207:
machine in the series. If they're not deleted (I see one big no-consensus result for the lot) they'll all need to be trimmed substantially and merged and redirected where necessary. We'll also need some non-primary references for the entire group. I wish the nominating editor had listed all of them separately ans conducted his deletion debate in a more civil manner. Finally, because someone is a fan of a certain series doesn't mean that that article deserves to be in
Knowledge. This detailed fan stuff is more suited to Wikibooks, as the
1149:(Breaking indent) SeizureDog, I really have to disagree about the state of NGE. In short, the article suffers from problems of emphasis: too much on fans and cultural-impact and not enough on the series itself. I'm surprised at the skimpy summaries in plot and characters, and I doubt that any 26-episode anime, even NGE, deserves a full page for its plot. If anything needs to be moved sub-articles, it's "Influence" and "Inspiration and symbolism," which currently dominate the article.--
753:
many other games, they don't have long lists like that. In the table for the characters, there is an "original appearance" section. Not needed either, in my opinion: the article is about the video game, not about the anime and/or magna. If people want to know about those, they can read it on the character article itself. Anyone have any thoughts on what to do about the article? Feel free to post them, or be bold... and fix the table. The cleanup tag has been there since
November.
2159:
have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in
January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at
31:
1354:
case? So, looking at
Pokemon articles, we have all English names: (Ash vs Satoshi) On Dragonball, we have a mix, but mostly romazation names (from the manga, not the anime): (Kuririn vs Krillin) Other animes seem to follow other standards. Of course, for anime and manga without a popular US translation (that is, if it's still primarily known in Japanese) then maybe we want to skirt this altogether. I see that you site
1960:
1831:
1428:
1572:.) These are better defined as "licensed translations." Multiple companies license series for translation. On top of that, there are sometime multiple English-language translated versions. (i.e. mangaka romaization vs. licensed translation; sub vs. dub; manga vs. anime; company 1 vs. company 2; macron long vowels vs. waapuro long vowels vs. no long vowels; r vs. l)
814:. It's an article on a free comic that came out because Jump Super Stars was popular. Many video games have free things: it doesn't make many (or any for that matter) notable for a single article on Knowledge. A one time manga certainly isn't that notable in the long run. A note on the Jump Super Stars page is all that should be done in this case.
902:
will, for the most part, become part of classical culture. As such, I think that some plot overview is necessary to provide context, and explain the nature of the cultural item. Monocrat is right about the creation of episode articles. There may be one day a show that is so popular, deep, controversial
2098:
it looks like alt name can have more than one alt name in that parameter). The date part is a bit tricky, since a single article might contain info on an anime and manga that were produced at different times, etc, so not sure if we would have more than one data parameter or just a really generic one.
1892:
types are all like, one is you can't all see the bad side of things no matter what the reality is, well I have dealt with them all before. The easiest way to define one is anime that lost money and overhyped anime that failed to live up to expectation Not to mention, what you all forgot to do is read
901:
I would not want him, or anyone else, think that there is no valid reason for most (if not all) anime to have their own article in
Knowledge, as I am keen to include most published books, aired TV shows, and featured movies. Just to make that clear: they are all part of contemporary culture. And they
473:
with songs that never even appeared in what they're supposed to be soundtracks for, which is what it seems like an image album is (in the case of the album I'm referring to, it was songs inspired by the book). Furthermore, I've not seen the term "image album" used and it seems pretty misleading, plus
1600:
My personal view is that a consistent
Romanization by the mangaka should trump everything else if he has given one, because he is the author and for his works his statements are The Truth(tm). Of course then you get problems with authors who suck at Romanizing their characters's names, but that's an
1583:
Determining "most popular" is often a problem. To determine popularity, we usually use the google test. Becuase we have fansubs to deal with this makes some series very difficult. Fan translations may turn out to be more popular than licensed ones. (Though some disupute that and says that licensed
1353:
articles should be named, you have a brief paragraph on names, but perhaps it could be elaborated on. For an anime or manga released in the US, and popularly known by the US version, should we be using the "common" names (how it is in the US releases), a direct romazation, or something else. Case by
929:
I agree with
Monocrat: TV episode articles for every episode are a big problem on Knowledge. It seems like once they started, they didn't stop. The problem is people wont approve of mass AFDs on any TV show's endless episode articles. It's the whole problem of "this show has episode articles, so any
281:
They all seemed like very secondary to me. Miho says two sentences in the whole series, Yuri and Reika are only Alice's supporting crew, and I'm pretty sure Chisa doesn't acheive 15 mn of screen time. Actually, I still have doubts about Taro and the Office Worker, but they play key roles in the plot
2109:
If we're going to use the infoboxes to generated them, then there shouldn't be a problem renaming a field down the track as only the template pages would need to be changed. So why not use the existing fields as placeholders? Short
Description could be used instead of Media since there are no short
918:
very important episodes (South park and
Seifield come to mind). Some characters might also be important enough to warrant indepandant articles, but I can't think of anime/manga characters right now (maybe cobra, or Ken? They marked a whole generation worldwide). Also, I'm OK with the idea about the
837:
Rather than deleting pages, let's talk about this in the discussion page here. Why do specific anime and manga characters or story lines warrant placement in an encyclopedia? I see the need for this page, about manga in general, and certainly one on anime in general, but what makes each character
752:
I haven't played the game, but I've noticed the article is a long cluttered mess. It's a video game, and falls under the anime category as well. The biggest problem: the characters list. One long list isn't working and just makes it cluttered and long. Yes, the game has many characters... but so do
1903:
Most of the items listed below are ones that had high expectations, large amounts of money or widespread publicity, but fell far short of success. Obviously, due to the subjective nature of "success" and "meeting expectations", there can be disagreement about what constitutes a "major flop". Plus,
1484:
Allow me to clarify my point. The precedence is on whoever owns the copyright on the
English translation. I support the "official English translation" in as much as we are dealing with some company's copyrighted material. If the copyright owner dictates how something is supposed to be, that should
1474:
This really doesn't apply. First, the scope of the example is wide, but the examples provided only deal with use of macrons in romanziations of corporations or institutions. Second, which company takes precedence? The company the company that originally produced the product? Or the company that
1420:
It's not that simple, as sometimes the names change from the manga to the anime, and from one English publication to another. I agree that we should choose a simpler rule, though, because "the most popular one" is a really vague definition. Although I'm not a native English speaker I'd support the
997:. Seeing them gone would also be a way of atoning for my newbie sins. Apart from purging the Knowledge of their trivia and speculation, there would be no real loss from getting rid of these articles: the main character-list has been sufficiently cleaned up in my estimation. Throwing it out there.--
805:
I figured people would revert it, due to them not wanting the article to change. Cluttered lists make the article look horrible. It's basically a guide to characters (and the series they are in) and levels as it is now. There is some other information, but overall... just that. It should be noted:
239:
If there's an easy way/tool/bot to go through and nominate multiple articles for deletion I'd like to know it. Because it could talk half a day for one person to go through and list each Gundam article that needs trimming one by one. I tried by best to make it clear that I wanted people to vote on
2158:
proposal for an appreciation week to end on Knowledge Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who
1524:
over Naruto articles since the series' fans want to use "real names" (all the characters use Japanese order). We came down to using English order for the reasons Exairetos brought up (use official English name from the anime, since you can't automatically expect a reader to be fan of the series).
