Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga

SPI cleanup

The user HaganaiPlys was recently blocked as a sockpuppet and thus all of their major contributions should be reverted. Since this user created a lot of articles, is there anyone who can help clean up the damage? Link20XX (talk) 17:39, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Fate/Grand Order characters (2nd nomination)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Fate/Grand Order characters (2nd nomination), which is within the scope of this WikiProject. Kodning 🌸 (talk) 05:16, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Should citations to Natalie sites use Natalie or a more specific one like Comic Natalie?

I think that citing specific Natalie sites such as Comic Natalie or Music Natalie rather than Natalie as a whole is preferable, since they have completely different editorial teams, social media accounts, and website names in their banner areas. In addition, they are generally cited by their individual names by reliable English-language sources. 1234567 Finally, MOS:NOPIPE notes that "using a redirected term that fits well within the scope of the text" compared to a piped link is helpful for several reasons, while WP:NOTBROKEN notes that an accurate redirect term can be preferable to a piped one.

Two editors have offered a different perspective; lullabying said it was not necessary at the moment since they both link to the same article, and that it would be better to wait until articles are drafted for individual websites. Meanwhile D.18th said it goes against WP:NOTBROKEN and MOS:NOPIPE (I didn't completely understand that, which might be on me, so I invite them to clarify). Due to the widespread usage of Natalie sites within this project, input to help establish a consistent style would be helpful. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 16:48, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Similarly, I think it's better to include a link to each sub-site rather than just listing "Natalie" for the reasons you mentioned. That's what I've been doing myself for almost two years. I don't understand D.18th's comment either, since linking redirects instead of using piped links is precisely what WP:NOTBROKEN and MOS:NOPIPE suggest that should be done. Xexerss (talk) 17:13, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

To clarify my stance from Crestfalling's talk page: I’m actually totally fine with using specific redirects like Comic Natalie for new articles or when you're already in there editing a page. My main issue is really just with the mass-automated "sweeping" of thousands of existing, working citations.

Even though WP:NOTBROKEN and MOS:NOPIPE generally favor accurate redirects, those guidelines are usually interpreted with a "don't fix what isn't broken" mindset for existing links. Since the specific Natalie department (Comic, Eiga, etc.) is already obvious from the URL itself, changing the link text doesn't actually give readers or metadata tools any info they don't already have. In my view, doing this at such a massive scale doesn't offer enough technical gain to justify the huge amount of watchlist clutter it creates for everyone. I think it’s better to just use this style moving forward rather than trying to "clean up" thousands of citations that are already doing their job. ꕥ 𝙳.𝟷𝟾𝚝𝚑 ꕥ ^{→𝙼𝚎𝚜𝚜𝚊𝚐𝚎 𝚖𝚎←} 18:42, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

I'm good with that compromise, so I'll refrain from making changes to [[Natalie (website)|Natalie]] links at a large scale. As a point of clarification, in cases where Japanese text already should be transliterated anyway per MOS:NOTLATIN / MOS:JAPANCOM (e.g. website=コミックナタリ -> website=Comic Natalie), I think there wouldn't be any particular problems with using the department name, but please let me know if there are any objections to this. Thanks all for your input. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 19:09, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

June 2026 GAN Backlog Drive

Good article nominations | June 2026 Backlog Drive
June 2026 Backlog Drive: Do you want to become more experienced in the GA process? On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles reviewed. Mentors are available, and new reviewers (<6 reviews) get bonus points! Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talk page.
You're receiving this message because you have participated in a good article review this year or participated in the previous backlog drive.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:59, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Newly created articles by MrKaraRocks

I've noticed that @MrKaraRocks: has been creating articles for series like Alien Headbutt, Hitoner, and Class 2-B Hero Destroyerz shortly after getting started. The sources they cite mostly cover the release of these series, clearly lacking evidence of notability. I won't nominate them for deletion, but I would suggest to the user to familiarize better with WP:NOTABILITY and desist from continuing to create articles for recent series that have little or no coverage at all. Xexerss (talk) 21:21, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

