Talk:Voice acting in Japan/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Editing required

I'm translating what's left from the Japanese page, and some editing would be appreciated considering I'm neither English nor Japanese. It would also be great if someone could wikify the page by adding wikilinks to any term I missed or doublecheck that the ones I added all point to the correct page. Gastaman 15:30, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I could edit the English version - I can read Japanese fairly well, but I'm not a native or a professional translator. One thing I was hoping to change was the term 'television games' to 'console games' - I don't think the Western industry has ever called them television games. Lijakaca 18:34, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Removal of merge tag

I removed teh recently-added "Merge with Voice actor" tag because this was discussed in great detail and determined that the articles should not be merged. You can see the discussion on the archive page. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 17:56, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Seiyū's role format?

Just noticed something. I just browsed certain seiyūs and I noticed that there are two formats for their roles, in this case involves their respective animé characters that they voiced for. Is it [character role] in [animé name], or is it [animé name] ([character role])? Thanks :) E Wing 13:34, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Salary

What kind of salary do seiyūs get? I've only seen this article which notes that...

Seiyuus are paid around 2,000-3,000 yen per episode.

This seems very low in my opinion, but since I don't know how credible this blogger is (maybe this person is famous, I don't know) and I don't know what the standard of living is like in Japan, my opinion isn't really worth anything. So does anyone know? --Remy Suen 11:58, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Is this all really necessary?

Forgive my crassness, but this has always been something of a pet peeve of mine from what I see being done by the more Japanophilic Animeophilic Wikipedian users. Although having a page about Seiyu is not really a problem--despite the fact that there really aren't pages for (voice) actors of other nations/languages--is it really necessary to call ALL Japanese voice actors "seiyu" on their English pages? Nowhere on other, non-Japanese actor pages do we see their craft being referred to by their native language's term. For example, Italian-French actress Chiara Mastroianni is called an "actress", not an "attore" or "acteur".

Furthermore, if it's important to differentiate the Japanese version of a voice actor (or the voice acting system/style in Japan) from the non-Japanese, why not differentiate ALL Japanese versions of an occupation? Why not call Fujio Cho, chairman of Toyota a "gichou", or baseball player for the Hanshin Tigers, Atsushi Fujimoto a "yakyuusenshu"? Or conversely, why not create pages for the different non-English speaking or non-American occupations that are equally as different or important as seiyu is compared to English/American voice acting?

Heck, should this page even be called "seiyu"? Why not "Voice acting in Japan", much in the same way it's [Professional baseball in Japan] and not "Dai-nippon Tōkyō Yakyū Kurabu" (or however the Japanese themselves refer to their own baseball league)?

Now I can understand calling it "seiyu" if it was a word that has entered the (American) English lexicon, much in the same way "anime" has in recent years. But I would argue that "seiyu" really hasn't entered into the (American) English lexicon and really is not deserving of an article titled such... though it's not to say that it shouldn't exist under another title, like the aforementioned "voice acting in Japan".

I'm sure there's a really good reason for all of this, so therefore I really would like to know. I'd like to think that this article exists because it truly isnotable and has plenty of merit in of itself, and not because a bunch of anime fans took it upon themselves to create it. Thanks! - 98.210.109.135 (talk) 12:26, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Check out the archives of this talk page: Talk:Seiyū/Archive 1. It seems that this was brought up before and voted down by anime fans. (I agree with you, by the way.) — Dulcem (talk) 12:52, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Do we always have to refer to them as seiyuu's? It's just the japanese word for Voice Actor, so is there some law against that?> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.88.250.97 (talk) 22:29, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I Agree completely. This page is completely unneeded. I'm an anime fan myself, but I strongly oppose the use or seiyuu as a neologism, as a Japanese voice actor is no different from a voice actor from any other country or language. This should be "Voice Acting in Japan" section on the Voice Acting page instead. Else I'm going ahead and making a "Doubleur" page for french voice actors too. Seriously though, the only way I'd see this page staying would be as a stub saying "how non-japanese otaku refer to Japanese voice actors" --Dez26 18:58, 10 July 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dez26 (talk • contribs)