1079:
to FL. Once that is done, we might want to get NGE to GA/FA. To me it's the most encyclopedic manga ever, with tons of reviews, scholar work, etc. It will need a radical cleanup, and some warring with the fanboys out there to get all the cruft out, but getting it to GA should be quite easy. To me
879:
Personally, I think the most egregious example of cruft, and this may be endemic to TV-show topics, is the creation of articles for each episode of a series, especially when these articles don't provide much more information than the episode-lists. I imagine it's a rare TV episode that is notable
763:
No comment on most of that, except that you're right that it needs help. The original appearance section, however, is necessary. Not only for those characters which do not have their own articles, but because in a real-world sense, the important thing is not which fictional character is there but
867:
I agree storylines and plot summary articles don't belong here. This is an encyclopedia not a storyline guide. People assume it's alright, because they see other summaries...so they make one, another person makes one, and the cycle keeps going. Fancruft of summaries needs to stop for anime and
206:
I really think it is overstating the case by implying that if these articles are deleted, other anime articles will be deleted. This particular lot of articles are horrible quality and are in dire need of clean-up. Someone went way overboard with creating entries for every minor character and
577:
Someone seems to thing trivia such as "In volume 2, when 2-A is declared first place in the tests classification, a chibi version of Mitsune Konno (Kitsune) from Love Hina can be seen in a certain panel, throwing her tickets in the air, as she usually does when loses a bet." is,
1368:
It means to use the most common name/title used by English-speakers. But on many anime and manga series, the most common usage can't be easily determined. This has lead to edit wars between those who side with the romazatized Japanese-language names and those who interpretation
735:, where I suggested looking at our animanga infoboxes as a solution to shows with lots of different media (TV, movies, games, etc). I thought I'd make a note here incase anyone had any more suggestions or feedback on adapting the animanga infobox system to the TV infobox. --
1953:? And that just to list some English speaking countries. I don't think that would be feasible, and in the way it is it just doesn't have a broad view; again, Sailor Moon may have been a flop in the US, but does it matter if it was a success in the other four continents? --
2093:
I'm thinking we should use generic labels for whatever we can. This way, if metadata is applied to other TV/comic/movie type articles we can have a compatibility system. We should definitely have the first three used in PDATA, Name, alt name, and short description (from
1695:
a project solely for anime conventions. With the amount that are still popping up and the fact that I am writing a book on these conventions, I figure it would be a great idea to start a project and formally collaborate with others who have an interest in them too.
110:
there is a blanket AfD for probably a good 50-100 Cosmic Era articles. I have objected to this out of principle, saying that one cannot nominate 50 different articles without explaining specifically how each one violates a Knowledge policy. If this is passed as a
1201:
I think what Monocrat meant is that the plot doesn't warrant its own article, while the summary presented on the main article is too short. I agree to what SeizureDog says, althought we'll have to see what's left after we get rid of the OR. It might not be much.
1590:
I really don't think we can create a "one size fits all" guideline for this. I was actually the one who cited the WP:NAME example (Use English, unless non-English is more recognized.) We may be able to come up with some sort of "one size fits most" guidelines.
857:
Storylines/plot summary articles should be moved to WikiBooks. Character articles should be judged on a case by case merit. Characters for anime that last less than 26 episodes probably should be probably be merged into a "Characters from ..." article
1445:
under "Names of companies, products, and organizations," says to honor the current spelling used officially by that party. The anime and manga titles would be the "products" of the distributor, hence why I would advocate and use that precedent.
1579:
where Knowledge ignores a dub mis-transliteration. Should we propogate sloppy translations mistakes? Or should we honor the original intentions of a manga-ka? I lean toward siding with the intentions of the author and footnote the
1006:
There's no cause for deletion when redirecting will work just as well, you know. If you believe the list does a good enough job, then just point the pages to the list after discussing it with any other active editors on those pages.
257:
I am unable to vizualise kanjis for technical reasons beyond my hability, and would be eternally grateful if someone could help me with the simple task of adding the kanki and romanisation for the names in the character section of
2163:
where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention.
1158:
Well, that's still relevant, ie, to be moved to other pages, whereas CB has a lot to be simply removed, for causes of OR and triviality. I say we begin by making the page as complete, thorough, sourced and big as possible, and
892:
I think there's a discrepancy between the title and the question asked. For "better represented", (ie topic), I agree with most of that. There is a need to contain this section from being overwhelmed by fancruft. However,
1567:
It's very complex. I do not support the "official English translation" rule. First of all, I don't think there is such a things as an "official" translation. (Arbitrarily declaring things "official" is a violation of
2063:
line to anything in the table that is required to be parsed. Most fields look like they will work as is, though the date field would probably work better broken up so that the years are separate. Then categories like
1601:
entire other mess and hopefully won't come up too often. For series where no official translations exist it may be best to just pick one consistent system of Romanization for the set of articles (Knowledge suggests
368:- A type of model that anime characters often come in. Can end up being really expensive too. There are similar articles that almost seem to be good choices to redirect too, but none seem to actually be quite right.
