Talk:Death Note/Archive 6

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Controversy

I added a controversy section and placed the "Death Note in China" under that section. I'm sure the show will have more of its share of controversy when it comes here to the United States and so I felt it best to do that instead of adding a "Chinese-exclusive" section. Drumpler 00:18, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

The controversy section is just looking fine right there, Drumpler. We will just have to wait and see what criticism and controversy the TV series has when it comes to us here. Sjones23 15:37, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Rumors

I apologise if this is not the right place for this sort of discussion, or if rumors are not even to be discussed on wikipedia, but it feels right to be under the "controversy headline".

A rumor was printed in Salon online magzine

There's a rumor that "Death Note" was originally supposed to be only about half as long as it turned out to be, but when the original Japanese serialization proved to be wildly popular, Obata and Ohba were persuaded to extend it. That makes sense, since about halfway through the series, there's a point that seems like a natural ending. It's a fake-out, but it does signal a change (which some readers hate) in the tone of the series into a parable about mortality, immortality and the difference between physical existence and identity.

This was brought to my attention as Anime News Network considered the review in Salon to be newsworthy, http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2007-07-27/salon-magazine-looks-at-death-note The article can be viewed in its entirety here, http://www.salon.com/books/review/2007/07/26/death_note/ Haze01 11:57, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

It probably isn't worth mentioning, but there are rumors (on these Wikipedia discussion pages, at least) about the involvement of Ohba in writing Death Note 13: How to Read. Just speculation based on some inconsistencies between the manga and the How to Read volume. Also rumors as to who's responsible for various loose ends or plot holes in the manga. On a related note, the number of people involved in the production of the manga is unknown to me - is such a thing valuable to this article? Haze01 11:57, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Remove the Parent project banner

I agree with the removal of the WikiProject Japan banner from this talk page in order to reduce redundancy. The fact that the WikiProject Anime and manga banner is there shows that it's a Japanese series.--十八 02:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

What of its good article status in said category, though? A lot of subjects fall under several Wiki projects. Drumpler 06:03, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Everything in WP:MANGA is in WP:JAPAN, so it's totally redundant. They can list it on their brag sheet if they want without putting a banner here. --tjstrf talk 06:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me, brag sheet? Is that proper criteria for deciding what goes and doesn't go in WikiProjects? Isn't it the Japanese WP that gave it its own good article status? Drumpler 06:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

You know, those lists of Good and Featured articles everyone keeps. By the way, you seem to be confused here. WP:JAPAN did not give it a GA, WP:GA did. GA-class is a standardized process common to all wikiprojects. --tjstrf talk 06:26, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay. But I'm still confused as to why there's removal from the project to begin with. Is there a discussion or something I'm missing here on the project page? Drumpler 06:31, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

As tjstrf said, it is meant to reduce redundancy. Most articles that fall under WP:Anime do not have the WP:JPN banner for this very reason. This is also why articles that fall under WP:VN do not get the WP:CVG banner.--十八 06:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

The reason it's redundant is that the set of WP:MANGA articles is a perfect subset of WP:JAPAN articles, or at least should be. There are a few mistagged OEL manga and the like that don't fall under WP:JAPAN, but they really aren't under WP:MANGA either. --tjstrf talk 06:52, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Alrighty, thanks. Drumpler 10:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

One can only assume that to change in the future, since Manga is a genre/style far more than it is a "national product". Luis Dantas 12:03, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

It is neither. Manga, like comics in general, is a medium; it can be and often is any genre or style. Being from Japan is the only thing that defines it as the subset of comics we call manga. Doceirias 18:48, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Luis, the articles in the WP:MANGA#SCOPE are all products from Japan ("Although its scope is broad, this project maintains an essential focus on media meant primarily for consumption in Japan"). Ninja neko 19:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I just spotted this topic here today, but during the last few days I removed a couple of wp:film tags on anime film articles, as wp:film is also a parent project of wp:anime (same redundancy thing to me, I don't care much for clutter, that's all). One of the wp:film people told me they'd like to keep it. WP:Japan on the other hand has it on it's talk page not to include the tag on child projects (Template talk:WikiProject Japan#Where to add this template). So it also depends on the parent project view on things I guess. Ninja neko 19:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Note Blue

The "Note Blue" club mentioned in episode 13 seems to be based on a real club called "Blue Note." Apart from the names both are in Aoyama as far as I can tell.

