Talk:Rumbling Hearts

Article name

Would there be any objections to moving the article to Rumbling Hearts, which is the official English title of the anime and the subtitle of the game? Shiroi Hane 23:33, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I would like it if it stayed as Kimi ga Nozomu Eien since the English DVDs haven't even been released yet and it's most likely more known with the Japanese title. However, I wou;dn't mind if it was changed to The Eternity you Desire since that's what the Japanese title translates to.--Juhachi 23:43, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I would rather keep the official japanese name than adopt the name some translation chose.-- Roc Vallès^Talk|Hist - 05:17, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I think it should stay as is now, with Rumbling Hearts and The Eternity you Desire redirecting to this page for the moment. However, if I'm not mistaken, it is the policy of the english wiki for anime titles to be listed under their english released name (we went over this recently with Please Twins! and Please Teacher!. I think that once it is released in the US, then yes, it should be moved to Rumbling Hearts. - FleetAdmiralJ 06:26, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Snarfies 17:05, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

"However, if I'm not mistaken..."

You are mistaken. Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles) This has been the subject of a very long-running thread. Basically, everyone agrees that it was a mistake to state that anime titles should be listed under their English released name. Normal Wikipedia policy is to use the most widely known and used name, not the official name. Until it actually becomes *known* under the English name (which, for a heavily otaku-based title like this one, may never happen), keep it under the Japanese name. Ken Arromdee 17:10, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

OMG, don't I remember you from rec.arts.anime, pre-split? Heh. In any event... since there is an official US release website at this point (rumblinghearts.com), it seems to me that this article should be moved at once. Wether you like it or not, that WILL be the known title to 99% of English-speaking fans. I'm not entirely sure I even understand the "heavily otaku-based" argument - once it hits the shelves, it'll be bought by anyone whose eye it catches and tempts sufficiently, just like any other title. What's your criteria for a "tipping point?" Snarfies 20:12, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

When the title becomes mostly known under the new name to 99% of English-speaking fans, then you can rename the article. Don't rename it in advance because you think you can predict what name is going to become popular.

Personally, I think 99% of English fans for this title will probably be people who knew the title from before the English release and still refer to it by the original name. Ken Arromdee 01:47, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

So now we've changed the burden from "when most English fans" know it by the new title to "when 99% of English fans know it" then we can change it? Why 99%? Why not 75% or two-thirds? Or a majority? There is no rational reason to set the basis of changing an article name to such a level, because then it will result in title names never being changed.

I only said 99 because that was in the message I responded to. I don't think it has to be literally 99% before using the name. Most is good enough. Ken Arromdee 21:35, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

And even if you just look at the forum thread about it being licenced on Anime News Network (I think I linked to it somewhere in this discussion), you'll see that the vast majority of people postig on the thread called it by - you guessed it - Rumbling Hearts. Why? Because that's it's official English title now, so thats what most people are going to refer to it as. It may not be 99% because there will always be holdouts who just refuse to refer to it by it's new name, but that's not a good enough excuse to not change the article if most people refer to it by it's English name. FleetAdmiralJ 13:24, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Ken on this one. While I've made the argument that official titles are more likely to be known many times, this is just one case where... well.. Kimi ga Nozomu Eien isn't what I would call the next big thing to hit the English market. I seriously doubt that it will be broadcasted on TV, and it's more likely that sales of the DVD will be slow and steady for new fans. The initial exposure will be anything but quick. And it wouldn't surprise me if it never becomes widely known by the new name. -- Ned Scott 20:45, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Since it has an official English title, it should be moved ASAP. Exceptions to this standard are to be very, very rare. --SeizureDog 20:56, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

No, see, this is what Ken was trying to tell me about before. Official titles should not be the sole reason to re-title an article. It should only do so if it seems to point to a logical and clear conclusion that current and future fans will recognize the new "official" title. There is absolutely no reason to rush this issue when we can at least look more into this. -- Ned Scott 21:54, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