1722:
It might just be better to make that a sub-project / task-force of this project. That way you could still have a dedicated talk page, to do list, etc, but wouldn't have to start a WikiProject from scratch. --
410:
I'm sure there are more that need to be done. We need to be sure that all cultural references that pop up in any have at least stubs. I would make them, but I'm hoping someone else knows more about these than
2082:
The way that WP:PDATA works is that they use a few general values that will pretty much be true for all people. What feilds would we include that would pretty much be true for all works of anime and manga?
930:
other show must have them". There is a TV wiki, isn't there? Episode guides belong there for all shows. I'm sure there is anime and manga Wikis as well: episode articles should be put on there, not here.
1769:
Maybe it is time we start organizing task forces. I can see having one for manga, anime, light novels, visual novels, conventions, seiyu, mangaka, and characters. And that's just off the top of my head.
1286:. The feature should be used cautiously, because users may be confused by being sent to the middle of a page when clicking an ordinary-looking link, and the redirect notice will be obscured by the jump.
1030:
One thing that always gets me depressed is the very low number of GA/FA in this project, compared to the number of articles (4500!!). Anything that reduces the number of stubs is welcome. Where shall we
1587:
Third is the consistency problem. The dub name may be more popular for one character, but the mangaka's name may be more popular for a second. Mixing and matching names should be avoided at all costs.
1942:
as these three was sourced from a book called The Anime Encyclopedia by Jonathan Clements & Helen McCarthy and I only listed them on the fact they lost viewing figure and had early cancellation.
1175:
That being said, I agree with Monocrat, too. There's a need to inflate a little the in-world sections. When that's done and all the OR has been removed from the others, it should look much better.--
107:
1273:
1184:
I'm confused. You just contradicted yourself by calling the plot summary "skimpy", but then complaining about how it has a full page's worth of information. In any case, I was saying that
1258:
I have added some examples on how to use the stub tag and talk page template to better explain them. A lot of users who are new to the project don't pick up on these straight away. --
1241:
960:
I think part of the reason shows like that get small episode articles is the thinking that they have to have them in order for the "List of ___ episodes" to be featured articles.--
94:
89:
84:
72:
67:
1793:
and added some bits. How accurate is it to call them a failure considering two of them are listed as they failed in the US and can anybody think of anymore that could be added.
59:
181:
1192:
however, will hardly have anything left. In any case, it's nice that the problem is that we need more in-world information. Generally, we have the exact opposite problem.--
1972:
Now that we defined "flop" lets define where it was a flop. The original country, here, Europe, mars? Big O was a flop in Japan but it did well over here. --Malevious
336:
1691:
Normally you would expect someone who is active in this Wikiproject to spur a new project, but I am not. Hopefully that this doesn't deter anyone from my idea. I am
778:
Damn that's a lot of characters...I totally need to import this game for x-mas. Anyways, I went ahead and did some major and rough splitting of the lists off. --
1824:
was awful, but it was a hit in 99% of the planet), and the list is pointless anyway; if we were to list all the real flops we'll need a database on its own. --
2099:
Another possible parameter would be something like "MEDIA" that would say what media the work was published on (anime, manga, game, novel, etc). Thoughts? --
1904:
lack of success is not always indicative of lack of quality or recognition. For example, one of the biggest film "flops" of the 1960s was the 1962 remake of
466:
Hmm. Image album looks like something that needs to be merged into something else. It seems that most "soundtracks" in the West these days are actually just
637:
I've added my two cents. Note that if this fails to produce consensus, the next step in the dispute resolution process is to open up a case at ArbCom. --
47:
17:
1552:
Going back through that debate, I don't see where an "official" name order was cited as the main reason to convert to Western order, it seems to be the
2160:
296:
598:, a published magazine and thus one of the few creditable places we can find critical reviews. However, it's negative and fanboys don't like thatĀ :/
1796:
1205:
1575:
Sometimes the licensors get it wrong and we will go with the author's original intentions: The example that I often cite Tessaiga concensus from
1373:
to mean that we should use the official English-language names used by the English-language company that holds the distribution rights to it. --
1873:
last year dedicated to talking about the worst animes of all time. I think if an anime is a failure its a matter of your opinion. --Malevious
1699:
If anyone is wondering, I have been working in anime cons for six years, and will have by the end of next year staffed at least seventeen.Ā ::
339:
and should not contain rhetorical questions (for example: "Was it just a mirage, a sign that he's still out there, or was it really him?"). --
1671:
295:
Just FYI, you can install Japanese language support for Windows XP (ie. the ability to see kanji in your browser) by downloading the file
262:
where it is still missing. I believe that's only Taro, Miu Miu, their friend, the Office Worker, and the two MiBs. Thanks for your time!--
162:
violation by the original poster. Those gundam articles are one of the reasons I started editting here, removing them reduces wikipedia.
1421:
official English name over the most common among the fans, and the anime over the manga; I think most readers don't belong to fandom. --
272:
You seem to be missing a Miho Iwakura, Reika Yamamoto, Yuri KatÅ, and Chisa Yomoda. At least, they're listed on the Japanese article. --
2130:
1297:
1272:
Good news for those who are merging minor characters to list or shared articles, and or any other situation of shared topic. From the
1041:
516:
453:
144:
1808:
628:
1949:
That seems to be a good definition of "flop"; but are you willing to list all the shows that were a flop in the UK, Australia, or
1906:
240:
the articles seperately and not together in my nomination. In a sense, it's the same thing, just less hassle for the nominator.--
2090:{{Persondata |NAME= |ALTERNATIVE NAMES= |SHORT DESCRIPTION= |DATE OF BIRTH= |PLACE OF BIRTH= |DATE OF DEATH= |PLACE OF DEATH= }}
1979:
1880:
1539:
679:
226:
The gundam articles are mostly just fancruft, and can be merged / trimmed to a hand full of pages and do a lot better job. --
2021:
787:
I don't know about that. Moving alist from one page and just making it into a new page doesn't solve the problem completely.