I've been aware of this user's articles for awhile now and I agree that they are almost always subpar. Take a look at Otr of the Flame before others cleaned it up (); it does not use proper formatting and is super short, doing little to establish notability beyond just stating the basic facts. If this was just once, then maybe I could live with it, but they also wrote To Dusk and Twilight (), Witching Hour (manga) (), and the three mentioned above (, , ), none of which appear to be notable and are probably WP:TOOSOON, especially for the ones without a volume released. I would hate to see any sanctions applied or articles deleted, but I don't think most of these articles are of a sufficient quality to be in the main space at present. Link20XX (talk) 23:20, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

I could take the time to fix the structure and do some copyediting, but since they aren't notable at the moment, I'm not sure if it's worth the effort. Xexerss (talk) 11:06, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

I have gone ahead and draftified Class 2-B Hero Destroyerz and Alien Headbutt as they are completely unsuitable for mainspace in their current forms. I also left a message on their talk page pointing them to this discussion. Link20XX (talk) 17:20, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

Akira Takano

Good day! I've opened up a discussion for Akira Takano at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 May 28#Akira Takano. Your input is appreciated. Cheers! lullabying (talk) 20:38, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

Buriki

Is this anime artist notable? If yes, please add a few more sources to show notability, after which you may remove the tag. Thank you kindly in advance. Bearian (talk) 02:30, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

@Bearian: Outside of what I see for articles about the series he worked on, no. I cannot find a reliable source that significantly covers Buriki himself. Even the sources listed in his Spanish article's references primarily cover works he was involved in and only mention him in passing. Z. Patterson (talk) 15:37, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

I started a discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Buriki. Z. Patterson (talk) 16:02, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. Bearian (talk) 16:50, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § Source reliability and quality check for Rei Ayanami

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § Source reliability and quality check for Rei Ayanami. Z. Patterson (talk) 15:28, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

Should hatnotes to lists of chapters/volumes/episodes use {{Main}} or {{See also}}?

Many articles have section hatnotes to lists of chapters/volumes/episodes in their "Media" section. However, there seems to be significant inconsistency in which template to use, even among FAs and GAs. For example, Naruto and My Hero Academia use {{Main}}, Re:Zero uses {{See also}}, and School Rumble and Revolutionary Girl Utena use a mix of both (with the latter using {{Main}} for the film and characters).

WP:SUMMARYHATNOTE states that "In the parent article, the location of the detailed article for each subtopic is indicated at the top of the section by a hatnote link such as "Main article" ... For article pairs with a less hierarchical parent/child relationship, {{See also}} may apply."

I was thinking of doing an AWB run to make them consistent, which would be a fairly easy task, but I'm not sure what to change them to in the first place. Personally, I feel like {{Main}} makes a bit more sense because the lists are direct subtopics of the main article, but of course there are arguments to be made either way. Discussion to establish a consensus would certainly be helpful. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 01:40, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

I believe the reason for this is that in past years we rarely made articles for tv series based on manga so we just focused on episode lists. I mean I have recently tried to create more tv series articles like Madhouse 's Trigun, Arslan's adaptations, X/1999, d.grayman, etc since I managed to find content to back up production and reception sections. Tintor2 (talk) 02:22, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

@Crestfalling: Revolutionary Girl Utena uses a mix of both. I would use {{Main}}, especially now that we have more information about subtopics of anime. Z. Patterson (talk) 02:24, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

Got it, clarified that above. Thank you and Tintor2 for the helpful replies so far. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 03:37, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

Authors on reference

I've noticed the some editors are quite inconsistent when it comes to referencing certain news articles, mainly those from Anime News Network. On some pages, there are authors, especially newer anime series. However, others lack those, especially series created before 2020s. I just wanted to know if there's a Manual of Style whether or not authors are required for certain references. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:27, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

Oh yeah. I think Animenewsnetwork didn't give authors name before in news articles before and only reviews. Tintor2 (talk) 14:29, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

