Talk:Voice acting in Japan/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Why GN-SN and SN-GN?

I'm Japanese seiyuu fan. I have a question. Why family name - first name and first name - family name are mixed? (For example, "Mitsuishi Kotono", "Mitsuishi" is her family name, "kotono" is her first name. But, "Yuuji Ueda", "Yuuji" is his first name, "Ueda" is his family name.) I'm sorry for my poor English, but please understand. Thank you.

Unforunately, we don't have a convention about the order of name of Japanese people. That is why. -- Taku 04:54, 7 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I see. That is, if "Mitsuishi Kotono" is introduced as "Kotono Mitsuishi", she is known as "Kotono Mitsuishi", right?

If someone knows the proper format of a name, all that would have to be done is to post a REDIRECT command to the existing article. For example, I know of a childrens author who went by Taro Yashima (and had a daughter named Momo Yashima). If an article existed under either name, one could create a new page under the reverted name and post a REDIRECT command there to the existing article. ^_^ knoodelhed 16:51, 10 Nov 2003 (UTC)

It appears that many of the new individual seiyuu articles created in the past week or two are stubs with limited information(possibly created to fill in "red" holes in existing entries).If anyone has any further information that can be contributed to these stub entries,please feel free to do so.;) User:Ranma9617

According to Japanese names then the original japanese syntax should be used. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.157.54.35 (talk • contribs) .

Tempted to vandalize this one

I really want to change "Some fans are divided over if a particular seiyū has "perfected" a certain voice type (e.g. the ditsy schoolgirl, the deep-voiced loner). This can lead to speculation as to whether these seiyū have become typecast." to add "These fans need to find a new hobby." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.105.34 (talk • contribs)

Thank you for your restraint, and we understand the impulse. DenisMoskowitz 02:43, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

End of intro nonsensical

There appear to be some words missing in the last paragraph of the introduction, as it makes no grammatical sense. Can anyone tell what it's supposed to be saying?

It took me a little while, but I think I figured out what they were going for. Recury 06:33, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)]

Making Sense of the Lists

Is it possible, or would someone like to undertake an effort to go through the individual seiyuu pages and alpha by character or series? It seems to me that this would make more sense and make it easier to read. --Martin Osterman 16:31, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Merge with Voice actor?

I think that this page should not be merged with Voice actor (and just removed a request to do so). The circumstances of being a Seiyu and those of being a non-anime voice actor are different enough to warrant a separate article. (We may want to add more details on those differences to this article.) DenisMoskowitz 15:25, 2005 Apr 27 (UTC)

• This needs to be brought up in an RfC more than anything else. I do disagree with the idea of a merge, but I think that we need to make sure that community consensus is taken care of on this one. --Martin Osterman 16:21, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• I do believe a merge is in order. I'd rather see this page as an extension to the voice actor page, as the difference between the topics is extremely small. A Japanese voice actor is still a voice actor.
  • Previous was by 84.240.67.34

• I reject the merging, a seiyuu is part of the otaku subculture, and ísn´t a simple voice actor.--Taichi 30 June 2005 04:45 (UTC)

• Ah, but as far as I have gathered, it actually is a simple voice actor and as such, two pages for the exact same profession is probably too much. If there really are any noteworthy differences ("They are japanese" doesn't seem like a very convincing one), it would help to add them in the article. Right now the page seems like it's there only to make fanboys happy. As I said above, an extension should suffice.

• Before I start, I think this article and the Voice actor articles need a massive cleanup. They both appear to be massive link dumps. That said, I fear that if seiyu is merged with voice actor the main major point of interest would be the American industry. IE, Anime is simply the product of the Japanese (or east Asian) Animation industry, and could have been simply merged like this with the animation article for reasons stated here, but it doesn't take into account that it has become a disingusished subgenre of that medium and has had cultural impacts here in America distinct from animation in general. I think the case could be made that Seyiu fits into the same situation compared to VAs as anime to animation. If not, I'd say this article should merge with one relating to anime itself, not to voice actor. SterlingNorth 05:09, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

