Talk:Tokyopop/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Mobile Suit Gundam

The primary Mobile Suit Gundam manga is not a TokyoPop licensed property, therefore it does not belong on this list. Only the Blue Destiny side story is a TokyoPop title.
Compare:

Greyweather 01:05, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

"Mobile Suit Gundam" is actually referring to the entire Gundam series. WhisperToMe 05:40, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

TOKYOPOP, not Tokyopop or TokyoPop

The name of the company is TOKYOPOP explicitly in all caps; see all company literature such as its press releases and its website. pfahlstrom 22:11, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

And typography of logos isn't relevant for an encyclopedia article. --zippedmartin 00:32, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm not talking about the logo, just the name of the company. But since as you've pointed out WP:MOS-TM decrees that companies are not allowed to have all-caps names, I will bow to consensus. pfahlstrom 21:03, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Mixx/Tokyopop Boycott

I've just ran across this article and I'm surprised that there is no information about the controversy of Mixxzine's second year because of its format change and its handling of Sailor Moon along with the early boycott of Mixxzine and later Tokyopop during that time. This was one of the more significant events in Tokyopop's history.

I would include it, but I don't think I will be able to keep a NPOV since I was neck deep in the controversy at the time.--TheFarix 12:15, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I'd love to hear more. I was buying the magazine at the time of their first year onwards, but they didn't give much detail in the magazine itself, and all I ever read online was slandering of Levy, the owner. I do know about the handling of Sailor Moon's Michiru and Haruka, and was disappointed, but it was better than the dubbing of the anime. - Cyborg Ninja (talk) 11:11, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

If neutral, reliable sources can be find, then it should be included. Part of the problem is that at the time, the magazine itself probably wasn't big enough to warrant coverage in national news. I'll search around, though, and see what I can find. ANN and AnimeOnDVD may have covered it, hopefully neutrally. :) Collectonian (talk) 20:14, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Kyaa's folly

user:pfahlstrom may be Peter Ahlstrom of Tokyopop. He came in and removed some verifiable data from the criticism section, claiming POV. The changes of names in the TP version of Initial D is not POV, although the wording could be brushed up. Also, 5'0" is the average height for women in Japan, making Karin's 4'11" not 'chibi', even by Japanese standards. Based on that information, which can be found in the human height wikipedia article, she may actually be relatively tall for her age. Kyaa the Catlord 04:19, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I grant your chibi point, and your rewording of that section is much better than the original, but I didn't touch anything about Initial D. I have always attempted to be an ethical wikipedia editor—I have no problem with valid NPOV criticism, and you can see that I have not touched the well-phrased though unsourced criticism in the criticism section. However, I do have problems with new unsourced non-NPOV additions. In this particular case, while TOKYOPOP has long been criticized for its OEL titles, I did not notice any particular upsurge in this criticism after the HarperCollins announcement; most people who have a bone to pick about the issue picked it to slivers already about a year ago. I agree that this criticism should be addressed somewhere in the article; however, as I have been well aware that I am not the one who should be addressing it, I haven't added anything on the subject. This new paragraph which was added by user:66.65.94.135 was unsourced, clearly non-NPOV, and full of weasel words. I have now attempted to reword it in a less POV manner (as well as fixing the spelling mistakes which you unilaterally restored); does it meet with your approval? I have also, with a bit of searching, found a citation for it, but it's a pretty poor one; since you are the one who say that this information is verifiable, please find a better citation which will verify it.
Also, when you reverted my edit, you failed to keep the wikification I performed, leaving in <i> tags. Please be more aware of this type of thing in the future. pfahlstrom 05:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Actually, I agree with that bit. I didn't actually see that you had removed that section beforehand due to scrolling length issues. What most disturbed me was that someone from the company came in, removed text that could be taken as a criticism and was calling that POV. This is on par with congressional aides editting wikipedia articles to make their bosses look better, imho. The criticism section is dying to be rewritten and sourced. I'll try to do that later, if I have time.... (Ugh, I really don't want to cite blogs and forums but a lot of the TP criticism is direct from the fanbase and only available in these places.) Kyaa the Catlord 06:10, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Great start on the citations, though the ref names are a bit...*cough*...creative ;). As for the congressional aides parallel, I don't plan to attempt any edit which would prompt me to hide behind an IP address. pfahlstrom 15:58, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
I thought it was a good summary of the feelings portrayed by the articles I found. :P Personally, I find most criticisms of TP to be simply fanboyish whinging. I'll try to find some more sources for that part later. Kyaa the Catlord 06:33, 4 May 2006 (UTC)


Refactored to strike out Kyaa's lack of good faith. Apologies to Peter. Kyaa the Catlord 10:20, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
I appreciate it. pfahlstrom 15:58, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

WP:COMICS

While the article on Tokyopop is already covered under the Anime and Manga WikiProject, it is to be noted that Tokyopop also distributes original (domestic) English-language manga in the United States and elsewhere. See Peach Fuzz, a manga produced by Tokyopop in the U.S. and syndicated in newspapers such as the San Francisco Chronicle. Thus the Comics WikiProject should also cover Tokyopop and its English-language manga. --Geopgeop 09:49, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I disagree with the the WP:COMICS label. While indeed Tokyopop distributes original (domestic) English-language manga in the United States I believe the WP:COMICS label is insufficient in representing the whole of the company as beyond merely print works Tokyopop also distributes anime series aswell. Ariolander 10:26, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Nothing is stopping both wikiprojects from covering this article. The more the merrier! Kyaa the Catlord 11:24, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Apparently the Anime and Manga WikiProject is a subsidiary of WikiProject Comics, WikiProject Television and WikiProject Japan all of which could fit this article. Surely the child project that covers all these works just fine by itself. Ariolander 02:16, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Success & Criticism

Someone really needs to seperate that segment into a clearly defined "success" and "criticism" section, because it's tough to follow solid ideas in that large and detatched section due to the blending. I'm not familiar with TOKYOPOP all that much, so someone else here needs to take the time and rewrite the article segment. 68.189.82.81 21:41, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
The Success and criticism also has many unsupported facts that need citation.--65.96.253.2 22:36, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not really sure where to put this, but I was cleaning up the page to reflect the fact that the plural form of 'manga' is still 'manga.' It is not 'mangas' because Japanese does not have a plural form. I noted two uses of 'mangas' on this page and corrected them. 74.195.238.31 17:25, 24 March 2007 (UTC)LSE

Well I took the liberty of mentioning Tokyopop's contributions for Manhwa in the United States. Note I brought text sources with me. No really we need to clean this section up. Whoever added that needs to tell where the info came from. While I might agree with it as I have read some of it before tis useless unless we can cite it properly - Ariolander 08:39, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Other Manga

I saw the list and I thought "shouldn't this be incomplete"? I looked for some titles I've heard of in ads 'n' stuff, like Comic Party, I don't see it there or I haven't looked hard enough....but, I saw a Manga named "Comic Party" before that wasn't published by Tokoyopop....I saw it in a store and I have the manga by Tokyopop.

Lists

Part of the clean up should involve the removal of the lists. Best to be moved into a separate article, and the lists themselves need some clean up. KyuuA4 06:45, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Public or private comany?

Is this a publicly traded corporation, or is it privately owned? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.69.118.1 (talk) 04:09, 29 November 2007 (UTC)