Per WP:CITESTYLE, "citations should aim to provide information listed [in WP:CITEHOW]", which includes author names. As such, they should be included in citations if they exist, but it's not a strict requirement, since a functional citation is better than no citation at all. If an editor is consistently not adding them, it may be helpful to gently start a discussion on their talk page, since it's often because of Wikipedia's Citoid software not properly retrieving metadata. On the other hand, if no author name is given in the original source, simply citing the webpage as-is is fine.Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 21:21, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Toritsukare Otoko#Requested move 20 May 2026

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Toritsukare Otoko#Requested move 20 May 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Jeffrey34555 (talk) 05:44, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Removed Plot Summaries

I noticed that a temp account removed all the episode plot summaries for Silver Fang saying they were all made up. I don't know anything about the show so I can't really contest that claim, but the summaries are strangely descriptive and cohesive to be fake. Does anyone have any knowledge or know a place to confirm this? It is a lot of work to write summaries like that and I would hate for them to be lost if there is nothing wrong with them. Ajheindel (talk) 15:05, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Looking at the article all the summaries were added by a single IP address last year. Also taking a closer look they also added summaries to Heathcliff (1984 TV series) which were also removed as being fake by User talk:Hassocks5489 so unless they and the temp account are the same person we have a case of two different people on two different articles believing the IP to have added fake summaries. Granted, this isn’t absolute proof but I believe it does offer validity to the fake summery theory.--~2026-29774-36 (talk) 04:19, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Deprecating Full Frontal

Full Frontal (at fullfrontal.moe) does not appear to be a reliable source. Based on what I have seen in Special:Diff/1346084741 and the rest of the website, it appears to be a blog website, and per WP:BLOG, they are generally not reliable. I also have reason to believe its fact-checking and editorial policies are loose, if they exist. Consequently, I removed or replaced Full Frontal citations in some articles (such as in Special:Diff/1357847663, Special:Diff/1357848080, and Special:Diff/1357850658), but there are still more to replace or remove. Before I potentially ask an edit filter manager to add this source to Edit Filter 869, I am wondering if, as a whole, we should deprecate this source. Z. Patterson (talk) 02:01, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

Its interviews/translations have been referenced by Mechademia, Dexerto, Screen Rant, Comic Book, CBR, and Forbes (last one is a Forbes contributor, but should be reliable WP:SPS because he's written for The Guardian). Deb Aoki (see WP:A&M/ORS) has praised the site. I'm not sure if it should be deprecated outright since its interviews are very useful; it's secured interviews with the mangaka of Oshi no Ko (link 1), Takeshi Honda (link 2), and many other influential figures. It also apparently has a partnership with Animeland, France's first animanga magazine. That's what I found in a search, and I'll try to take a closer look later to see if any of its authors have published elsewhere. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 05:21, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

Matteo Watzky, one of its contributors, has written for The Journal of Anime and Manga Studies, a peer-reviewed publication (link 1). I found additional references by Game Rant, CBR 1, CBR 2, Anime Corner, Comic Book, Otaku USA, and IGN Brazil. It was also used by Anime Corner for a very contentious claim (link 2), which demonstrates a high level of trust in its veracity. Its opinions have been cited as critic reviews by Looper and Animation Magazine. While I tend to be skeptical of websites without clear editorial policies, I think this level of WP:USEBYOTHERS probably makes it reliable. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 00:04, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

Based on what Crestfalling has presented, I'm inclined to say that the site seems reliable. At least regarding interviews, I think that it is very useful material to deprecate the entire site. I haven't checked other kind of articles on the site, so I can't comment on them for now. Xexerss (talk) 06:20, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

I see. So the reliability of Full Frontal is situational. We could say, on Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Online reliable sources, that like Anime News Network, Full Frontal can generally be cited, but do not cite the Blog section. Z. Patterson (talk) 03:28, 6 June 2026 (UTC)