(now why is the name Ken Arromdee so familiar?) As was pointed out at the time the license and name were announced, the name was not chosen randomly by FUNimation, it was dictated by the licensors. Not only that, it was already the official English title of the game in Japanese - notice the distinct lack of any "kimi"s or "nozo"s in this url: http://www.oaks-soft.co.jp/princess-soft/rumbling/. Shiroi Hane 23:11, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I see. In that case, Rumbling Hearts sounds like the logical conclusion. This article is also about the game, after all.. -- Ned Scott 23:32, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Darn! You guys messed up my nice long 4 paragraph response haha. But yes, part of my response was saying how the name Rumbling Hearts was chosen by âge, not FUNimation, so that's one argument for Rubling Hearts. Also, the fact that websites like Anime News Network have changed all official references of the series on their website to Rumbling Hearts is another argument, and the fact that many people called it Rumbling Hearts in a thread that was posted in response to FUNimation's announcement that they had licenced it seems to show that once an English name is adopted, it becomes the de facto name for an anime, even if more hard-core fans may resist the name change. Of course, there is also the fact that I think that the whole "most commonly known name" policy is silly anyway, but that's beside the point. (doh, signing in helps) FleetAdmiralJ 23:39, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

>>notice the distinct lack of any "kimi"s or "nozo"s in this url: http://www.oaks-soft.co.jp/princess-soft/rumbling/
Er. That's the consumer version's subtitle, not the game's English title. Age's official Kimibou page can be found here. Note the distinct lack of any rumbling anywhere. Omgwtflolz 12:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

And of course, note that this article is about the game. Not the show. Omgwtflolz 07:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Of course, that sort of begs the question about whether the article should be about the anime rather than the game, since the game hasn't been released in the US that I'm aware of, and the anime is probably more well known anyway. Also, even if "Rumbling Hearts" is on one of the pages, it's in a way irrelevent whether it shows on another since many names change, if for no other reason that because they get translated as well. However, I would still think that the fact that age wanted the series to be called Rumbling Hearts in the US can't just be dismissed out of hand. FleetAdmiralJ 13:16, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

So what if it hasn't been released in America? Kimi ga Nozomu Eien is a game which was later ported to the PS2 (and DC?) and turned into a show. Not a show that was turned into a game. Thus, the article should be about the game. The "Rumbling Hearts" bit is only there for the consumer ports and the American release of the show. Thus, it should be kept out of this article's title, which is about the original game. Fact. There's nothing to discuss, really. If you want an article with the title Rumbling Hearts, go start one on the show or something. Omgwtflolz 08:08, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes and No. yes the game came first, and that is currently highlighted first on the page. However, the idea of "X came first, therefore that's what the article should be about" doesn't appear to be absolute, as there are articles, at least when it comes to manga and anime series, which talk about the two equally or highlight the anime above the manga it is based on. What I was saying in this case was, because the anime has been licenced and the game hasn't, therefore the article should be about the anime, with a note that it was based on the game. FleetAdmiralJ 22:06, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, in cases of manga and anime articles, the whole article should encompass information from all media types, manga, anime, or otherwise, like light novels or even video games. Usually, if these individual sections become too large, they are split into seperate articles with the (manga), (anime), (video game) designations given after the initial title of the series. So for the time being, this article should touch upon all media types, that is, game, anime and the music as well. If you're hung up on the current article scope, rewrite it to seem more ambiguous so that it doesn't focus on either the game nor the anime. -- (十八|talk) 23:44, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Good point and I agree, though I'm not sure that helps with what name it should be, other than perhaps conclude that "if there is a conflict go to the old standby" which is "whatever is most well known." FleetAdmiralJ 02:53, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Move this to Rumbling Hearts please. I thought the precedent was that when an English title was released the Japanese title was superseded. Calicore 01:41, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

This is kind of funny. You know why the "Otakus will keep the real title alive" argument doesn't fly? I'm actually old enough to remember the whole "It's Shin Seiki Evangelion. Where the **** does this 'Neon Genesis' crap come from? The fansubs say Shin Seiki or New Century, that name will never be supplanted!" I remember there was something of a fight for some eccentric die-hards. Anyone want to remind me how that came out? I've heard and seen a number of Japanese refer to as "Neon Genesis." So see, this idea that the article shouldn't be "Rumbling Hearts" or that there's going to be some kind of bizarre grass-roots campaign to keep it under its original title is a little amusing to me. Rumbling Hearts has already taken more root than Samurai X ever did, the fight is over. 12:21, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Come on, guys. Check the Google hits and common sense. The anon's got it right; let's just move it already. --Gwern (contribs) 19:35 14 January 2007 (GMT)