811:
2126:
1521:
1502:
1463:
710:
654:
617:
Deppey described the series as creating "simultaneously ... wildly entertaining situations" and extremely disturbing ones.
690:
567:
848:
Not a whole lot, and you're not alone in your view. However, less cruft in itself can be "better representation". --
2168:
2144:
2114:
2103:
2076:
2050:
2041:
2032:
2014:
1996:
1982:
1967:
1883:
1858:
1838:
1812:
1790:
1774:
1764:
1751:
1727:
1716:
1678:
1652:
1614:
1595:
1560:
1544:
1508:
1479:
1469:
1435:
1415:
1384:
1362:
1334:
1320:
1304:
1262:
1248:
1221:
1217:
1196:
1179:
1167:
1153:
1132:
1123:
1092:
1066:
1035:
1025:
1016:
1001:
964:
955:
934:
923:
884:
872:
862:
852:
842:
818:
800:
791:
782:
773:
757:
739:
716:
684:
660:
632:
610:
546:
533:
524:
478:
461:
415:
343:
329:
303:
286:
276:
266:
244:
230:
219:
197:
188:
175:
166:
152:
335:
Sentou Yousei Yukikaze needs wikifying. Remember that wikipedia is an encyclopedia, it should explain things in an
38:
2065:
1619:
1526:
1076:
973:
Also, if it would set a good precedent for mass deletion of crufty character articles, I'd be happy to sponsor
387:
1389:
I hold the view that the causal non-otaku (English usage) Knowledge user would use would be the name used. --
1708:
1645:
1494:
1455:
1408:
1081:
1072:
944:
702:
646:
259:
1358:, but I'm not sure what really you mean. Can someone help me to clarify this section one way or the other?
1111:
and I think there are probably more resources out there for it. Plus, it's a better article to work with.
511:
448:
315:
139:
1740:
has enough "child" projects already and most of them could also be reorganized as task-forces as well. --
390:- Those blue, one-piece things seem to have a pretty big fetish around it. I can't figure out why either.
2069:
1916:
1804:
1701:
624:
469:
406:
from an anime article for some reason they're going to be grossly misled as to what we're talking about.
172:
163:
402:
needs an image of the kind of bloomers we've grown to know from anime. If someone clicks on a link of
2007:
1602:
1313:
573:
In trying to enforce Wiki-policy, I keep kinding myself getting reverted on this page. The problems:
2111:
2073:
1675:
1259:
1129:
374:- Small anime figures that randomly come in sealed boxes that you can buy with one coin. Similar to
340:
326:
2155:
1976:
1963:
1877:
1834:
1535:
1431:
745:
675:
539:
1692:
1188:
has more to work with. Once we get rid of all the junk we'll still have a decently sized article.
2165:
2140:
1854:
1747:
1627:
1390:
1380:
978:
974:
899:"Why do specific anime and manga characters or story lines warrant placement in an encyclopedia?"
796:
Of course not, but it's a quick fix. The list certainly can't be turned into prose in any case.--
594:
542:. And like I said before, that article is totally misleading if we link to it in our articles. --
529:
Do we have an article about those summer sport shorts they have (bulma or something like that?)--
393:
365:
361:
355:
1499:
1460:
732:
707:
651:
488:
425:
424:
already has an (extremely small) section on character albums that could be used as a start. ā
371:
171:
Hey, there's a Wikiproject related directly to these articles. I bet they'll be surprised. :P
116:
1115:
has too much that needs to be removed; you'd have to write that entire article from scratch.
1943:
1800:
1610:
1576:
1553:
1442:
1330:
1012:
939:
One solution would be to begin with the shows that have almost empty episode articles, like
807:
769:
666:
620:
586:
180:
They aren't active though. At least, I thought the project was shut down. Anyways, see also
2095:
2047:
2029:
1771:
1737:
1733:
1605:) so that we don't have to bother with problems like inconsistent scanlation qualities. --
1350:
1245:
1193:
1120:
1063:
961:
859:
797:
779:
607:
543:
475:
412:
381:
273:
241:
194:
185:
159:
2024:, where it seperates out of universe information from in-universe information. Example:
1213:
2100:
2038:
2011:
1993:
1973:
1954:
1874:
1825:
1724:
1667:
1569:
1530:
1422:
1370:
1355:
1317:
1301:
990:
849:
736:
670:
319:
227:
2135:
1911:
1849:
1742:
1375:
1150:
1022:
998:
931:
919:
characters of shows with less than 26 eps, but that definitely shouldn't be strict.--
881:
869:
815:
788:
754:
1592:
1557:
1487:
1476:
1448:
1085:
695:
639:
300:
216:
208:
1959:
1893:
the top of that page or shall I copy and paste it out for you all to read below...
1830:
1427:
602:
I'm about to revert all of this, but the page as they seem to want it can be seen
322:. I know the latter isn't finished, but it at least has SOMETHING in there now.