One thing worth noting is that some of its discussions with creators, such as those in convention panels, are in the Blog section, e.g. this one. Looking closer at the site, they said that in 2023, they spent over $4000 USD on transportation costs alone to conventions, a claim that seems reasonable considering that they were paneled at Annecy International Animation Film Festival 2023, The 50th Angoulême International Comics Festival, and Japan Expo 2023, among many others. I'm not sure if an ordinary blog would be able to secure such opportunities; it does have a chief editor as well as editorial direction, which may count for something. That being said, I understand the concerns regarding this source, and I think establishing a consensus before deciding what to do with it would be very helpful. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 01:43, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

The Case Files of Biblia Bookstore copies update

Hi everyone can anyone help me to find the source of The Case Files of Biblia Bookstore reception? because sales of franchise went into 8.5 million copies in April 2026 Venom5122 (talk) 19:09, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

Avoiding a FA reassessment

The FA article Naruto got some revisions to keep up with present FA needs. Xerxess and I add content and revised stuff. You can see everything here. Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 23:42, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

Discussion at Template talk:Infobox animanga § Restore the "Demographic" parameter or keep it thrown away?

 You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Infobox animanga § Restore the "Demographic" parameter or keep it thrown away?, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 01:44, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Renaming Comitia

The article COMITIA currently uses all caps when that naming scheme is discouraged my MOS:JAPAN. It's not even an acronym for anything. I'd like to change it to Comitia and I remember bring it up at a rename discussion, but nothing really came out of it. lullabying (talk) 00:02, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

I opened a discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 June 9#Comitia. Your input is appreciated. Thanks! lullabying (talk) 00:11, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Chanmei = Mei Chan

I am proceeding to change all instances of "Chanmei" (Japanese writer who has written articles and editorials about manga in Real Sound, Da Vinci, and Natalie into "Mei Chan" as it seems to be the proper way of writing her name. Here's a photo from her Instagram account regarding an autograph she received from manga artist Misato Konari, where there is a visible space between ちゃん and めい, so her name is supposed to be Mei Chan.

Also, it may be worth putting her in WP:ANIME/RS as well. lullabying (talk) 05:31, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

I am not familiar with this person but a space in an autograph by someone else is incredibly weak as evidence especially when her official website and social media accounts spell her name as Chanmei consistently. Also, she is born in Shizuoka, which makes Chan (not a Japanese surname) being her family name less likely. _dk (talk) 14:33, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

I think that's also weak evidence too because there are Japanese people who use their whole name in their URLs without spaces as well, yet we can tell what their names are supposed to be. And also, while Chan isn't a Japanese surname, you can't rule out that there are people of non-Japanese descent who were born and raised in the country (i.e. Hanae Kan). lullabying (talk) 23:58, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

As of right now i do not believe the weight of the evidence supports changing all instances of Chanmei to Mei Chan on Wikipedia. _dk (talk) 09:28, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Stating that her social media accounts and official website list her name as "Chanmei" is not really a convincing argument, though, especially since the names are written in Japanese and naturally don't have spacing in the URLs because she chose not to write them that way. A space does indicate that there is a separation between "Chan" and "Mei", so I do believe her name is supposed to be Mei Chan. lullabying (talk) 05:42, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

The point is that she didn't write that space herself and whether there is meant to be a space there in the first place is debatable. Come back with more supporting evidence because her social media accounts, as weak evidence as you claim they are, are much more relevant than a phantom space written by someone who might not even know her that well leading to interpretations about her name and ethnicity on shaky OR grounds. _dk (talk) 12:41, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

On her manga recs page, (link) she calls herself "manga writer Chanmei" in English text. This Japanese interview from 2022 (link) says her name is Mei, and that Chanmei is a nickname, which is presumably a sound inversion of Mei-chan, another pen name she'd considered. Kint Editors (talk) 09:58, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Sword Art Online needs to be updated/fixed to remain a GA

See Talk:Sword_Art_Online#Not_comprehensive_for_GA - is there anyone interested in helping? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:51, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:JoJo's Bizarre Adventure: Shining Diamond's Demonic Heartbreak#Requested move 13 June 2026

