Talk:Yu-Gi-Oh!/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Literal translation

Yu-Gi-Oh translates into "Card Game King/Ruler"

I always thought it meant GAME KING, since the real first season (season 0 - not shown in the U.S.) doesn't have any cards at all, just essentially shadow games. Bekkie 17:32, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
  • That's wrong. Looking up "遊戯" on WWWJDIC gets simply "game; play; sports". "Card game" gets more complicated results, none of which is the "yūgi" kanji. JuJube 19:55, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion: how about more info for card collectors?

In particular, what is a rare card v. super rare, ultra rare, etc. How do you recognize one?


—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.136.37.77 (talk) 13:40, 8 February 2007 (UTC).

Each has a different foil and print. For example, ultra rares get gold writing and foil, while rares get silver writing.

Gaget654321 12:41, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

There are now 9 Valuable Books, not just 5

Volume 6 ISBN 4-08-782060-2 Volume 7 ISBN 4-08-782085-8 Volume 8 ISBN 4-08-782099-8 Volume 9 ISBN 4-08-782149-8

For those who don't like official translation are there scanslations as well. I miss this info in this article too.


NOTE

I deleted "This article needs to be locked" because it is locked. Stop making this part again, after I delete, whoever is.

Korean War

Someone should mention that "Yugioh" (technically "Yug-I-Oh") in Korean means 6.25, which is what South Koreans usually call the Korean War. (As it started on 6.25)

We're not here to report coincidences. Setokaiba✌≝ 17:51, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
And it's not technically Yug-I-Oh, for the record. Both the English Yu-Gi-Oh! and the Japanese Yuugiou are acceptable. John D'Adamo 16:37, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Fan site?

What was wrong with that last fansite I tried to link to? Was it against a rule? --63.65.45.98 20:02, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

We really don't like to have people post fansites. Mainly due to the fact that so many just try to advertise and/or the sites don't provide much information. Then again, this is my opinion. Manjoume Thunder 17:54, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Misc Comments

I deleted the link to "Yu-Gi-Oh! Zone" because the link didn't work. About "Ultimate Shoujo's" link.

I didn't realise that the fan sites section had to be 50 % to 100% Anime/Manga content. I made it as a shrine to ALL of the Yu-Gi-Oh females. Anime/Manga, TCG and real life female fans/duelists. I will live with the desion that Ultimate Shoujo's link will only be listed in the TCG/OCG articles. I will stop re adding the link to the main Yu-Gi-Oh! page. At first, I thought it was a vandel, so that's why I kept adding the link. Oh well, They did warn us about having our stuff edited/deleted with out notice.

Speaking of which... Can we have this article "Locked"? It would keep non members from accidently deleting stuff. Just a suggestion. Thundercat2

I had suggested it does get "protected" or "locked" at one point not too long ago due to the sheer amount of vandalism and abuse this page has been taking esp from unregistered users. (though oddly enough, this page seems to even get some vandalism from some newly registered users as well, almost as if they register just to abuse the page. Go figure.) ZyphBear 05:36, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Guys, it's not every day that I try to contribute, and I do not understand why, after I Added militate.com, Geg removed the link. It's a prominent Yu-Gi-Oh! site, also known as yugioh-fusion.com so why the deletion?

Actually, it looks like Geg has been doing alot of "trimming" lately for things he doesn't seem to agree with, even if they happen to be true. (and instead of just saying "was put in wrong area, moved to correct area", he just deletes it. Oh well, guess what's why they say "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it."ZyphBear 14:04, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Please don't add the names of characters without some kind of content with them. There is no benefit to anyone otherwise. RadicalBender 22:26, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)

The last Yu-Gi-Oh episode was printed and published on March 8, 2004 edition of weekly Shonen Jump. Just to let you know. All good things must come to an end. :) Revth 18:13, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Actually, I'm trying to find some actual confirmation of this. I know some people have been saying this, but the most recent scans seem to indicate it's not done quite yet, it's just in the final arc. Yugi is battling himself (Yami Yugi), but the fight isn't over as of issue 339. I could be behind, though - I'm not sure. Do you happen to know the number of the final issue? RadicalBender 18:53, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Yu-Gi-Oh! is not finished!