Is this worth a mention? In, say, a trivia section?

80.6.106.90 01:01, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Review WP:Trivia. It is preferred that "Trivia" be included in the main article text. Drumpler 01:02, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

It's actually in Minamiaoyama, which is just south of the main district of Aoyama. If you visited Japan and asked for directions to Note Blue in Aoyama, they would tell you that you're in the wrong town. User:MissyMary 00:17, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Timing

I found this quote here 'The series currently airs on the Nippon Television network "every Tuesday [at] 24:56".' Would someone care to elaborate? On the 24 hour clock there is no such time as 24:56, it's 0:56. If I may I'd like to change this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FortOyer (talk • contribs)

They say 24:56 because it airs after midnight, but it's on the Tuesday night programming lineup. It's actually Wednesday morning at 0:56 if you want to get that technical. Also, this has been explained before. (Also, new discussions go at the bottom, you can click that little + next to Edit This Page to add one automatically in the right place, and please sign your talk page entries. Thanks!) Nique talk 18:09, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I should have checked if it was asked before - and about the other things. Perhaps the timing should be explained to stop mistakes like mine happening again? - FortOyer

Kuro-Hana CnD Order

I noticed an addition about the CnD order for Kuro-Hana fansubs. Several fansubbing groups received such orders. Wouldn't this be a good addition to the controversy section? Or maybe a new legal suits section? Certainly it was fansubbing in the first place that led Viz to directly release their own subtitled versions of the anime on the Internet. Drumpler 06:21, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Maybe to Controversy, though is it really that uncommon for a group like Viz to send out such warnings? I wouldn't call it controversial enough myself, but as I said in my edit summary removing it, I'm not too strong in that opinion, as it does relate to the article and the fame that the series has accumulated. Nique talk 13:46, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Not notable. CnD orders are common practice, and not controversial. The online thing has less to do with fansubs and more Viz deciding to try something new with an obviously popular title. Doceirias 10:14, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I would have to contest this. Unless I'm mistaken, it was the fansubs that made the Death Note anime popular in the first place. Said fansubbing groups have translated the anime not only into English, but into Spanish, French, etc., giving the anime international exposure. I think if a reliable source can be found that substantiates this, the source regarding the CnD needs to be reincluded. Drumpler 06:13, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Virtually all popular titles are fansubbed these days. Death Note was already a highly successful manga property in English before the anime started. The anime would have been popular with or without fansubs, since the manga already sold very well. Obviously, the fansubs did contribute to its popularity, but there's nothing in this situation that makes it any different from any other popular anime. They all get cease and desist orders if they don't stop releasing the moment the license is announced. This really is standard practice. Doceirias 10:14, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Similarity to Juvenille Group Games

Did anyone else play that game where they would have out cards and those playing would get cards letting them know if they were the killer or the detective. There was always one person outside of the game that directed the killing, investigation, and ensuing debate over who was the killer and the group would vote on who to kill. As the killer or killers in some cases the object was to kill everyone that wasn't a killer, and the detective's job was to convince everyone who the killer was if he was able to find out during the heads down blind phase. I think everyone had a different name for this game, but when you think about it, it's very close to what was played out in Death Note.—Preceding unsigned comment added by MCP (talk • contribs)

Actually, the "Death Note: Kira Game" for Nintendo DS operates on a similar premise, if I am correct. Drumpler 11:04, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Concerning the Merger

I decided to propose the plotline for merger because it required one to read the main article before reading plotline, if we do merge it, we should shorten it quite a bit before merging. GreaterWikiholic 23:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Why is the plot line article even necessary? A short summary is all that's needed. Drumpler 12:17, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Plotline of Death Note up for deletion

Thought I would post it at the main article since this is where most of the traffic is. Plotline of Death Note has been nominated for deletion. See the subpage Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Plotline of Death Note and leave comments there. This is merely a notice to inform anyone that wants to know.--十八 06:38, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

End of the series

The last episode of the anime (37) was showed in japanese TV some days ago

Some days ago? Actually, it was broadcasted yesterday (Tuesday June 26th 2007). Drumpler 18:32, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Also, please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~). The official NTV website and all other sources have 37 episodes if you want to check. Thanks. Greg Jones II 01:31, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Another thing, someone editted the main page to say Death Note has 50 episodes (which had me excited for a second) but it was a prank. Someone should edit it back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.167.56.177 (talk) 20:54, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

You're certainly able to.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 21:04, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

DVD release dates

An official press release from VIZ concerning the North American release dates has appeared on ANN in the recent Anime Expo (June 29, 2007) (the official press release is here if anyone is interested). The release date can be added now since it had recently been announced. Greg Jones II 21:33, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Kouryaku Manual Page 1-37

I was browsing the Saiyaman Torrent page earlier, and something came up called:

DEATH NOTE Kouryaku Manual Page 1-37.