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:JoJo's Bizarre Adventure: Shining Diamond's Demonic Heartbreak#Requested move 13 June 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Red Shogun412 (talk • contribs) 15:04, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Edit filter noticeboard § Request to add Bounding into Comics to Edit Filter 869

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Edit filter noticeboard § Request to add Bounding into Comics to Edit Filter 869. Z. Patterson (talk) 17:23, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

List of Naruto characters nominated for removal from Featured Lists

See Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of Naruto characters/archive3. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:55, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Infobox help for Fate/Extra Last Encore

I started this article and will be polishing it in the near future, but I could use help with the infobox. I based it on Fate/Zero (TV series) which uses Infobox television, but I noticed Fate/Extra (parent game) uses a more complex Infobox animanga/Video . I am not sure if Fate/Extra needs the anime infobox now that the anime show has an entry at Fate/Extra Last Encore, which infobox to use and which parameters to move/merge. If anyone here is an infobox-expert, I'd appreciate some c/e help in these articles. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:22, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

URGENT - Immediate Action needed in regards to Cultural Findings In Regards to Fujoshi/Fudanshi Japanese subculture

I am seeking community guidance regarding the categorization of joseimuke media of all kinds (BL, TL/Otome, GL, NL) on Wikipedia. Currently, I am encountering significant hurdles in accurately documenting this genre because industry-standard Japanese terminology (such as joseimuke, visual kei’s relation to feminist BL content (Golden Bomber has a song called Fudanshi), a dansou cosplayer also known as a female crossplayer (Dansounoreijin is literally a The World God Only Knows OST song), and their important queer female historical context as your Boys Love media main page brings up queer female sexuality such as lesbianism or any form of transmasculinism) is being removed from articles or minimized in such a way that I feel is systemic misogyny in nature towards female and transmasculine artists and this is very scary to someone who’s in the female anime fan community, not only as a cosplayer who makes her own costumes as a hobbiest seamstress, but also, as a Japanese language DLsite mangaka who works for DLsite Garumani (DLsite Girls Side) and Comic Market (Comiket Japan) itself including its sister conventions such as, Sunshine City. I also fail to see why gay male authors are included in women’s BL authorship when I’ve only ever known of around 5 and famous ones such as Aoi Kujyo, aren’t gay in their identity at all, or the failure to acknowledge artists such as Uiro Yamada are not female, he is a male who has talked to me and is a partly closeted ftm individual who used to identify as female but recently addresses himself as male. The fact that the Boys Love page does not address this and somehow puts it with Bara in such a way that they feel like people think they’re marketed in the same market when they are not. BL often becomes cosplay outfits often ironically to Americans, on female models to bring out an androgynous or chuusei look instead of male models.

I have translated a Japanese source quote from Japanese fujoshi otaku updates site moegirl.uk: “it can be roughly guessed that Yamada Uiro is male, but NITRO CHiRAL has also had a female painter presentation with a masculine pen name before.” because he isn’t female he is a transgender man that I have personally talked to as I am also in the same industry as a newcomer. Again, which proves the artists aren’t always heterosexual women and this terrifies me because abusers online will often tell lies such as “they’re all straight women cosplayers and artists”. This is extremely unfair to them and they do not deserve this. Many of these creators are also associated with Tumblr alternative girl aestheticism culture as many of them are part of Tumblr officially on their Japanese side of the site. It’s refusal to address BL and GL and TL all fall under Shojo and Joseimuke content explicitly sets up female fans of anime to systemic abuse. I have had American cosplayers and artists tell me “I am too afraid to cosplay my Aoba Seragaki build again because I do not want to out myself” or “why does this stuff feel lesbian or nonbinary” or Japanese industry creators telling me “it’s safe for girls to explore their sexuality with as they are tiny safe men who change anatomy for girls, the penis is mostly there so women do not have to engage with their female genitalia directly when they’re still learning themselves.” And they are often crossplayer lesbians overwhelmingly in any industry related event I attend.I have also had American BL fan lesbian fujoshi cosplayers and artists state “the gay men want to ban BL as it doesn’t represent them and they also want it burned or gone.”