• I still don't see what distinguishes the subjects of the two articles, besides nationality. (Certainly this article in its current form has not established a difference.) I am troubled by the idea that "voice actor" should be understood to imply anything about nationality. — Pekinensis 01:23, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

• I also think that this and voice actor should remain separate articles, as the Japanese aspect is a completely different dimension; not simply because an unregistered anon user suggested the merger that shouldn't be... Ranma9617 04:34, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
• Given that no current discussion on a merger over in Voice actor currently exists, I believe that such a merger is not necessary, but I still maintain that an RfC would be a better way to go about discussion. =) --Martin Osterman 17:27, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

• Fine, no merge, as long as someone better-informed than me adds the little piece of information as to what actually makes these two subjects different. "They're japanese!" No, that won't do. "Part of the otaku subculture!" Fine, add it in there, try to use big words, they're swell. "A different dimension!" Wait, what dimension? Elaborate a bit and stick it in the article for all to see. Just try to turn it into something else than a circlejerk about Japan.
  • Previous was by User:84.240.67.34

The main difference, as far as I can see, is the way that seiyuu are regarded - different enough to be treated seperately. As far as I can make out, seiyuu are regarded as a special subset of actors in a much more 'strict' way than in the west, with particular 'ranks' of actors. It's as much a difference as "hollywood actors" and "bollywood actors", which I assume you would approach seperately. (first comment, hope I did it right) Liquidindian 06:16, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

This seems like a fair request. I gave it a shot. DenisMoskowitz 15:47, 2005 July 29 (UTC)

• I think the main difference here is that "seiyuu" identifies voices that are strongly associated with archetypal characters in the anime subculture. Voice actors are generally not noted for their roles, but for their versatility. Danny Lilithborne 09:46, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

This page should definitely be merged with voice actor. One of Wikipedia's biggest weaknesses is in its Western systemic bias. By segregating Japan-related topics such as this one from their parent articles we're not helping the situation any. The voice actor article should discuss voice acting in any country that does such a thing. And do we really need articles on French voice actors, British voice actors, Chinese voice actors, ad infinitim? And it's very strange and not at all helpful to see as the lead line for an article "So-and-so is a Seiyū." Excuse me, what? I'm going to reinsert the merge template until a consensus can be reached on this. — BrianSmithson 21:01, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

One point - any such article should read "So-and-so is a Seiyū", the point of which being that if you don't understand the term you can click on it and find out :) Shiroi Hane 22:28, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I know! :) But really, it's important to remember to keep articles accessible to as wide a base of readers as possible. The best solution, in my opinion (should the articles not be merged) is to say "So-and-so is a Japanese voice actor (seiyū) best known for blah blah blah . . . ." — BrianSmithson 23:49, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

In the seiyū articles I write, I try to put "So-and-so is a seiyū, or voice actor,..." so they can click the link or not. I do think, however, that having two separate articles is better in this case. --nihon 00:12, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

A merge would be stupid. We are explaining the word Seiyū, when someone looks up that word, they find this article. The article is not about Japanese voice acting (although it would be interesting to use this article to explain any differences the Japanese use in their voice acting productions), it's about what this word "Seiyū" means. The only type of merger I could see is if it was merged with a list of other Japanese words commonly used by english fans. But a merge of this type is missing the point. --Ned Scott 02:10, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I was just looking at the seiyū page, and there's a lot there that could be added to this article, making it more than able to stand on its own. If several of us with Japanese→English abilities got together and worked on it a paragraph at a time, we could have the entire article translated within a fairly short time. I'm absolutely opposed to merging this article with Voice actor. --nihon 03:26, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Per Ned Scott. If the article was about Japanese voice acting, I would wholeheartedly agree to have it merged. But it's not. As Ned Scott said, it's to explain what a seiyū means and is. —Mirlen 22:58, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a dictionary. We should transwiki to Wiktionary, then. — BrianSmithson 23:19, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