1821:
1606:
1475:
has the US distro contract? The country that has the S'pore distro contract? --
1326:
1008:
910:
episode of it needs its own article. This show has not yet been aired. For now,
894:
839:
765:
421:
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
2125:
I'm not sure how many people are aware of this, but a new notability guideline
592:
That's of course, when the review is actually in the article. The review is by
585:"Fuck" (as quoted in a review) keeps turning into "f***", a clear violation of
1293:
1052:
982:
2037:
I was thinking more for the series themselves rather than the characters. --
1869:, a lot of animes are considered failures by some. Hell I went to a panel at
1761:
1240:
Hi. This proposal and discussion is relevant to the Animga and Manga Portal:
1209:
1176:
1164:
1089:
1032:
952:
920:
530:
474:
no Japanese trans-wiki link to help verify it. Dunno what to do with that. --
283:
263:
1756:
Independantly, it could be fun to have a conventions wikiproject, for anime
1103:
just passed, so +1 for the GAs. I definately think that we should work on
833:
Please explain why anime and manga need to better represented on Knowledge
2154:
Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of
2059:
Adding metadata to the existing infoboxes would be as simple as adding a
1950:
1870:
1359:
1099:
1046:
994:
940:
555:
the same thing. This is what Minnie Mouse used to wear. Not anime cuties.
403:
399:
375:
299:.Ā ;) I'm yet to find a Linux distro that didn't come with it built in. -
193:
For some reason, the linking doesn't seem to work. Not sure why either.--
693:, asking for mediation at a WikiProject satisfies the mediation step --
487:
for an example. Image albums are a very specific category of album. ā
2010:
to anime articles? Maybe even use the existing infobox to do this. --
1889:
1732:
I have to agree that it would be better to create a task-force under
1058:
986:
1325:
Wow, that's excellent news. Thank you very much for informing us. --
838:
noteworthy to those outside the anime and manga community? Thanks!
212:
484:
2025:
1062:
is surely at least a GA article, but he's going straight for FA.--
947:, it would then create enough precedent that fans have to justify
358:- Those crazy clubs based around a certain hot girl at school.
25:
2129:
has been proposed. Please weigh in with your thoughts on its
1056:), so maybe we'll be able to bring the number up some. Plus,
1021:
I often forget about redirects. I'll keep that in mind.Ā :) --
1075:
from GA to FA, and Monocrat is on a very good track to make
1920:
was still nominated for an Oscar in a technical category.
282:
developpement so I thought it was best to include them.--
2046:
Yeah, I realized later that I had misread your point. --
1992:
Just a question, where are we going with this again? --
384:- Albums where the voice actors sing songs in-character.
1584:
names will overtake fan names. No one has given proof.)
1242:
Knowledge:Fair use/Amendment/Fair use images in portals
1088:(needs refs and deleting of trivia). Any preferences?--
603:
2006:
Just an idea to throw out there, apply the concept of
115:, it might not bode well for future anime articles. ā
810:
suffers from the same problems. Also there is this:
182:
Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Cosmic Era vehiclesā
1300:directly instead of generically to the article. --
1282:Redirects to sections now work, using text such as
733:
WT:TV#Infoboxes on articles covering multiple media
1107:first. It's much more culturally significant than
764:rather what real-world franchise they are from. --
350:Things related to anime that we need articles for.
1040:Well, at least we have 2 articles sitting in the
1914:nomination for Best Picture; even the notorious
1624:Knowledge naming is descriptive not prescriptive
1312:But for some strange reason it's not working in
1298:List of Infinite Ryvius characters#Aoi Housen
8:
310:Can someone offer a little feedback on edits
1820:Too US-centric from my point of view (wtf,
2110:descriptions in the infobox at present. --
951:a particular episode would have to stay.--
18:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Anime and manga
2161:User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week
103:Cosmic Era article series facing deletion
1674:. Contributions will be appreciated. --
1071:Good. I'm currently working on getting
396:- The half-assed way of drawing motion.
812:Jump Superstars manga: Special Edition
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
7:
1791:List of flops in entertainment#Anime
1736:then set up a separate WikiProject.
1789:I had came across this list called
1128:Well done getting Shuffle to GA. --
606:. I could use some support here. --
2068:could be automatically added like
2020:We should use something more like
24:
1485:take precedence over all else. --
880:enough to have its own article.--
665:You sure this is bad enough that
1958:
1910:, which nonetheless received an
1829:
1426:
29:
2089:<!-- Metadata: see ] --: -->
1525:It's explained a bit in detail
727:TV WikiProject needs your help!
2022:Template:General CVG character
1946:03:31, 27 December 2006 (utc)
1:
2169:16:37, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
2145:17:51, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
2115:03:47, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
2104:23:25, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
2077:04:37, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
2061:| class="db-bWV0YWRhdGEtbA" |
2051:05:54, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
2042:05:45, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
2033:03:19, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
2015:09:52, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
1997:23:12, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
1983:13:18, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
1968:10:10, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
1884:02:28, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
1859:22:28, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
1839:19:53, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
1813:19:05, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
1775:03:12, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
1765:17:44, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
1752:22:33, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
1728:21:59, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
1717:06:34, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
1679:11:11, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
1653:09:47, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
1615:07:18, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
1596:21:03, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
1561:21:03, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
1545:19:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
1509:21:45, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
1480:21:03, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
1470:20:33, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
1436:18:57, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
1416:18:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
1385:17:57, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
1363:15:58, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
1349:I'm a little confused by how
1335:07:09, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
1321:07:00, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
1305:06:59, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
1263:10:58, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
1249:14:38, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
1222:20:05, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
1197:18:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
1180:10:42, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
1168:10:14, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
1154:22:18, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
1133:08:13, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
1124:21:51, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
1119:mostly just needs sourcing.--
1093:14:44, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
1067:12:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
1036:10:11, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
1026:04:01, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
1017:03:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
1002:03:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
965:00:45, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
956:10:04, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
935:05:55, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
924:18:50, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
885:17:47, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
873:17:00, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
819:16:57, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
619:When in doubt, paraphrase? --
304:15:27, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
167:12:22, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
153:11:49, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
1930:...Wasn't that the case for
1268:Sectional redirects now work
863:05:35, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
853:03:51, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
843:03:08, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
801:05:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
792:18:41, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
783:08:59, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
774:07:47, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
758:07:16, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
740:07:45, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
717:00:28, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
691:Knowledge:Resolving disputes
685:00:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
661:23:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
633:17:03, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
611:16:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
547:14:16, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
534:13:44, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
525:11:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
479:13:20, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
462:10:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
416:18:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
344:12:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
330:00:06, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
287:15:07, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
277:13:04, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
267:12:38, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
253:Help with kanji/romaji names
245:13:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
231:21:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
220:19:06, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
211:fans have shown us with the
198:13:14, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
189:13:11, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
176:13:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
2066:Category:Anime of the 2000s
1938:in the US and in Japan for
1888:I know what a lot of these
731:There's some discussion at
568:Negima!: Magister Negi Magi
337:Out-of-universe perspective
314:I've done a bit of edit to
2184:
566:Need help with fanboys at
551:Gosh, you're right. It is
1620:Knowledge:Naming conflict
587:Knowledge is not censored
1254:Examples on Project page
1236:Fair use image on portal
1163:we see what gets out. --
1077:List of Excel Saga media
388:Japanese school swimsuit
2121:New Notability proposal
1105:Neon Genesis Evangelion
1082:Neon Genesis Evangelion
1073:Serial Experiments Lain
1042:Good Article Candidates
945:Serial Experiments Lain
748:in need of alot of help
260:Serial Experiments Lain
316:Sentou Yousei Yukikaze
2070:Category:Anime series
1799:comment was added by
1684:Wikiproject proposal!