The rationale provided is that these terms(such as Joseimuke) are 'too niche' for a general audience even tho this content is often niche itself under this same label, and that the Japanese industry sources and requirements (such as Chil-Chil, Pixiv, B's-LOG, and industry standard professional retailers like Mandarake) are considered 'unreliable' because they are not English-language secondary sources even though they are the industry’s own websites and a lot of this women’s media is niche itself in origin to begin with as it has strong ties to Comiket doujinshi and cosplay culture as it is, in fact, Joseimuke. I am failing to understand why these associated things aren’t being addressed on their related pages. I also failed to understand why facts such as BL hermaphroditic anatomy, it being feminist media, often cosplayed by female cosplayers more than male ones and other such things, are just not being addressed. Women are being harassed, forcemasced, and even being abused at conventions almost every time I go to one, where the crossplayer girls get popcans thrown on them for “fetishizing gay men” even if it’s a lesbian couple or otherwise or even female cosplayers performing female male-gaze anime girls being sexually touched without consent at American anime related events. Please look into this for me. Thank you. Fairyrosequartz (talk) 08:46, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

As someone who has made a lot of articles on Wikipedia where English-language sources are not available, secondary sources in Japanese are accepted provided as long as they have reliable editorial oversight. WP:ANIME/RS lists Chil-Chil as a reliable source. I would also consider B's-Log reliable since it's a magazine published by Kadokawa. lullabying (talk) 08:56, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Further reading as follows:

If need be I can source the actual Joseimuke mangaka as they are my associates. I can also source the very Japanese women’s comics industry in general. Every single one of their websites that are actual huge name businesses with billboards everywhere in Tokyo. If BL is only just gay pornography why is it displayed at the stations on screens going “BL game for girls” by the magnetic train light rail I have to ride over there to get to any of these business’s official industry stores. Why is it if it’s just gay romance it gets itself pregnant and bears children and has cryptic writing and nonbinary sexuality involved. It changes its body and anatomy so it can’t be regular gay romance along with gay manga men draw for men, at all.

Because it erases us the mostly female creators and performers, the Joseimuke BL crossplayer girls, because if you all go well it depicts gay men identity in it well my historically observed and witnessed argument is “because mostly American gay men harassed them to include it in their visual kei chuusei butterfly thing they do and you might hate hearing this but it’s more of a story trope than a story requirement for women’s BL for women bc it explores humanity as the two people like visual kei sings about, and visual kei is built on nonbinary queer visual puns anyway and shocking but lesbians love it more than gay men do. You all seem to ignore them such as Asahi Martha and Miyukiko or otherwise. It also seems to delightfully erase that famous male BL mangaka such as Aoi Kujyo and Takahiro Sakurai, aren’t even gay men. Fairyrosequartz (talk) 09:09, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Because my personal experience as a Global shojo manga artist with experience in both Japan and America, you all realize 4chan abusers put fujoshi bishonen art like this on Gay Pornhub and gatekeep it or forcemasc us or call us the rotten ones because they hate it’s an untouchable crossplayer dansou. And it’s extremely upsetting to see them also get abused at any convention ever. Fairyrosequartz (talk) 09:24, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Just a warning, if you have a personal connection with mangaka, then it may be a conflict of interest per WP:COI and you have to disclose the connection. lullabying (talk) 09:24, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Just to clarify something this user is saying about sources, referring to something I said on her talk page: at no point did I say that the sources she mentions here are unreliable or that they aren't reliable because they're Japanese; I told her that her sources, her personal Twitter account () or the retail websites she linked to on her talk page, () aren't reliable. Xexerss (talk) 09:09, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Please elaborate how the requirement to become this type of professional artist having a Twitter for it is somehow an unreliable resource as it’s a necessary requirement to work in it. Thank you. Fairyrosequartz (talk) 09:25, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Read WP:COI and WP:SELFPUBLISH. Xexerss (talk) 09:30, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

You do realize a lot of this Joseimuke BL content IS in fact self published right? Fairyrosequartz (talk) 09:34, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