I also agree and frankly find this matter ridiculous. Seiyuu isn't even a legitimately common loanword like say "kimono", nor is wikipedia the place to make it seem like one through biased editing. 地炎風水闇陽 ^(Talk) 03:43, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Not to say that you and the other's posting here aren't completely biased the other way, eh? I would argue that "ALL" (as our anonymous friend states) is very incorrect as well, since not all of them use the word. I've seen many of them which use {{Seiyū|voice actor}}, which is perfectly fine. Compared to many other countries, the voice acting industry is much, much larger in Japan. They even regularly produce radio dramas today, in addition to the plethora of animated works and foreign dubbing work for films and television series. ANd accusing the editors of this page of "biased editing" is extremely lacking in good faith. While I think the article could use more references (quite a few more), that's about all I agree with here. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 04:48, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

The voice acting industry is very large in Germany and Italy too, but we don't call a german or an italian voice actor "synchronsprecher" (literally: sync speaker) or "doppiatore" (literally: doubler) only because the profession is more expanded than in the United States/Kingdom. Calling a japanese voice actor a "seiyu" is a way to lower the work of the english speaking voice actor that even dubs japan animation for theirselvec. I think that is more useful, and less racist, to merge part of this article with "voice actor", and to write the other information that don't fit in an article regarding the various aspects of the seiyu phenomenon in Japan (maybe the article should be called "voice acting in japan" like said before). --217.202.107.78 (talk) 21:34, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree with this - there seems to be no real difference between voice acting in Japan and voice acting in the rest of the world, so using a special Japanese word is unreasonable. Wikipedie reader (usually) wants to learn more about the world itself, not more about foreign languages. --Tchoř (talk) 20:03, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Some real problems with this article

Isn't using English equivalents of words from foreign countries one of Wikipedia's guidelines? Doesn't this article technically violate this completely, as it is just the Japanese translation/equivalent for voice actor? And if the very fact that this article exists does indeed violate Wikipedia's guidelines, should it not be deleted, and merged with the voice actor article? In any case, shouldn't the article's title be Seiyu, instead of Seiyū? The Wikipedia Manual of Style for Japanese related articles clearly states this.

The beginning paragraph makes an unsourced statement that Seiyu is what English fans refer to Japanese voice actors as. This straight off the bat makes it look like it exists solely to please Weaboos.

The second paragraph starts by going into detail about the amount of animated cartoons that Japan produces, which, whilst some-what relative, is kind of unnecessarily off topic, as this article is about the voice actors, not the animation industry.

The "Five ways to become a seiyū" section of the article is an unsourced, probably unverifiable, how-to guide, filled with original research, that generalises how an unsourced (and possibly/probably non-existent) number of voice actors got their breaks, and states it as fact. I'm pretty sure this isn't allowed. Even if one thousand Japanese voice actors took one of these five paths to become a professional, there still would probably be more than just five ways to get the job. There may be hundreds. The list could go on and on and on.

The "The job" section seems vague and pointless. The stuff related to puppet shows goes for people who do puppet shows all over the globe; from Poland to Spain, so I don't see how relevant this is, or specific to Japanese voice actors. Same goes for singing, theatre acting and radio. This all seems to exist for no other reason than to say 'people from Japan sing, act and do puppet shows', which seems kind of unnecessary, obvious and completely aimless. How is any of this relevant or needed?

So, this article seems to violate at least one of Wikipedia's policies, as well as Wikipedia's style guidelines, by simply existing, and several other policies due to unbelievably poor editing and sourcing skills, as well as possible bias editing, which makes it seem more like a fan page than an encyclopedia. Why is it that nothing at all is sourced past the introduction (excluding the [2], which was used in the introduction)? If these statements can indeed be backed-up, then why is it that the article is so poorly sourced? If all original research and unsourced claims were removed, the article would be about a paragraph long. There are honestly too many problems with this article for me to state them all.