1208:comment was added by
669:needs to be skipped?
470:The Lord of the Rings
213:Guide to Harry Potter
42:of past discussions.
2150:Knowledge Day Awards
2008:Knowledge:Persondata
1907:Mutiny on the Bounty
1603:Hepburn romanization
2002:metadata for anime?
746:Jump Ultimate Stars
540:Bloomers (clothing)
1785:Animes that failed
1622:has said clearly:
1274:Knowledge Signpost
595:The Comics Journal
538:Closest we got is
468:Music Inspired by
2072:, etc, anyway. --
1816:
1650:
1613:
1413:
1333:
1296:now redirects to
1225:
1015:
906:influential that
772:
160:m:don't be a dick
158:Clear case of an
100:
99:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
2175:
2127:regarding fandom
2062:
1962:
1833:
1794:
1715:
1711:
1670:is undergoing a
1649:
1646:
1642:
1639:
1636:
1633:
1630:
1609:
1543:
1522:similar brouhaha
1507:
1505:
1497:
1490:
1468:
1466:
1458:
1451:
1430:
1412:
1409:
1405:
1402:
1399:
1396:
1393:
1329:
1285:
1203:
1011:
808:Jump Super Stars
768:
715:
713:
705:
698:
683:
659:
657:
649:
642:
523:
508:
507:
504:
501:
498:
495:
492:
460:
445:
444:
441:
438:
435:
432:
429:
173:Kyaa the Catlord
164:Kyaa the Catlord
151:
136:
135:
132:
129:
126:
123:
120:
81:
56:
55:
33:
32:
26:
2183:
2182:
2178:
2177:
2176:
2174:
2173:
2172:
2152:
2123:
2091:
2060:
2004:
1795:āThe preceding
1787:
1709:
1705:
1686:
1665:
1647:
1640:
1637:
1634:
1631:
1628:
1533:
1506:
1495:
1493:
1488:
1486:
1467:
1456:
1454:
1449:
1447:
1410:
1403:
1400:
1397:
1394:
1391:
1347:
1283:
1270:
1256:
1238:
1204:āThe preceding
835:
750:
729:
714:
703:
701:
696:
694:
673:
658:
647:
645:
640:
638:
571:
521:
510:
505:
502:
499:
496:
493:
490:
489:
458:
447:
442:
439:
436:
433:
430:
427:
426:
382:Character album
352:
312:
255:
149:
138:
133:
130:
127:
124:
121:
118:
117:
105:
77:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
2181:
2179:
2151:
2148:
2122:
2119:
2118:
2117:
2088:
2086:Here's PDATA:
2080:
2079:
2057:
2056:
2055:
2054:
2053:
2003:
2000:
1990:
1989:
1988:
1987:
1986:
1985:
1970:
1925:
1924:
1923:
1922:
1897:
1896:
1895:
1894:
1862:
1861:
1841:
1786:
1783:
1782:
1781:
1780:
1779:
1778:
1777:
1767:
1704:
1685:
1682:
1668:Azumanga Daioh
1664:
1663:Azumanga Daioh
1661:
1660:
1659:
1658:
1657:
1656:
1655:
1588:
1585:
1581:
1573:
1565:
1564:
1563:
1518:
1517:
1516:
1515:
1514:
1513:
1512:
1511:
1492:
1453:
1440:
1439:
1438:
1346:
1345:Article naming
1343:
1342:
1341:
1340:
1339:
1338:
1337:
1290:
1289:
1269:
1266:
1255:
1252:
1237:
1234:
1233:
1232:
1231:
1230:
1229:
1228:
1227:
1226:
1182:
1170:
1147:
1146:
1145:
1144:
1143:
1142:
1141:
1140:
1139:
1138:
1137:
1136:
1135:
991:Gojyou Shiouji
971:
970:
969:
968:
967:
914:TV shows have
890:
889:
888:
887:
877:
876:
875:
834:
831:
830:
829:
828:
827:
826:
825:
824:
823:
822:
821:
749:
743:
728:
725:
724:
723:
722:
721:
720:
719:
700:
644:
635:
600:
599:
590:
583:
570:
564:
563:
562:
561:
560:
559:
558:
557:
556:
536:
527:
517:
454:
408:
407:
397:
391:
385:
379:
369:
359:
351:
348:
347:
346:
320:Submarine 707R
311:
308:
307:
306:
292:
291:
290:
289:
254:
251:
250:
249:
248:
247:
234:
233:
223:
222:
204:
203:
202:
201:
200:
169:
145:
104:
101:
98:
97:
92:
87:
82:
75:
70:
65:
62:
52:
51:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2180:
2171:
2170:
2167:
2166:Badbilltucker
2162:
2157:
2149:
2147:
2146:
2142:
2138:
2137:
2132:
2128:
2120:
2116:
2113:
2108:
2107:
2106:
2105:
2102:
2097:
2087:
2084:
2078:
2075:
2071:
2067:
2058:
2052:
2049:
2045:
2044:
2043:
2040:
2036:
2035:
2034:
2031:
2027:
2023:
2019:
2018:
2017:
2016:
2013:
2009:
2001:
1999:
1998:
1995:
1984:
1981:
1980:Contributions
1978:
1975:
1971:
1969:
1965:
1961:
1956:
1952:
1948:
1947:
1945:
1941:
1937:
1933:
1929:
1928:
1927:
1926:
1921:
1918:
1917:Heaven's Gate
1915:
1913:
1912:Academy Award
1908:
1905:
1901:
1900:
1899:
1898:
1891:
1887:
1886:
1885:
1882:
1881:Contributions
1879:
1876:
1872:
1868:
1864:
1863:
1860:
1856:
1852:
1851:
1846:
1842:
1840:
1836:
1832:
1827:
1823:
1819:
1818:
1817:
1814:
1810:
1806:
1802:
1798:
1792:
1784:
1776:
1773:
1768:
1766:
1763:
1759:
1755:
1754:
1753:
1749:
1745:
1744:
1739:
1735:
1731:
1730:
1729:
1726:
1721:
1720:
1719:
1718:
1714:
1712:
1703:
1702:Colin Keigher
1700:
1697:
1694:
1689:
1683:
1681:
1680:
1677:
1673:
1669:
1662:
1654:
1651:
1643:
1625:
1621:
1618:
1617:
1616:
1612:
1608:
1604:
1599:
1598:
1597:
1594:
1589:
1586:
1582:
1578:
1574:
1571:
1570:NPOV policies
1566:
1562:
1559:
1555:
1551:
1550:
1549:
1548:
1547:
1546:
1541:
1537:
1532:
1528:
1523:
1510:
1504:
1501:
1498:
1491:
1483:
1482:
1481:
1478:
1473:
1472:
1471:
1465:
1462:
1459:
1452:
1444:
1441:
1437:
1433:
1429:
1424:
1419:
1418:
1417:
1414:
1406:
1388:
1387:
1386:
1382:
1378:
1377:
1372:
1367:
1366:
1365:
1364:
1361:
1357:
1352:
1344:
1336:
1332:
1328:
1324:
1323:
1322:
1319:
1315:
1311:
1310:
1309:
1308:
1307:
1306:
1303:
1299:
1295:
1292:For example,
1287:
1279:
1278:
1277:
1275:
1267:
1265:
1264:
1261:
1253:
1251:
1250:
1247:
1243:
1235:
1223:
1219:
1215:
1211:
1207:
1200:
1199:
1198:
1195:
1191:
1187:
1183:
1181:
1178:
1174:
1171:
1169:
1166:
1162:
1157:
1156:
1155:
1152:
1148:
1134:
1131:
1127:
1126:
1125:
1122:
1118:
1114:
1110:
1106:
1102:
1101:
1096:
1095:
1094:
1091:
1087:
1083:
1078:
1074:
1070:
1069:
1068:
1065:
1061:
1060:
1055:
1054:
1049:
1048:
1043:
1039:
1038:
1037:
1034:
1029:
1028:
1027:
1024:
1020:
1019:
1018:
1014:
1010:
1005:
1004:
1003:
1000:
996:
992:
988:
984:
980:
976:
972:
966:
963:
959:
958:
957:
954:
950:
946:
942:
938:
937:
936:
933:
928:
927:
926:
925:
922:
917:
913:
909:
905:
900:
896:
886:
883:
878:
874:
871:
866:
865:
864:
861:
856:
855:
854:
851:
847:
846:
845:
844:
841:
832:
820:
817:
813:
809:
804:
803:
802:
799:
795:
794:
793:
790:
786:
785:
784:
781:
777:
776:
775:
771:
767:
762:
761:
760:
759:
756:
747:
744:
742:
741:
738:
734:
726:
718:
712:
709:
706:
699:
692:
689:According to
688:
687:
686:
681:
677:
672:
668:
664:
663:
662:
656:
653:
650:
643:
636:
634:
630:
626:
622:
618:
615:
614:
613:
612:
609:
605:
597:
596:
591:
588:
584:
581:
576:
575:
574:
569:
565:
554:
550:
549:
548:
545:
541:
537:
535:
532:
528:
526:
522:
520:
515:
512:
509:
486:
482:
481:
480:
477:
472:
471:
465:
464:
463:
459:
457:
452:
449:
446:
423:
420:
419:
418:
417:
414:
405:
401:
398:
395:
392:
389:
386:
383:
380:
377:
373:
370:
367:
363:
360:
357:
354:
353:
349:
345:
342:
338:
334:
333:
332:
331:
328:
323:
321:
317:
309:
305:
302:
298:
294:
293:
288:
285:
280:
279:
278:
275:
271:
270:
269:
268:
265:
261:
252:
246:
243:
238:
237:
236:
235:
232:
229:
225:
224:
221:
218:
214:
210:
205:
199:
196:
192:
191:
190:
187:
183:
179:
178:
177:
174:
170:
168:
165:
161:
157:
156:
155:
154:
150:
148:
143:
140:
137:
114:
109:
102:
96:
93:
91:
88:
86:
83:
80:
76:
74:
71:
69:
66:
63:
61:
58:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
2153:
2134:
2124:
2092:
2085:
2081:
2005:
1991:
1939:
1935:
1931:
1919:
1909:
1902:
1866:
1865:yea, define
1848:
1844:
1788:
1757:
1741:
1706:
1698:
1690:
1687:
1666:
1623:
1520:There was a
1519:
1374:
1348:
1291:
1281:
1271:
1257:
1239:
1189:
1185:
1172:
1160:
1116:
1112:
1109:Cowboy Bebop
1108:
1104:
1098:
1086:Cowboy Bebop
1080:it's either
1057:
1051:
1045:
948:
915:
911:
908:every single
907:
903:
898:
891:
836:
751:
730:
616:
601:
593:
579:
572:
552:
518:
513:
467:
455:
450:
409:
324:
313:
256:
209:Harry Potter
146:
141:
112:
106:
78:
43:
37:
2156:Esperanza's
1977:ā¢Talk Pageā¢
1944:Willirennen
1932:Sailor Moon
1878:ā¢Talk Pageā¢
1822:Sailor Moon
1801:Willirennen
1672:peer review
1284:#REDIRECT ]
422:Image album
394:Speed lines
36:This is an
2048:SeizureDog
2030:SeizureDog
1936:Escaflowne
1772:SeizureDog
1762:SidiLemine
1688:Hey guys.