It used terms such as: 同人ソフト Fairyrosequartz (talk) 09:36, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Let’s try to communicate this as clearly and translate it as much as possible within my ability to about what is actually happening here:

You are, in my viewpoint as much as I attempt to understand it, prioritizing a rigid, Anglocentric interpretation of 'source reliability' over the verifiable reality of a multi-billion-yen industry that isn’t Anglocentric but borrows aesthetics from European nationalities such as French. By insisting that industry-standard Japanese primary sources and professional profiles are 'unreliable' while simultaneously acknowledging that no comparable English-language secondary sources exist because it is threatened by male-centric erasure about a female art genre about safer female gaze male characters. You have created a structural vacuum in my eyes that is also erasing Asian people, mostly women ironically I know. I just don’t understand why Wikipedia.jp exists but I have to engage with English secondary sources to prove those BL titles are specifically fumuke or fujoshi content and always were.

This systemic female media vacuum is not neutral it is dangerous. It is actively weaponized by outside bad faith localizers to English audience to mislabel joseimuke bishonen (female coded male character) along with regular shonen design, as well as a Japanese style of dansou content, erase the identity of female and nonbinary creators who make up most of the industry, and justify the harassment of tons of queer women at geek culture related conventions. When you choose to enforce these specific Anglocentric rules in the face of cross-cultural translated and sourced evidence that they facilitate real-world abuse towards mostly female humans, you are no longer acting as 'neutral' editors—you are actively participating in the systemic erasure and targeting of these type of otaku subculture creators. If your policies are fundamentally incapable of accurately documenting a major global industry with its actual audience without fueling misogynistic abuse, then your policies are objectively broken and misogynistic too. Why is 'process' more important than the safety and professional integrity of the people who actually build and stay in this culture?

I have no idea why the cross-dress dansous aren’t just evaluated upon more than they are on this website it’s almost like they are hidden and im not sure those Yaoi Girls even consented to having their photo here as a “resource”. Sorry if this comes off as rude it’s just incredibly painful and frustrating. Fairyrosequartz (talk) 09:51, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

I want to stress that if you don't agree with Wikipedia's guidelines and policies, you don't have to edit here. I can understand your frustration, but keep in mind that Wikipedia does not try to impose "the truth" on its readers, and does not ask that they trust something just because they read it in Wikipedia. We empower our readers. We do not ask for their blind trust. For about two days, I've been trying to convey how editing should be done, but it all boils down to trusting your expertise and professional knowledge on a certain topic, disregarding any published sources; apparently, your knowledge is worth more than them. Given this dilemma, I don't know what else to do here, because you clearly have a different understanding of what Wikipedia is, what its purpose is, and who it's intended for. Xexerss (talk) 10:40, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

This isn't about the joseimuke/BL media; it's about the sources used to support information and analysis. Self-published sources aren't accepted as reliable on Wikipedia — it's basically the equivalent of "Source: Trust me, bro." Reliable sources are generally by outlets that have a professional editorial oversight or notable critics who have had their work referenced by these very spaces with editorial oversight. Also, if you have a conflict of interest, you may make suggestions but you may be discouraged from editing them directly. lullabying (talk) 09:36, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

It's just as lullabying says. I'm not trying to discredit you as a professional or belittle your work, but I'll repeat that as Wikipedia editors, we're not some kind of authority (regardless of our professional experiences outside of Wikipedia), and our word alone isn't enough when it comes to making contributions. Xexerss (talk) 09:42, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

So I am failing to grasp why it has to be in English source where these online trolls also known as an antifujoshi can erase those English wiki or whatnot pages and continue abusing and forcemasc manipulating and gatekeeping the crossplayer queer girls at events and cons which is what that kind of BL is for. That isn’t right or fair to women to me or cosplayer artists, in general. It creates a systemic loop where it won’t stop unless it gets translated effectively over to English but localization industries for Joseimuke BL have combined it with the Gay men’s comics more often than it should, again, creating a systemic abuse cycle of these fujoshi artist girls. I literally cannot retrieve a reliable English resource for this content, as many in the English comics industry do not actually care as much as income from it. I’m not sure what you would like me to do to make it reliable enough for an English website, when clearly, Wikipedia also has a Japanese version I also use so I am not sure what you want me to do to fix this huge issue. Fairyrosequartz (talk) 09:33, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