Google? If you are going off google hits alone, "Rumbling Hearts" hits 226,000 while "Kimi ga Nozomu Eien" still hits more at 367,000.---- (十八) 23:53, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

How on earth are you searching? 567,000 vs. 373,000. --Gwern (contribs) 01:26 15 January 2007 (GMT)

Duh, it's not exactly acurate unless you use quotations: 226,000 vs. 367,000. When you said it was the other way around, I tried it in Google and sure enough you didn't use quotations, so your search is flawd.---- (十八) 01:39, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

This article covers the game as well. Obviously, the game has not been localized. Thus, the only official title for the game is Kimi ga Nozomu Eien (or 君が望む永遠). Although the anime has indeed been localized under the (nonsensical) title of Rumbling Hearts, that doesn't mean that the entire article should be renamed, as its scope includes the game. If somebody were to localize the game (yeah, right) as Rumbling Hearts, there'd be no problems with changing the title. As it is, though, I think the article should stay under the same name, with a mention of the localized title, of course. Moogy ^(talk) 15:55, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

The idea isn't as much about the official title as much as it is about the title that is better known to English readers. The only problem is right now we are in a weird spot that makes it hard to tell which is better known. Personally, I'm in no hurry, and I think it will eventually be clear, so there's no use in turning this into a big debate. -- Ned Scott 16:39, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Also note that a new animated series is in the works. Its title is, guess what, Kimi ga Nozomu Eien. It'll probably be included in this article too, which means we'll have an article about a show named Rumbling Hearts, a show named Kimi ga Nozomu Eien, a game named Kimi ga Nozomu Eien, and a game named Kimi ga Nozomu Eien Special FanDisk. Omgwtflolz 06:47, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Er, just noticed that there wasn't a section on the SFD and added one. So, anyway, yeah. Three things named Kimi ga Nozomu Eien (and that's excluding Kiminozo Radio), one named Rumbling Hearts. Omgwtflolz 07:02, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I have a copy of the English Release DVD in front of me. On the front cover it has Rumbling in a large flowing font and under that starting at the B on rumbling in a smaller black font Kiminozo then Hearts in the Blue font under that. When I bought it it was listed as Rumbling Hearts (Kimi ga Nozomu Eien). So in fact it is being marketed in the US under both names. --Jsoo1 03:31, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

• This was shown at Otakon this weekend. Guess what title was on the schedule? Hint: They showed the dub, even though they were supposed to show it subtitled. Snarfies 22:36, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I'd be willing to continue this debate on a similar issue that is at the Higurashi no Naku Koro ni page. Only the anime has been adapted into English and renamed to have an English title, but that is only one adaptation, and this was primarily an H-game with the title Kimi ga Nozomu Eien. If there were to be an article for the anime, I would have no objections with naming it Rumbling Hearts, but this article should have the game as it's backbone since that is the source material.--十八 02:46, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

The game info is suspiciously lacking

The plot section of this article summarizes the Anime plot. The various game endings are missing. Also missing from the article is that a 228 page visual game walkthrough was published in 2002 titled Kimi ga Nozomu Eien Memorial Artbook- it's available for purchase in the US, JList I know carries it. Anyhow there are something like 17 endings. The most interesting one is the Haruka gets pregnant, slips back into the comma then Akane marries Takayuki and the family- in order to cover up Haruka's "indiscration" claim the child is Akane's. --Jsoo1 03:31, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Dub changes

