kun (talk) 05:41, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Kazu-kun, can you comment on the above section as well? I'd like to solve both of these matters which I've been involved in. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 06:07, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Isn't it "fair use" to carry postings of thumbnails? This is what all the search engines do (see [2]. IMHO it would be perfectly adequate for this page to use thumbnails to help indicate which character was which. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.174.110.168 (talk) 17:44, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reception and Influence

http://www.kicie.net/realm/naoko.htm The comment about clones... I thought it might be useful. --Hitsuji Kinno (talk) 15:54, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Minor development thing

Takeuchi-sensei mentioned several times how the anime influenced the manga, for example in two pictures of the artbook 1, and again in Casablanca Memories where Tomizawa's favorite flower made it in... should this be put into the article at all? Or is it too trivia-esque?--Hitsuji Kinno (talk) 16:14, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Seems like a useful fact to me. --Masamage ♫ 18:03, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

^^;; Where would it go? We don't really have a development section and it seems awkward in both the header and in the Manga section...--Hitsuji Kinno (talk) 08:32, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Maybe in the manga article itself? --Masamage ♫ 17:05, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Umm... Where would it go there?--Hitsuji Kinno (talk) 03:09, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sailor Venus isn't the leader of the group...

Under characters, under Minako Aino, it says Sailor Venus is the leader of the group, and that's not true. She was the first sailor to become a scout, but she isn't the leader. Sailor Moon is, or else it would be called "Sailor Venus" and not "Sailor Moon." 76.183.211.196 (talk) 04:34, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

"Scout"? What is that? JuJube (talk) 04:41, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
Watch your nomenclature, anonymous. We're using original terms here.

And yes, #5 is the leader of the group of four Senshi that protect the Princess (#1), but if you consider the entire team of five, #1 is their leader, and #5 is the second-in-command. -- Denelson 83 04:45, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Sailor Venus is the leader of the Senshi, who are there to protect the Princess, who is Sailor Moon. She's their royal leader, but not their battle-leader. --Masamage ♫ 05:12, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

The anime rarely mentions it. The Manga and Live action are more specific. Sailor Moon did not exist in the silver Millenum but venus did. She was the leader. Since being reborn as Usagi, Moon became a Senshi and sorta took over direct leadership over ALL the senshi. Venus does Lead the Guardian senshi however. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lego3400 (talk • contribs) 17:34, 11 March 2008

[edit] Pictures?

I think this page would benefit by having a picture of each character next to her/his name and description. I'm not a big fan and never will be. But I see their images around, and when I'm curious about a character it is usually because I have seen her, and that's what brings me here to look them up. But it is a very slow process to click on each character article just to see the picture to see that it's the one I'm looking up. The pictures are already on the individual pages, they would just need a reference from this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.174.110.168 (talk) 16:45, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, until very recently it used to have those. They were only removed because it was determined that this page had too many copyrighted images in one place (which is one of the things we have to worry about). Otherwise, yeah, it was pretty useful. --Masamage ♫ 17:22, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

See this consensus. Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 17:22, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Comparisons

So, given that Sailor Moon has been compared to Barbie, Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers, Buffy and Sabrina, does anyone think we need to expand a bit on what the comparisons say? -Malkinann (talk) 22:56, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

What do the comparisons say? --Masamage ♫ 00:02, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Drazen evidently doesn't think much chop of the Buffy comparison, because he says it's a "female empowerment fantasy" and then says you could equally compare it to Bewitched. Plugging Buffy Sailor Moon into Google Scholar gives our good friend Victoria Newsom, with a paper that isn't citeable: Girls of power: " girl power" in Buffy the vampire slayer, Sailor Moon, and Queen Amidala from Star Wars episode one: the phantom menace. So there may be some leads there, or there may not. :/ In "Challenge to Hollywood", Allison goes Sailor Moon was said to be too different, but MMPR is just different enough - boy targetted superheroes, live action, henshin, and mecha, but changing the setting to an American one "domesticated" the difference. Allison says the companies assert that Sailor Moon was too girly and too flawed a heroine, and that the cultural differences in Sailor Moon were too great. A representative for Bandai is quoted as saying "We think American girls might move over toward Sailor Moon. Barbie is an excellent doll, but she has no story. Sailor Moon is a warrior on the side of justice. I mean, this girl is a superhero." I'll try and have another look at the Japan Pop chapter when I've time. The others are freely available online. -Malkinann (talk) 00:36, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

See also ebooksgratis.com: no banners, no cookies, totally FREE.