Talk:Rec (manga)

First header

I think this should be an anime/manga article.

Also, it should link the words anime and manga.

Details of the Audrey Hepburn referencing in this series should also be made, and I'm sure a brief episode guide can't hurt for such a short show. I'm not a Wikipedian, so I suggest these things primarily because I'm not familiar with how to do some of the crosslinks myself. 72.192.237.134 17:43, 9 March 2006 (UTC)Ismail

I noticed someone had further fleshed the article out. Using that as a base, I added a little bit of info, such as information about the Hepburn references and a bit clearer understanding of the awkward dimensions of the relationship. I think I stayed pretty well in NPOV but of course if anyone can tweak that better go ahead. I also modified one slight grammar error I saw.

Do we need an external reference to point at on this? What sources would be appropriate as a link for this sort of thing? 72.192.237.134 15:11, 12 March 2006 (UTC)Ismail

Refs for anime/manga articles are always iffy. The usual practice is to link to the official site. - mako 21:41, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

I put an external link to the official site, though I flagged it as Japanese. I have to think there is an English language site to give some idea of the show/information about it that we can link. I've seen other references to help other anime out before. I know not to link any "technically illegal" sites, and that the show is recent enough and low-profile enough to not really have fanpages yet (at least, I assume) but perhaps Anime News Network can be an English-language resource. What do you think of http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/encyclopedia/anime.php?id=6008 ? It offers an episode list and cast list besides just having another plot summary, so it actually adds something to what we have to link it. We can even put a link to the companion info page for the manga: http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/encyclopedia/manga.php?id=6016 Thoughts on these two (or at least one of them) as useful external links? 72.192.237.134 22:04, 13 March 2006 (UTC)Ismail

Sure. Right now we have less information than they do, but when that changes, I would say that such links become less relevant. - mako 23:26, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey, this is me, the guy who's been talking in this thread so far :). Someone else made some edits to try to flesh things out, but a few things struck me as vague or worth improving. Here is where I mention what I did change and ask about what I wondered about.

First, when he said "stood up" he forgot to put the comma inside.

The link for Audrey Hepburn in the spoilers was removed by this editor. I put it back. Audrey Hepburn should be linked in the spoilers because people do not necessarily know who she is. The fact that it was linked earlier might be claimed, but by that token we link seiyu twice, once in the introduction and one in the spoilers.

Later at dinner was getting several commas that were unnecessary. I simplified that section since "asking her" was also at dinner by using the expression "At dinner afterwards,"

"there was a fire in the neighborhood" is shifting tense to past suddenly. I corrected this.

Finally, at the end of the entry, the fact that they are not (immediately) continuing a romantic relationship is not clear in his wording. Tell me if the way I've worded it now is okay.

A few things I didn't touch because I thought I'd get an opinion on first:

1) Grudgingly? He doesn't "grudge" it other than asking since it is so random. I'd say he is surprised. I liked the word Dumbfounded better, seemed to fit the situation more (I've seen both the anime episode and read the manga chapter)

2) The parenthetical note is awkward as a sentence of its own

3) The circumstances/make love/etc. lines are confusingly worded.

Lastly, I'm wondering about my Anime News Network link suggestion. I'm thinking that the core cast is small enough to be suitable for being put in the article. We might put a picture in. After doing those things, the only information the ANN page still has over us is the production details in the lower-left corner. Shall we just put a link, or go ahead and put the cast etc? If we do put the cast and a picture, should we still link for the production info in the lower-left corner or drop a link entirely at that point? The manga's ANN link seems to be of limited information at present, so I'm not sure about that (except maybe as counterbalance if we link the anime's ANN link.

Heh, this is the first page of Wikipedia I'm focusing on, so perhaps I'm going into more detail than would strictly be necessary. 72.192.237.134 22:12, 15 March 2006 (UTC) Ismail

Yeah, most people aren't so cautious when they contribute =). There's a guideline called be bold; basically, no need to go into detail about reasonable changes. I also encourage you to get an account, though of course it's not required.

As for the article, the other anon indeed introduced some not-so-helpful changes. I'm too lazy to go into the details, but I agree with your concerns. I'd also like to keep this summary applicable to both the anime and manga, considering the slight differences in continuity and detail. As for ANN, I'm pretty indifferent, heh. You seem to have given the subject some thought, so I'll leave it up to you. There's not much guidance to be had from existing anime/manga articles, as they all do things differently. - mako 23:32, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh yeah, the "house style" is to put punctuation outside quotation marks. See the Manual of Style. - mako 23:48, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I've corrected a small gramatical error in the Aka Onda part of the character section, and added a little to it. 07:01, 01 May 2006 (UTC) ModernTenshi04

Squashed images?

Some One of the images looks really squashed Image:ティファニーで朝食を.png. It's closer to 2:1 aspect ratio than to 16:9 (It's 0.51!) --Squilibob 13:22, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I uploaded a new one. - mako 08:20, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Renaming

I changed it from REC to Rec because looking at the manga, it seems that the e and c in the title are lowercase and not uppercase.--Juhachi 20:48, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Manga/anime

So right now, we have a manga and an anime where the amount of unique information for the anime is low enough as to not need a separate article. How is this handled normally? This has been now labeled Rec (manga) but still includes the anime info, which to other eyes can be awkward if not misleading, especially since the anime is a fair amount of the length of the article if not the content. Also, if this truly wants to be an article on the manga, then pictures from the manga should probably be used and not *just* pictures from the anime. Are cases like this normally handled by labeling it (manga) when you don't have a separate anime article and the anime is included? Or should it perhaps be labeled manga/anime?

Also, some further information on the rest of REC might be good... the series has been over so we could maybe go into some of what happened under a spoiler tag, and the manga continues on well past that point. Also, the title seems to be accepted as REC in many sources, so I'm not sure "Rec" is more than just the style of the letters rather than the intention, but I'm not necessarily suggesting to change that.

Maybe if this becomes an article on the greater scope of the manga, an anime subsection can be in the article that covers the particulars of the anime, including its opening song, unique format, and having pictures of the anime representations of the leads, as well as just how far it generally gets (and what it doesn't do in the chunk of the story it bothers to adapt)... while the rest of the article speaks to the manga as a whole.

I'm thinking out loud here for what others think might be the right direction for this article. It's not a stub, but it's just start-class and could certainly grow in at least some of the ways I suggested. I was an early contributor to this article but it's been a long time since then. Lots of good has been done, I just wanted to fire off some of these ideas. 72.192.237.134 05:05, 25 July 2006 (UTC) Ismail

Generally we stick with whatever "()" the article started with, and cover everything in the franchise (?) until the article gets too long. As for your ideas, yeah, sounds good. Be bold. - mako 08:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, without going in to how.. I've managed to read up through chapter 11 of the manga... and the anime tapped various material from the first seven chapters. As for going with what it started with, I think it used to be REC (anime) but is now REC (manga) (actually, Rec) ... some issues: 1) I can get manga images, but I don't know how to make sure the rationale is good legally for fair use 2) the restructuring I proposed would take me some time... 3) also, I've also only read *so far* past where the anime went just yet. ... for the images, I'd need to know that, and for the rest, well, I think either I'd need some time, at which point I'll be able to prepare something like that, and I'll possibly need to read some more, or I'd need help from those who've read further. 72.192.237.134 22:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)Ismail

Fair use rationale for Image:Fumihiko Matsumaru.jpg

Image:Fumihiko Matsumaru.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:27, 5 June 2007 (UTC)