I think the mention of many of the dub script changes is largely irrelevant to a Wikipedia entry. If it's there at all it should be much shorter and balanced with a some more positive comments (such as the views of the Anime News Network review ) to ensure NPOV. Not that it's wrong to criticize FUNimation's script liberties - I haven't liked some of them in the past either. But as it is right now, the section is way too long and overly negative. It is likely to be offensive to those who enjoyed the dub. --EmperorBrandon 05:10, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Ordinarily I would agree with you, but not in this case. With this dub they changed multiple plot points, added expletives that didn't need to be there and don't even match mouth movements, softened language from Akane that needed to be there, down aged Ayu and Mayu, for no reason. Finally- from the Anime News Network's review "but it's Kevin M. Connolly, who to this point has only done bit parts, who turns in the highest-quality work in his interpretation of Takayuki. Though he takes a bit different approach than the original seiyuu, it sounds and feels right. " Which is in fact the opinion of the reviewer. The original voice actor most likely was directed to model his performance as being emotionally numb and subdued, consistent with the other elements of post traumatic stress disorder that are present throughout the work such as the; the flashbacks, the loss of appetite, the insomnia, strong affect reactions to triggers, loss of volition, etc etc present in the work. The dubbed version removes this element from not only Takayuki's performance but also to a lesser extent Mitsuki's. Akane's motivation is also changed/softened because of the changes made in the dub- her motivation for saying such awful things is in fact because she has feelings for Takayuki and not because she's being protective of her sister. This actually changes the work quit a bit as in the original Takayuki still is not well even three years after the accident. It also removes a different way of looking at why he doesn't have sex with Huruka the second time, due in large part due to his triggered stress reaction (Part of his illness) to the reminder of the accident instead of a sense of commitment to Mitsuki or any regards to Haruka's feelings- which purposely was added to the anime as that huge scar running between Haruka's breast was not present in the game and subsequently he does not stop in the game (They do it in the hospital bed). In the English dub version he most likely was not directed to model his performance after someone suffering from PTSD and they purposely changed dialog and plot points to erase that element. The fact of the matter is they did change plot points through dialog and did change the way the characters are portrayed , changing the plot again. This certainly needs to be mentioned. It's not necessarily negative but the two are significantly different enough to be considered different works. as a matter of point originally when I wrote that section it was shorter but it got removed by you, on the basis it was biased, so I expanded the points- although there are significant other points where they changed it, for example in the dub Haruka tells Mitsuki she has completely fallen head over heals in love with Takayuki again with him often sitting in bed with her, this is actually not what she said - it is much softer in the sub, and in the dub Mitsuki's motivation for sleeping and then telling Takayuki to stop seeing her can only be a strong jealous reaction instead of the possible mixed reasons it was originally.--Jsoo1 12:41, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

A lot of what you're saying is your own interpretation and counts as original research. It is not supposed to be in a Wikipedia article. --EmperorBrandon 18:30, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Exactly which part of that is interpretation? The visit with Haruka dialog, in episode 8, is in fact different in the dub than the sub. Akane does admit she visits Haruka in the hospital because she in fact does want to see Takayuki in episode 11, that is if you watch the subtitled version. Takayuki character most certainly does exhibit the symptoms of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and it isn't just the emotionally numbness, only one symptom. Takayuki does not stop with Haruka until he does see the scar and does have a startle reaction upon seeing it. Absolutely none of that except the comments on direction are interpretation. Even your own source, which is not NPOV, comments that the characters are portrayed differently in both versions- In the case of your source they liked it. Okay... Not up for debate is the dialog in the sub and dub are different- no debate there. Also not up for debate is the level of affect in the voicework between the two performances is different (Your own source points this out as does many other sources BTW). Several examples of the differences between the sub and dub dialog and the note that levels of affect are different between the Japanese and English Voice voicework is currently what is in the article, just how how I rewrote to avoid POV. The fact that there are differences in both the voice work and the dialog are important enough to mention in reviews and across forums proves it is relevant and should be mentioned. Your suggestion to make it "much shorter and balanced with a some more positive comments (such as the views of the Anime News Network review ) to ensure NPOV" Would make it POV if we include "Positive" comments, as there currently aren't any negative comments in the article as it is right now.--Jsoo1 02:55, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

All that stuff is original research, as I said above. Where in the anime does it ever say Takayuki has PTSD? Unless you have a source that can verify something like that, you shouldn't go about adding it to a Wikipedia article. --EmperorBrandon 04:22, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