Why is this article needed at all? And if this article is kept, why can there not be full, in-depth articles about German, Mexican, English, French and Russian voice actors? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.17.163.105 (talk) 22:45, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Reply

Notable subject per there are a bunch of paper magazine dedicated to the subject in Japan as seen here. Name me another country where you can find a magazine dedicated to voice actors let alone 4 to 5 of them.

If you can't stand this article then ask someone send it for you to Afd for you at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion and let the strength of the arguments decide. --KrebMarkt 22:03, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

There may be several magazines in Japan about voice acting, but that does not mean there need be an article on Japanese voice actors. Only four statements are sourced, and even then only one of them can be read online. This article is filled with unverifiable statements, possible original research and generalisations.

If voice acting in Japan is notable, more so than in any other country in the entire world, then you need secondary sources to prove it. From other countries than just Japan. There are over a dozen magazines in England about the English countryside, but that does not make the countrysides in England more worthy of note than anywhere else on the planet. There is not an article dedicated soley to English countrysides as a whole, despite the fact that there are plenty of magazines about it and even entire television shows dedicated to the subject. Because magazines, published only in England, about England, cannot be used as reliable sources, since the entire subject of the publication is about contrysides that are only of importance in England, to those who show an interest in the English countryside. The same applies for fan magazines about voice acting in Japan.

No primary sources, affiliated with the subject, can be used. As of now, there are no reliable sources that can be backed-up bar one. A magazine in Japanese about voice actors in Japan does not make seiyu worthy of note. In order for this subject to be notable, then sources are needed that show that voice acting, specifically in the country of Japan, is so much more worthy of note than in other countries. See [1]

And the title of this article itself violates guidelines. Noticed that you did not address that point, which was made by 82.17.163.105. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.30.1.163 (talk) 23:07, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

As i wrote before if you don't think that the subject is notable then send it to Afd or ask someone to send it for you at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion and let things be decided there. Discussing further the subject here will be pointless due to the lack of broader participation to the discussion and Afd would be the best place to nail all raised issues at once whatever it's notable and worth its own article which policies & guidelines its really violates. --KrebMarkt 02:08, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

When an article encounters problems, they are brought to the discussion page in order to resolve them. One user brings forward the problem for discussion, and others collaborate with one another in order to resolve the matter. That is what this page is for. Whether you like it or not, this article has encountered several problems and they must be resolved. What you are doing is counter productive. If everyone nominated articles for deletion as soon as the slightest problem is encountered, Wikipedia would lose thousands of relevant and necessary articles every day.

This is why we have talk pages; to resolve all problems without having to delete the article.

When an article encounters problems, you do not just instantaneously nominate it for deletion. Nominating articles for deletion should be a last resort, when alternatives have been tried and have failed. You are not imputing anything of any value at all to sort this mess out. If you do not like an article, do not get others to nominate it for deletion. And if you do like it, you should not be so quick to risk having it deleted.

If you have anything of any worth at all to add, please do so. If you have any reliable sources to add which makes the information more verifiable, add them. If you have any links to show that voice acting in Japan is more notable than it is anywhere else on Earth, add them. Do not just keep telling people, who are actually trying to fix these problems, to nominate it for deletion, as it does not resolve the article's problems.

Now, if you can help us to sort this out, then please do so. It would be nice if we could resolve this quickly, but if you cannot help, then please stop commenting, as your comments are not helpful.

I may be incorrect when I write this, and if I am, I am sorry, as it is easy to misinterpret comments made over the internet, but it seems to me like what has happened is that you've seen someone bring forward problems with an article on a subject you like, and that you do not know how to fix them. You may know that there aren't any reliable sources, but you hope that if someone nominates it for deletion, then people who are fans of the subject will rally round, and outnumber the amount of people who can see that this article has encountered several problems that need to be resolved, one way or the other. Doing this does not change the fact that this article is unsourced, or the fact that it may violate policies. The problems won't be resolved, and we'll end up going round and round in circles.