Does anyone know anything about this? RedEyesMetal 12:18, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

It's a segement that aired after each episode, hosted by Misa and Sayu's voice actors. -- Ishikawa Minoru 15:18, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

The voice actors are Aya Hirano and Haruka Kudo if you want to know who voiced Misa and Sayu. Greg Jones II 01:48, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

TV Special

I added this to the page. If someone could somehow include it in the template at the top-right, it might help. Thanks. Drumpler 00:40, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Can someone change Mikami's quote?

The more common translation is "Eliminate" instead of "Delete". I go so boldly to say that "Eliminate" is the correct translation and that "Delete" was just a mistranslation that was simply over looked.

I don't have editing privileges since I am not a member, so I can't do it myself. 24.87.60.64 05:09, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

The official translation in the Viz editions of the manga is "delete". To my understanding, the article uses "delete", even if it may or may not be accurate, in order to reflect the official position (the phrase "eliminate" is largely used by the fansub community). Drumpler 06:09, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

It does not matter much what the more "common" translation is. To summarize previous discussions that have taken place on the matter, I'll quote the inserted note from the List of characters in Death Note page: Please do not change this to "eliminate" again. "Delete" is what he says in the English manga, it's not an unreasonable translation considering the multilayeredness of kanji, the grammar of it makes more sense in English being in the present tense, and it makes it similar to hitting a supernatural Delete key, removing their lives from a page. Thank you. Not that everybody seems to read this, it gets changed to "eliminate" almost every day, but so far, the consensus by established Death Note article editors has been in favour of "delete". Nique talk 14:20, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

If the official Viz translations says "delete", there is no sense in changing it. I haven't read the official translated version so I don't know if this is true. Don't most articles use officially translated names in the articles? Like for in Naruto Gai has been translated as Guy so all articles list him as Guy. This was done just to stick to official translations. So if the Viz edition carries "delete", it should remain delete. eZio 07:21, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

24.87.60.64 08:15, 19 July 2007 (UTC) Well if you guys are certain then I guess it stays... Plus, you know the rules of Wikipedia more than I, so I won't argue much more.

How about make a note of this? Most people that are bilingual in Japanese and American will think the closest word is "Eliminate". In order to prevent confusion, why not make a note of this in the article so people stop editing it? --ShrimpCrackers 08:15, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Anyone who actually knows both languages will know perfectly well that they are equally legitimate translations. Only people who watched the fansubs will think otherwise. Doceirias 09:51, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

YTV broadcast

According to Zannen, Death Note will be airing on YTV on September 7, 2007 on Bionix. I am not sure if it will be added in. Greg Jones II 15:48, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

It can now be added since the official premiere date has been announced. Greg Jones II 15:55, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Why isn't there any analysis of the manga?

Think about it: it has a serious discussion about morals and very interesting characters. Also notice the similarities of characters: Near looks like the albino version of L, but he plays with toys; Mello has his intelligence and love for chocolate, but he wears clothes with a peculiar resemblance to Ryuk's; and Matsuda looks like the adult, black-haired, foolish Light. 瀬人様 18:47, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Analysis needs to be sourced. And frankly, what you have this is trivia, not analysis. Doceirias 19:04, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

This is what I came up with in a matter of minutes, just to demonstrate. There must be, anyway, why not include them? 瀬人様 19:12, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Furthermore, have a look at this site: http://deathnotes.kefi.org/. 瀬人様 20:13, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Apparently fansites are not considered reliable sources. This is the real reason there's so little analysis on anime. It has to be from an established site, magazine, book, etc. And those tend to be pretty shallow. Doceirias 20:19, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Just to clarify, fansites aren't generally allowed because they are WP:SPAM. Greg Jones II 20:58, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

It's hard to be objective up to Wikipedia standards with such an analysis. And Death Note is a bit controversial in this respect, anyway. I wouldn't go farther than linking to some webforums. Luis Dantas 13:51, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Web forums aren't appropriate sources. Drumpler 17:57, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I was thinking along the lines of external links as opposed to sources. Luis Dantas 18:35, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

delete vs eliminate

how is telling the truth such a crime that it will get me blocked, he is clearly saying eliminate, the manga does NOT translate correctly, and the page is about the anime, what 2% of the page is about the manga

The issue has been discussed on a number of occasions, above and probably in the archives.