None of that is original research!!! Once again the dialog is indeed different in those places and in fact Anime News Network [1] (Did you see that I just cited it ) even points out that Funimation took an interpretive approach to the script with the dub. Your own source verifies that the two are different, among others. It's also very verifiable... In the US releases vol I ISBN 1-4210-1592-7, vol II ISBN 1-4210-1593-5, and vol III ISBN 1-4210-1594-3 and switch the menu from English with no subtitles to English with Subtitles and watch it and the spoken dialog does not match the subtitles on the screen at those places. If you read the original research page it does allow literature and TV Series themselves as Primary Sources. In this case the work itself, the hybrid DVD set to display the subtitles while the English dub is playing is the Primary source. There are multiple secondary sources, including the citation we have already been talking about. Do you want verbatim quotes of the actual dialog v the subtitle with a cite of the actual R1 release DVD?? That isn't original research. So we have a verifiable primary source (The actual work itself) and reliable secondary sources plus there are multiple less reliable secondary sources in the form of fanpages and internet forums (Discussion boards). As far as the the PTSD... where was Haruka ever officially diagnosed in the series with anterograde amnesia?? In none of the Primary sources is the diagnosis ever disclosed. Not in the series not in any of the official release materials- Nowhere except discussion boards, blogs, fansites, and here is the correct name put to the disorder she is afflicted with. A knowledgeable editor at some point saw the symptoms described, saw the blogs and discussions, and used synthesis with published information on antegrade amnesia to shorten the description of the symptoms to simply antegrade amnesia instead of fully listing the symptoms. Also the blunted affect is present in both the dub and the sub at the 1 year flashback sequence... As are all the other symptoms of PTSD. Anyhow there are websites that do refer to this as PTSD if you want the citations in the article. Here is one [2]. It really isn't original research and most certainly does belong in a Wikipedia article. Your main contention however is and still seems to be that the dub and sub differences(In the US it was released as a hybrid DVD containing both versions on one disk) is mentioned. Ordinarily I would agree that the differences shouldn't be mentioned but this case is different as the differences in this case run contrary to the typical dub v. sub differences and is in fact important enough that reliable Secondary sources, like Anime News Network, are mentioning it. Typically the complaint is the US voicework contains less emotion than the original. In this case it contains more emotion. Typically the complaint is that language is softened for release in the US while in this case they added expletives (Made it harsher). Normally they add words to make the mouth movements match but in this case they add words so they don't end up matching (Because they tossed in some expletives). Normally in the dub they change the age of the characters to make them over 18 but for some bizarre reason they changed it to make Ayu and Mayu younger. Finally you contend the section is too long... You seem to be forgetting that this article is covering a franchise of Visual novels adapted into Anime. When we look at the Good Rated Articles where the game was adapted into an Anime what you have is a separate page for the Anime episodes with a paragraph or two synopsis/summary of each episode. In fact in the Good Rated Anime Articles they split the episodes off into their own page and have a paragraph or two summary of each episode. --Jsoo1 02:29, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Tons of citations.... And I'm one-step from nixing the Original Research tag. To begin with the AnimeNews network reviews start off positive on review one

Carrie Savage and Leah Clark are right on the money as Haruka and Akane, even mimicking the original performances as close as is reasonable, but it's Kevin M. Connolly, who to this point has only done bit parts, who turns in the highest-quality work in his interpretation of Takayuki. Though he takes a bit different approach than the original seiyuu, it sounds and feels right. And who else but Luci Christian and Monica Rial would you want for the Ayu-Mayu waitress duo? The English script glosses over the crudest dialogue (young Akane's comments to Takayuki are toned down a bit) and is every bit as interpretive as FUNimation dubs normally are, but it never strays far enough to be a problem.

[3] but then get progressively more negative. Eg;

If the dub is to be criticized, its most vulnerable point is the extremely interpretive English script, which in many places completely reworks scenes while only generally keeps to the intent of the original scene. Whether or not the script is better for the tweaks is debatable.

[4] for DVD2 while DVD 3's review is almost downright negative

Funimation's propensity for rewriting their shows usually isn't an issue as they are fairly careful not to make offensive or artistically unsound alterations, but there is cause for trepidation with Rumbling Hearts (starting with its unfortunate renaming). The delicate balance of emotion required and its absolute reliance on its actors makes Rumbling Hearts potentially unsuited for Funimation's usual brand of hands-on script alteration, and sure enough there are several examples of questionable choices. Shinji's confrontation with Takayuki loses some of its emotional implications in the rougher, cruder rewrite, some lines from the Japanese are excluded altogether, and for those of us too stupid to figure out who symbolizes who in the children's-book metaphor, the sex of one character is changed so as to simplify things. On the other hand, the emotional core of the series is beautifully preserved, and the performances (particularly those of the female cast) are excellent, packing just as much of a wallop as their Japanese counterparts. It isn't a perfect adaptation, but just be glad that the bull only squashed a couple of plates while passing through the china shop.