1294:Aoi Housen
1246:GunnarRene
1194:SeizureDog
1177:SidiLemine
1165:SidiLemine
1121:SeizureDog
1117:Evangelion
1090:SidiLemine
1064:SeizureDog
1053:Death Note
1033:SidiLemine
983:Il Palazzo
962:SeizureDog
953:SidiLemine
921:SidiLemine
860:SeizureDog
798:SeizureDog
780:SeizureDog
680:he scores!
608:SeizureDog
544:SeizureDog
531:SidiLemine
476:SeizureDog
413:SeizureDog
366:PVC figure
284:SidiLemine
274:SeizureDog
264:SidiLemine
242:SeizureDog
195:SeizureDog
186:SeizureDog
95:ArchiveĀ 15
90:ArchiveĀ 14
85:ArchiveĀ 13
79:ArchiveĀ 12
73:ArchiveĀ 11
68:ArchiveĀ 10
2131:talk page
2112:Squilibob
2101:Ned Scott
2074:Squilibob
2039:Ned Scott
2012:Ned Scott
1994:Ned Scott
1955:ĪĪ¾Ī±ĪÆĻĪµĻĪæĻ
1826:ĪĪ¾Ī±ĪÆĻĪµĻĪæĻ
1760:others.--
1725:Ned Scott
1693:proposing
1676:Squilibob
1580:mistakes.
1577:WP:MOS-JA
1554:WP:MOS-JA
1531:NeoChaosX
1443:WP:MOS-JA
1423:ĪĪ¾Ī±ĪÆĻĪµĻĪæĻ
1318:Ned Scott
1302:Ned Scott
1260:Squilibob
1130:Squilibob
858:though.--
850:Ned Scott
737:Ned Scott
676:he shoots
671:NeoChaosX
667:mediation
580:"notable"
362:PVC model
356:Idol club
341:Squilibob
327:Kschang77
228:Ned Scott
60:ArchiveĀ 5
2136:TheFarix
2096:WP:PDATA
1974:Userpage
1951:Botswana
1940:Gundam X
1875:Userpage
1871:AnimeUSA
1850:TheFarix
1809:contribs
1797:unsigned
1743:TheFarix
1738:WP:Anime
1734:WP:Anime
1376:TheFarix
1351:WP:Anime
1218:contribs
1206:unsigned
1151:Monocrat
1100:Shuffle!
1047:Shuffle!
1031:start?--
1023:Monocrat
999:Monocrat
995:That Man
941:Planetes
932:RobJ1981
882:Monocrat
870:RobJ1981
816:RobJ1981
789:RobJ1981
755:RobJ1981
519:contribs
456:contribs
404:bloomers
400:Bloomers
376:gashapon
372:One coin
147:contribs
1867:failure
1845:failure
1843:Define
1593:Kunzite
1558:Kunzite
1489:RoninBK
1477:Kunzite
1450:RoninBK
1371:WP:NAME
1356:WP:NAME
697:RoninBK
641:RoninBK
621:HKMarks
301:Phorque
217:Kunzite
39:archive
1890:fanboy
1607:tjstrf
1327:tjstrf
1314:Safari
1097:Well,
1059:Madlax
1044:page (
1009:tjstrf
987:Kabapu
895:Uvacss
868:manga.
840:Uvacss
766:tjstrf
483:Check
318:, and
113:delete
2026:Talim
1316:. --
1210:$ yD!
1113:Bebop
979:Hyatt
975:Excel
897:asks
411:me.--
16:<
2141:Talk
2133:. --
1934:and
1855:Talk
1847:. --
1805:talk
1748:Talk
1710:Talk
1648:TALK
1626:. --
1611:talk
1556:. --
1540:walk
1536:talk
1527:here
1411:TALK
1381:Talk
1331:talk
1214:talk
1173:Edit
1161:then
1050:and
1013:talk
993:and
916:some
912:some
770:talk
604:here
485:here
297:here
215:. --
108:Here
2028:.--
1964:msg
1835:msg
1758:and
1644:--
1638:urt
1635:l C
1632:mue
1432:msg
1407:--
1401:urt
1398:l C
1395:mue
1360:JRP
1186:NGE
1084:or
949:why
943:or
904:and
553:not
184:.--
2143:)
1966:)
1857:)
1837:)
1811:)
1807:ā¢
1770:--
1750:)
1641:is
1629:Sa
1591:--
1538:,
1529:.
1446:--
1434:)
1404:is
1392:Sa
1383:)
1276::
1244:--
1220:)
1216:ā¢
1190:CB
1007:--
989:,
985:,
981:,
977:,
678:,
631:)
503:ar
500:ik
497:Sh
494:rk
491:Da
440:ar
437:ik
434:Sh
431:rk
428:Da
364:/
325:--
131:ar
128:ik
125:Sh
122:rk
119:Da
64:ā
2139:(
1957:(
1853:(
1828:(
1815:.
1803:(
1746:(
1713:)
1707:(
1542:)
1534:(
1503:C
1500:T
1496:E
1464:C
1461:T
1457:E
1425:(
1379:(
1288:"
1280:"
1224:.
1212:(
711:C
708:T
704:E
682:)
674:(
655:C
652:T
648:E
629:C
627:/
625:T
623:(
589:.
582:.
514:/
506:i
451:/
443:i
378:.
142:/
134:i
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.