Delete and Eliminate are both valid translations of the Japanese word, but the official translation uses delete.

The warning on your talk page is strongly worded because you changed delete to eliminate twice, ignoring the message on the page asking you not to do that, and then blanked your talk page to remove the first warning I placed there. Doceirias 19:22, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

fine then, but i only blanked my talk page course it is to long. and i didnt "delete" content from the death note page i would call it replacing

Yeah, there wasn't a warning that said replacing. I had to make do.

Please sign your posts with four tildes (~).

Your talk page wasn't that long, and removing warnings is frowned upon. Be careful next time - it looks bad, even if you didn't mean anything by it. Doceirias 03:18, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I know but i guess i just dont like mess, i heve removed a bit of the stuff from the talk page, but left your warnings--Mhart54com 03:33, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

It would seem that you have made a number of vandelous edits. I've restored the comments on your page, as many of them point this out. You should instead archive them, not delete them. Drumpler 04:00, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Media > Video Games

I don't like the statement that Death Note: L o Tsugumono is a sequel to Death Note: Kira Game (henseforth abbreviated to DN:LoT and DN:KG, respectively). The gameplay and style of DN:LoT is nowhere near the same, as it instead plays like the boardgame of the same name that was produced at the same time as the video game. My understanding is that DN:LoT is completely serperate from DN:KG. It is accurate for the article to say that DN:LoT features characters from the series not included in DN:KG.

On another note, there is no information under Media regarding the boardgame version of DN:LoT. Haze01 11:13, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Anime vs Manga on Wikipedia

Why is it that in this article, as in many others, the focus is more on the Anime than on the Manga? The manga came first. The anime is not directed by the creator, and therefore may not represent his wishes for the series as well as the manga did. The manga was the first to be translated for an anglophone audience (the target audience of Wikipedia), regardless of whether you count fantranslations. On articles that do this, it sort of gives the impression that the manga is the spin-off, or gives the impression that all Wikipedia wants is pretty anime screencaps.

I think the introduction clearly says it's a manga. As for the images, we technically should use neither manga nor anime pictures, as they're not really free use. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 15:08, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

While they aren't free use, we have no other alternative. WhisperToMe 23:42, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Ah, yes it does. Re-reading the article, my complaint is more appropriate for the "List of Characters in Death Note" article than for this one. Haze01 22:29, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Shinigami List Incomplete

The main page should include the shinigami Shidoh, the true owner of Light's original Death Note.Lbgrowl 07:22, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Compared to the characters currently listed on the main article, Shidoh is significantly less important. I think the list is fine as it is. If they were to add anyone, characters like Deputy Director Yagami and Watari had more influence than Shidoh. There is a link to the main article for Death Note Characters anyway.

Haze01 07:40, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I think we should add Shidoh--Mhart54com 10:19, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't think we should change the list. We have the very most important characters, all the others were minor in comparison. Even Chief Yagami was a pretty 'minor' character in that yes, he influenced the story, but the story didn't precisely revolve around him at any point. The story is about, well, the characters listed in the section right now. Shidoh played a smaller part than a lot of characters, so he should stay off the main article. That's why we have List of characters in Death Note, after all. Nique talk 17:38, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

That is correct. Greg Jones II 02:30, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

After all, if the least important characters are added to the main article's list, it will be quickly reverted. If you want to add more information on the characters themselves, go to the List of characters in Death Note article and add your information there. I am just pointing out something. Greg Jones II 19:06, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Fourth Kira?