. Here is a quote from a reviewer who absolutely did not like the changes and points out further places where they changed it

4) They completely misinterpret what's going on in the series. The back of the DVD case says that Mitsuki is jealous of Takayuki and Haruka and starts trying to interfere with their dates. Which...actually doesn't happen. Except MAYBE once, and even then that's only through extrapolation!

5) They completely change the translation for the dub. The subtitles do not match the sub whatsoever. And no, I'm not talking about how sometimes sentences are changed so that they can fit the mouth movements, the ideas are completely different. I'm all for changing around the dialogue to make it more accessible to American culture.

HOWEVER, when the subtitles are saying the character is trying to throw a party for seniors that are graduating, the character is saying he's throwing a retirement party for people at his job. They take him out of college, and instead put him in a job! Not only that, Shinji (the aforementioned character) makes a comment about how Mitsuki and Takayuki are too busy to be dating someone, and they're all awkward and agree even though they really are dating!

Which isn't actually what happens in the sub, he simply says they mustn't get to see each other that much. In the sub, he KNOWS they're going out, but that they don't see each other that much. That I think, constitutes a major plot line change. Even when its not a plot point, the scene with Ayu and the angry customers is completely changed! Sorry I can't completely point out the differences, to really understand it, you'd have to watch it with subtitles on and the english voice track on. Fortunately they didn't fuck with the japanese translation for the subtitles, but god damn! why possessed them to take so much creative license!?

[5] Here is a comment from an internet forum poster who liked the dub but points out the dub is very different, often times saying the opposite of what was in the original

1) The English dub differs significantly from the translation. It's like listening to a third version. Heavily localized with lots of slang expressions, but quite well-done (even though on some occasions the dub says the exact opposite of what was REALLY said in Japanese). Still, an enjoyable experience, and I like the editing.

[6] . Now what has always been in the article, with regards to the dub changes, is information I collected directly from the primary source (The hybrid DVD) which again is not really Original Research. Now that that there are multiple cited secondary sources plus the information I gathered I am planning on citing some of this and removing the OR tags. Collecting info from primary sources and citing from secondary sources is in fact source based researchsource based research.

Original research that creates primary sources is not allowed. However, research that consists of collecting and organizing information from existing primary and/or secondary sources is, of course, strongly encouraged. All articles on Wikipedia should be based on information collected from published primary and secondary sources. This is not "original research"; it is "source-based research", and it is fundamental to writing an encyclopedia.

. Source based research is not only allowed in Wikipedia articles it is downright encouraged. So in fact none of what has been contended as original research has not been original research but rather source based research, and probably should have never been removed in the first place but rather just tagged for citations.. --Jsoo1 16:57, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Just because something is written on a site other than Wikipedia doesn't make it objective fact. Reviews are inherently biased. You read a review because you want an opinion on a product. But even if an opinion is highly qualified, it is still an opinion. The goal of Wikipedia is to provide unbiased information, with as little inflection of personal opinion as is reasonably possible. If you really want to cite ANN's reviews in your article, please at least indicate that the statements represent the opinion of an individual, rather than objective fact. I've deleted the "dub changes" section for now, but if you can rewrite it from a standpoint that exhibits proper neutrality, I see no reason why it shouldn't stay. Just for the record, I loved the dub, and not only am I aware of the adaptations, but I think to a great extent they're a part of what makes it so great. By adapting the dialogue and voices to flow more naturally within the context of Western language and culture, the scriptwriters have made the characters feel exponentially more lifelike and emotionally believable. I remember what inspired me to watch the series in the first place was watching the pilot episode on a Newtype disc, and thinking, "Wow, these characters sound like people I actually KNOW. They sound REAL." It's not often that a dub is able to focus on relatability over literal translation, and sometimes it admittedly does go wrong. But in this case I feel that (despite some admitted small errors) it worked out wonderfully. But the final deciding factor, I suppose, is what one looks for in a dub. The defining factors for me are the expressiveness of the actors, the appropriateness of the voices, and particularly for a drama, the believability of the dialogue. That's why I like dubs like Evangelion, Akira and Kiminozo. But, your tastes may be different. That's why, at the end of the day, what we're talking about here is OPINION. Wikipedia needs less of it. Good day. Gatotsu911 (talk) 20:01, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

