Talk:Redo of Healer

Comment

This isn't isekai. MC is native of world it takes place.

Yep. He travels four years back in time by healing the world itself. --Goroth (talk) 21:31, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

This seems questionable for me because isekai includes parallel universes. Technically, the MC didn't travel back in time, but instead imprints a message, desire or memory onto his younger self, which prompts the younger self to change things. This change creates an alternative/parallel world different from the one experienced by the future alternative self. He remembers his alternative future life using the "Halcyon Eye" that sees all of creation. What exactly the "Halcyon Eye" sees is questionable for me since he obviously sees his future, but never uses it again to see the new future? Your current and developing self basically consists of memories of your experiences, without which you are no longer "you", so adding new memories changes the protagonist to a self that is closer to the alternative future self, which is why he could think "my first go at life". With the classic (re)incarnation isekai, the memories come from a previous life (linear timeline) versus an alternative future self (split timeline). For me, it doesn't really matter from which time or self the memories come from, the memories are from a life already experienced. Jroberson108 (talk) 13:22, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Separating LN/manga and anime article

Hello there,

would it make sense to separate this article into a LN/manga article under Kaifuku Jutsushi no Yarinaoshi and an article about the anime adaption under Redo of Healer? I split the articles in German-languaged Wikipedia due to the controverse it may or will cause. The LN/manga didn't spark as much of a controversial discussion than the anime does. --Goroth (talk) 12:12, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

@Goroth: I see that you created an article at Redo of Healer (anime), but I think it should be merged back here. There is some useful information you added (particularly to the Plot section), but the Reception section gives too much weight to individual YouTube personalities (who are not reliable sources for Wikipedia purposes). The information from review sites (like ANN, Otaquest) can stay, and should be merged to the Reception section at this article. — Goszei (talk) 22:17, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Agree with Goszei; in any case, the mainstream controversy the anime series garnered does not seem to be notable enough to warrant a separate article, especially considering the manga already received similar criticisms (in a less popularized fashion); a similar instance would be the Goblin Slayer series, for reference. Sarcataclysmal (talk) 22:20, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

@Goszei: Feel free to do so if you really want to merge the articles. --Goroth (talk) 12:41, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

I have redirected without merging content: here is the the last revision if someone wants to make content moves. — Goszei (talk) 23:57, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

about my edit

Hi,1- in all Wikis, the info box logo is File: Kaifuku Jutsushi no Yarinaoshi logo.png Even the Japanese Wikipedia and this article is translated from that wiki. 2- In this article, having a section for each character helps to link to that character if needed elsewhere or even in this article. LordProfo (talk) 05:52, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Being the anime series an adaptation of the novel/light novel, the image of the original work should be included instead of the logo of the anime series. What the Japanese Wikipedia does doesn't mean that we must proceed the same way. Regarding the characters, unless the article is a list of characters, there are no reasons to make a section for every one of them in the series' article. - Xexerss (talk) 19:12, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

I agree with Xexerss. All of our other articles use the manga/light novel cover as the main image, since that was the original source, which is with the best representation of it. Even if it is different than how other Wikipedia languages work, that's perfectly fine. Most English Wikipedia articles have far better coverage of their topic that other language versions anyway. Link20XX (talk) 19:28, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Just a note, this article is not translated from the Japanese Wikipedia. Yes it is based on a Japanese series, but that doesn't mean it was. If it was, it would have a note in the talk page or in the edit summary if the page's creator, which it did not. Link20XX (talk) 19:44, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

ok, thanks LordProfo (talk) 16:55, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

What do you think about putting the anime logo in the Anime section? LordProfo (talk) 16:59, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Abbreviation

Should the abbreviation be changed from "Kaiyari" to "KaiYari"? I see it spelled both ways online, but it is technically the start of two words combined. Jroberson108 (talk) 16:35, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Saw in a YouTube

In order for the protagonist to be at all sympathetic as a character, despite his psychotic abuses, the villains need to be over the top evil caricatures, all while maintaining an image to most of the population of being good in heroic figures. at the same time, no practical limitations with the "Hero's" relative to that of his opponents, so all sense of danger is eliminated as soon as it is shown that he had the power to defeat a given opponent all along. Hyperbolick (talk) 09:38, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

This is the same content that you added before and it was already explained why you shouldn't add it again just like that. Why are you writing it here or is there something that you want to discuss (that's what talk pages are for)? Xexerss (talk) 15:02, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps somebody will find the sources that reflect this. Perhaps even you will. Hyperbolick (talk) 16:28, 4 May 2024 (UTC)