No! Dont merge, they are different things. In US, as the anime industry is not high, and there are enough number of voice actors, so the US voice overs for JP anime characters are often famous stars. BUT in Japan, there are always so many animes, and therefore seiyus are in high demand, so the JP developers just finds whoever have a good voice. (No offence) And they dont show their looks, so the seiyu's makes a living out of their voice, and their name, unlike US voice artists. I think this is enough to distinguish the difference. Caza 11:31, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

The American phenomenon you are describing is mostly reserved for high-profile, major motion picture releases. Disney films, for example, will have big-name, known actors do the voices. However, American television cartoons and video games more often than not have dedicated voice actors doing the parts. So I hardly see that as a difference. The point remains, though: If there are differences, they should be discussed in the Voice actor article in order to give that article a worldwide perspective. That said, I'm waiting to see what Nihonjoe comes up with before I continue with any pursuit of merge. — BrianSmithson 13:15, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

I suggest waiting a bit to give us time to translate the Japanese article, which has quite a lot in it, into English. There's enough info there to make this article much larger, and not have it be bloated with filler.--日本穣 00:51, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm rewriting the article right now, so please disregard any weirdness in the article while I work on it. Section headings (such as "Controversy" may change, as well. --日本穣 03:36, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for running a bit slow on the translation, but I had some real-life problems come up that had to be dealt with. I'll be able to do more this weekend. If anyone else wishes to help with the translation, I welcome the help. Just let me know what you're doing so we both don't do the same thing. (^_^) --日本穣 02:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm in favor of no move, but I'd say it makes more sense to merge this info into Japanese titles rather than Voice actor. The article is more about "this is what voice actor means in Japanese" rather than "this is what a Japanese voice actor is". If this article is merged, it should not be merged with Voice actor. -- Ned Scott 01:06, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

• STRONG opposition A seiyu is a voice actor, but a voice actor is not a seiyu. Seiyu often encompass more than the standard western voice actor does. They are more part of the popular culture of Japan than western VAs. This article really needs to be expanded to include the cultural differances between the two. The Japanese article should translated into English. http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/声優 (An article which has been nominated for a 'superexcellency award'.) A short paragraph explaining the "see also" reference should be made on the "voice actor" page to the seiyu page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kunzite (talk • contribs) .

If you'd like to help with the translation, I'd certainly welcome the help. An awful lot of colloquial Japanese is used on the Japanese page. (^_^;; --日本穣 07:00, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Again, differences in culture may be lines for a split, but they need to be dealt with first in the main article first, which in this case, is voice actor. But I hardly think this is the most unbiased place to discuss this move. How many non-anime fans are there here? At any rate, I've already said I'd wait for Nihonjoe to finish his translation before I pursue other avenues of dispute resolution. It's possible that at that time there will be enough information to warrant a split from voice actor. It will be necessary in that case to summarize this article at voice actor per Wikipedia:Summary style. — BrianSmithson 15:38, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Organized listing

I've organized the listing into alphabetical order to be as broad and wide-reaching as possible, with characters each seiyuu might be recognized at. Hopefully, this will assist in making Wikipedia an easier place to access information. :) Danny Lilithborne 01:10, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

I already sorted them into alphabetical order by family name.. why have you put them in order by given name? Shiroi Hane 07:24, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

It's complicated, but the short story is that Japanese write names with the surname first anyway. I didn't want to make the list difficult to read. Danny Lilithborne 08:39, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

It's not that complicated and I do understand Japanese name order, however all the names on this page are written in western order; e.g. "Ai Orikasa" - Ai is her given name, Orikasa her family name. If you open her own article you'll find it even states "Ai Orikasa (折笠 愛 Orikasa Ai)" Shiroi Hane 09:06, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

I know that. It's easier on the eye to read a list organized in alphabetical order by the first letter in the name. Danny Lilithborne 09:36, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

I disagree strongly - are lists of English names sorted in this way? No, because family-name first sorting is the standard. Personal names can be dropped, abbreviated, nicknamed, changed... family names are more permanent, and that's why we sort on them. DenisMoskowitz 12:58, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