If this were a formal debate, Jsoo1 won on points by a huge margin. Citations, examples, and unrebutted arguments all trump unsubstantiated opinions.
If reviewers who prefer the dub (i.e. are not biased against it) agree that there were major changes, and those changes can be described in detail, there are only three fair choices: 1) prove with cites that aforesaid reviewers are in the minority, 2) prove with cites that those changes did not in fact happen, or 3) quit the field.
Throwing up unsubstantiated opinions and claiming that they deserve the work of formal rebuttal is not a fair assertion of POV.

Per Neutral_point_of_view: "...we might not be able to agree that so-and-so is the greatest guitar player in history. But it is important indeed to note how some artist or some work has been received by the general public or by prominent experts. Providing an overview of the common interpretations of a creative work, preferably with citations or references to notable individuals holding that interpretation, is appropriate."

Arimareiji (talk) 21:31, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

At this point the section appears well cited by reliable sources (with one exception). While opinions will differ on the quality vs accuracy of the dub, to actually balance out the section is to find counter (positive) sources. Until found the section can be as negative as existing reviews. - RoyBoy 20:20, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Spoiler

'A second anime OVA series, which will feature Haruka's route from the game (the first series covered Mitsuki's), is currently in production.'

Could that please be moved down from the top of the entry and spoiler marked? It contains a presumable ending spoiler for someone who is only through 4 episodes of the series. 76.167.74.61 20:04, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I edited that section to remove the spoiler. That part is already mentioned under the 'OVA' section lower in the article and does not belong in the first section of the article anyway as it spoils the end for viewers visiting the page before watching the series or who are only midway through the series. Information like that should be tagged as 'spoiler'. PsychoticSoul 00:36, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, that information should be incorporated into the article just like any other information see wp:spoiler. "It is not acceptable to delete information from an article about a work of fiction because you think it spoils the plot. Such concerns must not interfere with neutral point of view, encyclopedic tone, completeness, or any other element of article quality" Thank you. AtaruMoroboshi (talk) 13:49, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Future edits

I am going to leave this here for now...

2001 PC game Characters Takayuki Narumi Haruka Suzumiya Mitsuki Hayase Vol. 1 DVD from FUNimation: December [2006] PC dating sim TV anime (En title): "Rumbling Hearts: Kiminozo" Staff Creator: âge Director: Hideki Takayama Script: Takamitsu Kono Character design: Kazuhiko Murata Animation production: Brain's Base Cast Takayuki Narumi: Kisho Taniyama Haruka Suzumiya: Namami Kuribayashi Mitsuki Hayase: Chiaki Takahashi Shinji Taira: Makoto Aoki Akane Haruka: Kaori Mizuhashi References

The characters section needs to be copy edited. If someone else does not do it I may. In either case the references should prove useful. – allen四names 02:36, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Header disambiguation

There are ambiguous sub-section headers in the article that should either be disambiguated or contain {{Anchor}} templates to provide unique HTML ids. – Allen4names 18:04, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kimi ga Nozomu Eien. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120722023154/http://products.alchemist-net.co.jp/products/kiminozo/ to http://products.alchemist-net.co.jp/products/kiminozo/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:32, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 27 October 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: No consensus. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 02:10, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

---

Rumbling Hearts → Kimi ga Nozomu Eien – Based on the recent announcement that the original game is getting an English release, and that the announcement on Twitter used the original title, I think it should be moved back to Kimi ga Nozomu Eien. Rumbling Hearts was the localized name for the anime series only. 十八 02:48, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

• Support: per WP:NCVG as the new title of the english release is going to be the romanization, the anime doesn't matter in this instance so this should be moved. Swordman97 ^{talk to me} 05:43, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose At least holding off until the game sees official release, upon which time I would see no issue moving the article. Saying the Japanese name in a Twitter message is not absolute proof it will be named that._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 09:19, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.