Again, if my guess is incorrect, then I sincerely apologize. I'm not just trying to delete this article because I dislike the subject, this is not a personal attack, and if you really do care about this article, then help me to fix it. Help me make this article meet Wikipedia's guidelines. Help me add reliable sources, in order to verify the statements made in this article. Your page puts you under the Precisionist Wikipedians category, so I'm hoping that you will help to sort out these setbacks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.30.1.163 (talk) 12:45, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Since no one is adding any sources, most of this unsourced information could be just made up. We need to start removing the unverifiable claims. We have to. The article may be filled with fabrications and falsehoods and there is no way to tell from the evidence (or lack thereof) presented. 195.194.150.129 (talk) 10:45, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Eh, I kind of agree with his suggestion that it should just be submitted for deletion. Pretty much the entire article is completely unsourced, it's been a month since you requested sources without any being added, and I'm pretty sure most, if not all, the material here is unsourcable anyway. What little verifiable content there is belongs in voice acting, an entire article on one country's voice acting industry is quite pointless. AdamantBMage (talk) 10:51, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Name me another country where you can find a magazine dedicated to voice actors let alone 4 to 5 of them. First of all, what's the distribution size of those "four to five" magazines? If only 200 people read them each, I don't think the fact that there are "four to five" magazines dedicated to Japanese voice actors is of any importance. Secondly, check out http://www.voiceacting.com/Links/links.html, and tell me how many American/English-language voice acting magazines there are (you might have to do a bit of research through). Besides, consider the reversal: "Hollywood" is known as "Hollywood" around the world because of it's sheer size and popularity. Grab a random person in Iran, Kenya, Morocco and Crete and see if they know what "Hollywood" is. Then consider the reversal, grab a random person in Iran, Kenya, Morocco and Crete and see if they know what a "seiyu" is. Japanese voice acting is not world-wide enough to merit it's own NAMED article, as well as other articles that use the word "seiyu" in there (like a video game that lists the Japanese and English voice actors). I don't necessarily believe that this article should be deleted, but I'd rather see it being called "voice acting in Japan" over "Seiyu". But if the weeaboo are not willing to yield to the idea, then I would definitely vote for its deletion. - 71.141.118.209 (talk) 06:02, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't get it

I still don't understand why 'seiyu' must be used on all pages. While voice acting might be a bigger deal in Japan than America, isn't the term ultimately referring to the same exact thing? A Voice Actor?

Should we rename every single thing that is more popular in another other foreign language by any degree to their language, even if they mean THE SAME DAMN THING?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.113.60.50 (talk) 11:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

We should call a German voice actor a Sprachschauspieler (Babelfish translating "voice actor") while we're at it. I mean to be politically correct. But some otakus feel that there is a need to express a difference between Japanese things and the rest of the world. However, in the mean time, I'll still refer to them as voice actors, which isn't incorrect either and will be understood by people who aren't familar with the Japanese word appearing randomly in several other articles.68.192.213.41 (talk) 00:49, 9 May 2008 (UTC)unsigned

I totally agree, using japanese terminology instead of the same identical meaning in English is typical of the wapanese movement. --217.202.107.78 (talk) 21:01, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I also fully agree and stumbled across this page while researching a person, I had no idea what a seiyu is and its use seems entirely arbitrary on pages other than the seiyu page as it encapsulates the exact same meaning as voice actor.--75.72.115.187 (talk) 04:00, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree is well, this is really silly and unnecessary. Can anyone please explain why this page still exists? AdamantBMage (talk) 10:29, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Goddess Family Club cover.jpg

The image Image:Goddess Family Club cover.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --03:24, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 04:32, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikibanner template

I propose replacing the use of {{WikiProjectBanners}} with that of {{WikiProjectBannerShell}}, since most other anime related articles uses the latter. Comment please? G.A.S 05:57, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't see that it really matters one way or the other. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 06:16, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

hm..

would only say that Seiyū is popular in Norway as well, we are talking about them all the time at school (Because we love anime) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.52.10.176 (talk • contribs)

A group of your friends' opinions should not be included in this, or any, article. At all. Ever. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.17.163.105 (talk) 22:47, 5 October 2009 (UTC)