A new Yu-Gi-Oh! story started in the Japanese Shonen Jump: Yu-Gi-Oh! R

--

Also, 4Kids seems to be airing a new, original season after the duel that follows Memory World in Ireland, called Yu-Gi-Oh: Capsule Monsters. I put what I know about it on the wikipedia page, but 4Kids hasn't even officially announced it....

--DawnMedia:http://www.mostsexymoms.com/out.php?url=http://www.fetishinspector.com/daily/392/index/&p=65&link=a

The 'Capsule Monster' story has been announced, the DVD is coming out, an online screening has been scheduled, and a possible Fall 2006 Airing has all been added to the article. ZyphBear 12:47, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Yu-Gi-Oh! naming

This article should be moved to "Yu-Gi-Oh!" with the exclamation mark! WhisperToMe 20:43, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Yes, it should. I've been meaning to do this for a while... RADICALBENDER★ 22:38, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Last set of changes

I intended to pop over to the French WikiP and rename their article, but the Movepage function isn't working. I left a request in their Talk page to move it. As for the "removal of criticism", I think article are much stronger when facts are presented as they are, so the reader can draw their own conclusion. The previous criticism section was weasl-y, with no citation or reference of where that opinion came from. -- Netoholic 04:06, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)
That doesn't even make any sense. So, why shouldn't those criticisms be under their own section (especially since you didn't remove any content)? The article is getting more and more poorly organized.

if u want to see more of my work look up poke'mon.

Finally, guns and violence, etc. don't fall under "FCC v-chip regulations," which don't actually exist. The networks are left to their own devices to assign ratings to shows. They could have left the entire show alone without any interference from the FCC (the parents would've gone ballistic because American sensibilitiwww.2girlsonecup.comn's shows are different from Japanese, and that is what I changed the sentence). And the proof? FUNimation is planning to release an uncut, Japanese-language version on DVD.

RADICALBENDER★ 13:58, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Yu-Gi-Oh! The Movie

The 2nd movie of Yu-Gi-Oh! will be aired on TV-Tokyo on January 2, 2005. (See here). And although so far the movie was not released in theatres in Japan, I heard that readers of the Japanese Shonen Jump were invited to special previews of the movie in November 2004. Riddle | Talk 06:41, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Episode guide!!!

I think someone should add the complete Yu-Gi-OH episode guide!!!

That would be nice, but if it's done it should be on a seperate page linking to this one. Yu-Gi-Oh! is one of the longest running anime I've seen, and I know there are longer ones. A list, much less an episode guide, would be too long for this article, but is a good suggestion for another page.

Millennium Puzzle Game

File:Congratulations scene of the Millennium Puzzle Game.png
Congratulations scene of the Millennium Puzzle Game

Words from Kazuki Takahashi concerning Magic & Wizards, shown up after you finish the Millennium Puzzle Game (Macromedia Shockwave is required to play the game). Click "CLICK HERE", then click "ゲームスタート" to play it.

Japanese text:

CONGRATULATIONS!!
ゲ㊌ムクリアおめでとう!!
あの千年パズルを完成させる𘚟は・・・
キミはすごいゲームセンスを持っているね!!
よし、約束どおり遊戯王の秘密の世界をお見せするとしよう!!

マジックアンドウィザーズの秘密!!?

マンガに登場するマジックアンドウィザーズは、 ご存知のようにマジックザ
ギャザリングをモデルにしています。 僕もギャザリングはプレイしますが、
とてもルールが難しく、 カードの種類もたくさんあるので、 閉口しています。
マンガのマジックアンドウィザーズがあんな風にシンプルなゲームになったの
は、 そんな風にマジックザギャザリングが難しかったからということも実は
理由の一つです。でも、最近マンガのほうも難しくなっているといううわさ
も……!!?

English translation (feel free to improve it):

CONGRATULATIONS!!
Congratulations on clearing the game!!
Having completed that Millennium Puzzle...
You have a great sense of gaming!!
Alright, I will show you the secret world of Yu-Gi-Oh!, as promised!!