If you like, you can reorganize the list yourself, but I'd request that you actually list the names Japanese style (surname first) if you do so; even if it's the accepted standard, the eye has a hard time dealing with lists that appear disorganized. Danny Lilithborne 13:37, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

It seems to work fine on pages like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:1942_births. DenisMoskowitz 14:39, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

I reorganized the list by family name as it's a pain to have to keep flopping names here when trying to find someone (almost all other places on Wikipedia sort by family name). I also put the list into two columns in order to make the list not as tall. --nihon 07:33, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for putting them back in the right order.. I couldn't face doing it a second time. Shiroi Hane 14:35, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

It did take a couple hours to do it since I was unicodifying it at the same time. ^_^ ---nihon 15:35, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Move list to List of seiyū?

This page has a nice article at the beginning of it, and then a big list of seiyu. We also have another page at List of seiyū, which doesn't include character names. Is there any reason not to take the list from this page and merge its data into the List of seiyū page? That would make this article more manageable, and we'd avoid duplication of data. DenisMoskowitz 14:48, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

It certaintly seems odd to have two lists of Seiyuu. This page states that it lists 'notable' Seiyuu.. but how do you decide whether someone is 'notable' ot not anyway?

The other page seems to only list seiyuu with wikipedia pages, which would imply there notability anyway. DenisMoskowitz 13:20, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

I actually think this would be a very good idea. It's redundant and a pain to have to keep track of two different lists that are covering basically the same thing. --nihon 07:34, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. Let's merge. I'll wait until tomorrow and do the deed unless someone objects. — BrianSmithson 23:50, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I still think it would be a good idea to merge them. Just reaffirming my opinion. (^_^) --nihon 03:30, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Done! — BrianSmithson 19:34, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

No move

Instead of constantly trying to move articles, why not try to expand them. If there is inadequate material, just write about it. I am serriously getting tried of "move" on anything spesific to japan. Next thing you know people will try to merge Sake with Alcohol. Merge of Seiyū and voice actor is a bad idea. Articles that stay independent as stubs have room to expand. Seiyū is notable on its own. --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 17:56, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Look at it from the perspective of the non-anime fan (e.g., me). Why should every topic one can think of have a duplicate article that basically says "this is how this particular thing is different in Japan"? It is by and large only the Japan-related articles that get this special treatment, and it's annoying. Don't get me wrong, I'm a Japanophile sure enough. But when many, many good editors are constantly working to counter systemic bias by writing articles with a worldwide perspective, others decide to split topics up based on language or culture, the exact opposite goal. We have one article at share taxi, when we used to have several (bush taxi, matatu, danfo, etc.). What happened? Editors realized we were describing the same phenomenon, and only the cultural context changed from article to article. Result? We merged. Look at palm wine. For a time, we had palm wine separate from toddy (what that drink is called in India). What happened? We realized that palm wine and toddy are two names for the same thing. So we merged. I am getting tired of people constantly trying to separate Japan-related content into its own little universe. Because a bunch of anime and manga fans adopt Japanese terms as their own does not mean that 99% of English speakers have done so. Like I said, I'll wait ot see Nihon's rewrite. But as of right now, this article has no right to exist as a dictionary definition saying that "seiyuu" is what you call a voice actor in Japanese. — BrianSmithson 18:48, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Becuase common useage is Seiyu. This article just like every japan related articles has every right to exist. Frankly I dont like your tone. Do not rush wikipedia editors, especialy me.

If CBS people want a real challenge they are welcome to look at a number of articles with serious pov issues.

--Cool Cat^Talk|@ 18:35, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Umm, you're a little late to the table, Cool Cat. This was decided over a month ago, with the merge template being removed on March 13. --日本穣 Nihonjoe 20:55, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Replaced template

Moved discussion to Talk:Voice actor, which will hopefully bring this possible merger to a wider audience. — BrianSmithson 17:18, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Removing "inuse" tag

This page has been marked "inuse" for two weeks now. I'm removing the "inuse" tag, as it was never intended to be applied for more than a day or so. Kelly Martin (talk) 15:19, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

cre