No one stated the source has to be in English. lullabying (talk) 09:37, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

The other admin was implying it was I literally sent him the Japanese resource websites and he claimed they weren’t reliable. So im getting a little irritated it was probably in the private Talk page on my profile. Thank you Lullaby. Fairyrosequartz (talk) 09:52, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Neither I nor Xexerss are administrators. Xexerss did, however, told you that your sources are not reliable because they were self-published by you on your Twitter account or are from retail sites. I can tell you that you will most likely get the same response from an administrator. Self-published sources are considered unreliable because anyone can say whatever without it being vetted by an editorial team. I am not doubting your credentials, but one statement from someone should not be recognized as an all-knowing authority on the topic. lullabying (talk) 10:19, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

@Fairyrosequartz, I insist that I have never said that Japanese sources are unreliable, and I take it as a personal attack when you imply that I'm engaging in gatekeeping for asking you to provide sources to back up your claims (which is the whole point of Wikipedia) rather than relying on your own professional expertise and knowledge. Xexerss (talk) 11:07, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

My apologies it just feels like a circular loop or miscommunication. It really just feels like I don’t know how to solve this and it’s creating a loop. I am not attacking anyone It feels more like defending myself as one of these World Cosplayer BL mangaka dansou crossplayers. Please keep in mind if it comes off that way it is simply because I do in fact face gatekeeping regularly so if I responded inaccurately due to a miscommunication that is my bad. I’m just trying to communicate this and fix it. Fairyrosequartz (talk) 03:57, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

I am just trying to communicate that the page in it’s current state only says “it’s distinct from gay men’s media” but doesn’t explicitly state why on the page. It should so men don’t harass crossplayer dansou at events. Fairyrosequartz (talk) 04:05, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi, Kagimiya-sensei, like I have stated multiple times here and on my talk page, your information is more than welcome, BUT you need reliable sources. Information directly from you is not only a self-published primary source, but it's also considered original research, which is discouraged on Wikipedia. Please provide sources other than just saying, "Believe me, I'm in the industry!" lullabying (talk) 07:14, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

I understand the concern regarding Wikipedia standard reliable sources. I am currently working with researchers and translators to compile Japanese-to-English documentation from [e.g., industry publications, Japanese historical pop culture archives, or event convention records] that do support these facts. Once this documentation is properly indexed, I will provide it as an external reference so that the information can be verified by independent parties, rather than relying on statements of my personal knowledge. Thank you for your time. Fairyrosequartz (talk) 22:59, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Stop!! Hibari-kun! § Why not include pronouns?

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Stop!! Hibari-kun! § Why not include pronouns?. Xexerss (talk) 20:48, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:YU-NO: A Girl Who Chants Love at the Bound of this World#Requested move 11 June 2026

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:YU-NO: A Girl Who Chants Love at the Bound of this World#Requested move 11 June 2026 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Jeffrey34555 (talk) 17:18, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Fate character lists

See two related discussions:

• simpler: Talk:List_of_Fate/Stay_Night_characters#Name/scope_(FSN_-_but_what_about_FZ,_FHA?) - should that list be renamed, since it covers not just FSN, but its differently named prequels and sequels (Fate/Zero, Fate/Hollow ataraxia).
• more complex: Talk:List_of_Fate/Grand_Order_characters#Name/scope_(FGO_vs_Fate)? - should that list (and the remaining FSN list linked above) be converted into one list for all characters from Fate franchise (several smaller lists were recently merged or redirected after AfDs, but there are also several "hidden" lists in articles like in Fate/Extra#Characters, creating a cross article mess (I just redirected a character from a target game in which she plays a major role in but is just briefly mentioned to a list where she has a bio note, but the list is technically about a different game/anime... sigh).

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:48, 19 June 2026 (UTC)