The secret of Magic & Wizards !!?

As you know, the Magic & Wizards game that appears in the manga uses Magic: The Gathering as a model. Alhough I also play Gathering [1], I am nonplussed by it because the rules are very difficult, and there are many different types of cards. In fact, one of the reasons the Magic & Wizards in the manga was such a simple game is that Magic: The Gathering was difficult in such a way. However, rumor has it that the recent manga is also difficult to understand......!!?

Note:

^ Magic: The Gathering. Although the game is usually referred to as Magic or MTG for short, here (and only here in the article) Takahashi uses "ギャザリング" (Gathering) to refer to it,

Riddle | Talk 11:00, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Memory saga

Will the Yu-Gi-OH Memory saga air in America??

It will. This morning whlie I watched the end of Grand Championship, there was an add for Dawn of the Duels. It showed Yugi dressed as the Paraoh and Kaiba holding the Millunum Rod. My guess is it will be aired and this will be the last season.--Dylankidwell 18:35, 8 October 2005 (UTC)


Memory Saga

Which age group is the Memory Saga aimed toward... Because the Japanese veriosn pretty violent. And will it be very edited...? Examples:

  1. Yugi's grandfather got shot (episode 199)
  2. Mahado's sacificed (episode 204)
  3. massure in the Theif Village (episode 206)
  4. Dark Priest being stabbed (episode 214)

etc...

(anon)

The original Japanese version was aimed towards teenagers in the 13-17 level. The dub version is aimed towards kids in the 6-12 level. Therefore, a lot of the goodies were edited out. I go into detail on my website, feel free to use it as a resource.  :) John D'Adamo 16:39, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Yu-Gi-Oh! articles terrify me

See, I knew nothing about Yu-Gi-Oh!, so I thought I could stand to learn about more fiction. I come here, and what do I see? LISTS. LISTS OF CARDS. And the most overblown template I've ever seen in my entire life. This frightens me. --Apostrophe 05:10, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you are talking about, "Lists, lists of cards". A quick glance at a revision to this article before your post, [2] doesn't seem to be too terribly card heavy. Furthermore, it's not like it's telling a ghost story or something so aren't you being a bit absurd with that "terrified" line? Hackwrench 15:13, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I am the exact sort of person whom those articles are for: somebody unknowledgeable in the fiction. It is not a good testament on all your abilities if a newcomer is scared away. Not at all. --Apostrophe 05:10, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

No, you aren't the exact sort of person these articles are for. The articles should be informative to everyone who wants information on this, no matter their familiarity with it. Hackwrench 15:22, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

The main problem, really, is the lists of cards. I'm not certain how you guys reached the conclusion of people caring about the specific details of fictional characters' decks, so I'll be blunt: nobody cares. To provide an example, I see Seto Kaiba posses a Luster Dragon #2! Do I know what the creature with such an absurd name is? No. Is it all that important? Most assuredly not. Thus, why waste the reader's time and expect him to care? --Apostrophe 05:10, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Oh, and you are somehow a master on what is important for every reader who comes here? You've already admitted your ignorance of the subject matter, and now you claim to be some sort of mind reader? Nobody cares? I suppose in your world, if you've seen one person, you've seen them all! Hackwrench 15:22, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Please keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a indiscriminate source of information, and most certainly not an obsessive fansite. Thank you. --Apostrophe 05:10, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Please keep in mind that you are not an authority on what is or isn't indiscriminate. Thank you. Hackwrench 15:22, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

So the cards should be limited to "notable cards" so the list isn't so gosh darned long, right? I don't even know what the cards do either; I only read the comics. WhisperToMe 05:12, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