Teru Mikami has been chosen as the fourth Kira? Who was the third?--SidiLemine 10:10, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Higuchi. Something tells me you haven't read or seen the series. >.>; Nique talk 13:44, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, something is wrong. That slimeball Higuchi just doesn't leave a mark. Shouldn't it be mentionned in the article thought? We cant expect everyone coming here to have read or seen it, and memorized it on top.--SidiLemine 14:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't leave a mark? Doesn't matter if he doesn't make a mark. He's clearly called Kira a number of times in the series, he's known as one of the Kiras among all the fans of the series I know. It doesn't take much memorizing to remember someone who's Kira for such a long period in the series, that section of the arc spans quite a few chapters/episodes. However, you're right that he didn't play a big enough part to be on the main page Characters section. It seems hypocritical, but we can't go saying Mikami is the third Kira just because we can't justify putting Higuchi on the main article. Nique talk 14:37, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry if I was misunderstood. I meant that I didn't remember him because of his shady, unremarkable personnality didn't leave an impression on me (well, that and watching the whole series in 48h). What should be remarked is that there was a third Kira named Higuchi (probably with a piped link to his part on the characters article). If there's no objection I'll do it.--SidiLemine 15:27, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that's really necessary though. The link to the Characters page is plenty already. Nique talk 15:54, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

It's a bit spoilerish to go into too much detail about the third (and, for that matter, the fourth) Kiras. Luis Dantas 13:55, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

what happend to the pictures

?????????????????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mhart54com (talk • contribs)

Erm, pictures? What do you mean by that? You'll have to be more specific than question marks if you want your question to be answered. Nique talk 13:44, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I think he/she means the anime or manga pictures. Mhart54com, for your information, some of them were removed, because they did not have a fair use rationale. Greg Jones II 02:15, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

We can always restore them and add rationales :) WhisperToMe 02:23, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that is affirmative. Greg Jones II 02:24, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Spoilers

The plotline section should have one of those spoilers warnings above it. In a long series with a complicated and subtle plotline like this, there are many mysteries and narrative twists apart from just the ending.

84.64.138.40 09:19, 29 August 2007 (UTC)tarma_2002

We do not allow spoiler warnings on Wikipedia anymore. WhisperToMe 14:14, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Since when? Drumpler 14:44, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I think they meant "We don't allow spoiler warnings on whole sections that imply spoilers anymore", like plot, synopsis, characters, etc. or on pages for such sections. WP:SPOILER. Nique talk 15:50, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Right. I've seen other articles split the plot section into a general, oblique non-spoiler version and a "plotline with spoilers" version. I agree with the guideline that templates within articles are ungainly. But I think it should recommend the above solution as a standard and to keep warnings until it has been implemented. Thanks for bringing this to my attention..84.64.138.40 17:02, 29 August 2007 (UTC)tarma_2002

There's not one guideline that says spoiler warnings aren't allowed. Here's some relevant guidelines (not rules) when it comes to spoilers from WP:SPOILER:

• It is not acceptable to delete information from an article about a work of fiction because you think it spoils the plot. Do not make spoiler-free parallel versions (content forks). Other unacceptable approaches include concealing spoilers using codes such as ROT13, and setting the text and background colors to the same color using HTML.

• Spoiler notices may be appropriate when significant plot revelations appear in unexpected places, if there is consensus that this is necessary (note it on the talk page).

This obviously discourages making two versions of an article, one spoiler-free.

Personally, I don't think Wikipedia articles NEED in-depth analyses of plots. A simple summary should be enough. Drumpler 17:20, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I said separate sections, not parallel articles. Apart from that I agree with your comments.84.64.138.40 17:35, 29 August 2007 (UTC)tarma_2002

That's still creating two versions of one subject, and thus it breaks the rule. I don't think spoiler warnings are really necessary at all on Wikipedia, but especially not in a plot section, and we should follow the guideline as such. All this aside, there aren't any major spoilers in the plot section right now. It's not like it gives away L's death or anything. Nique talk 19:14, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Like you just did right now. Anyways, people should be able to infer that a "synopsis" will include some spoilers. It's only natural. --BiT 22:33, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Shiori artwork on a CD album

Hey, I found a manga-style artwork of Shiori on a CD album: http://www.our-deathnote.com/img/musiques/death_note_movie_insert_song_ost.jpg

This is made by Shikao Suga: http://www.our-deathnote.com/?rub=musiques

Should we use the pic here of Shiori in the article? WhisperToMe 19:42, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Rules of the Death Note

Isn't it a bit redundant to have an article on Rules of the Death Note ànd a section here Death_Note#Rules_of_the_Death_Note? I think the section covers the subject nicely, and the separate article could go. If really notable, the extra stuff on the article could still be incorporated here. Ninja neko 12:41, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Late response, but yeah I have read both and semi-agree. But there are some things that could be added to Death_Note#Rules_of_the_Death_Note which are present on the other page and then deletion of the page could then be carried out. Rgoodermote 20:36, 8 October 2007 (UTC)