EDIT: Another idea: What if the strategy of each deck was explained, with the roles of each card? WhisperToMe 05:18, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Either option would be a improvement, any sort of interesting prose would be preferred to longwinded lists that can and will be easily skipped. --Apostrophe 05:51, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
I've always felt that each entry should have a short list of "notable cards" with notable cards being defined as the character's signature card and/or a card that contributed to the advancement of a storyline, i.e. Yugi's Dark Magician, Dark Magician Girl, Buster Blader, Exodia, Kuriboh and the Egyptian God Cards. Every time I turn around, it seems that there is a new article on a low-level card, i.e. Saggi the Dark Clown, and I am hesitant to remove it because there seems to be no clear-cut and definitive answer on what to keep and what to remove. - DrachenFyre 17:00, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
I would prefer this, actually. Explaining every card in their decks would be a longwinded nightmare. I know little about Yu-Gi-Oh!, but I'd be glad to help with the trimming if I can. --Apostrophe 23:35, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
I really wouldn't care either way, I guess, though I'm the one who helped put most of the card lists together (most of them were half-done so I figured I'd do some research and finish them off). I definitely agree with DrachenFyre that I hate seeing actual pages being made of random cards I've never even heard of and stuff. Still, there are lots of pages worse than the YGO ones. If you really want to see an excess of pages, check out the Wiki stuff on Lord of the Rings. Geg 23:01, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Then let us take a stand and differ from the LotR entries. Whilst I know that Wikipedia isn't a "paper" encyclopedia (as has been pointed out to me before), I still think that listing ALL major cards that the main characters have used is, ultimately, pointless and just clutters the article. Who's with me? Hmm? :-) - The Dragonmaster 23:23, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

If you wanted a fansite, theres a proper Yu-Gi-Oh! wikia. --144.137.60.44 08:47, 13 May 2006 (UTC) (Yami_Michael)

Couldn't you just put a card list on a seperate page (with a more specific title like "Yu-Gi-Oh! Card Lists")? The biggest problem there would be finding the time and energy to make it. I made one once, but it took me months of watching eBay for specific card numbers. I used it often when it was done, but then my computer got wiped out by a virus and it never occured to me to back them up. There are people out there who would use (and likely bookmark) such a page... just a thought. Smokeresearcher 17:27, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I have to agree. A card list article would serve better than a section in the main article. Also, if there are any notable cards, they should have a seperate page from the card list, rather than try to explain each and every card's stats and effects. There ARE articles that are mostly lists, and the ones for Yu-Gi-Oh! are getting B-Class ranking because of this. A central list would be more effective, possibly divided into "Real Cards," "Anime Exclusive," and "GX Exclusive." Dracokanji 12:48, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Trying to explain all the cards would take up sevral megabytes of information and several months of one person's free time (on his/her own). If you tried to create seperate links explaining every card that need explanation, they would likely overlap a bunch of other non-Yu-Gi-Oh related topics. The list itself would be bigger than the entire article though, so putting the list in a seperate articleis unquestionable. Based on that Animé tag, I'm sure Wikipedia wouldn't really mind the space. Obviously it would be a great asset to Wikipedia (think of all the people who would come just to look up a card they didn't know on the list. Hardly anyone knows all the cards in the game). It would just be really hard to find someone with all the time to make the list. There is a site, called pojo, that lists a few cards (something over 1,000) that might be a good place to start, but their lists aren't complete (even the ones on the left-side colomn) and I believe putting links to their type of site is against Wikipedia's policy because they advertise a lot. I'm playing a game of college-catch-up and am a little pressed for time, but maybe I'll try to start it sometime. Could anyone anyone with some free time help me wit this unenviable task? I think the article should be named List of Yu-Gi-Oh Cards (use this link to get started), but if someone disagrees, please speak up. --Smokeresearcher 23:11, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Redirect from Amane

I was trying to get information about that new image server's namesake, and I found out that Amane redirects here. Why?

Because "Amane" in a Yu-Gi-Oh! context is Amane Bakura, Ryo Bakura's sister. WhisperToMe 23:34, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Something to Consider

Is it possible that this Yu-Gi-Oh character is a Mormon? The reason I ask this because there are possible resemblemce between these Egyption cards and Joseph Smith's "Reading Stones".

Just a thought...

69.248.43.27 05:50 24 December 2005

Oh no. The character is most likely Shinto and Buddhist. Almost all Japanese people are Shinto and Buddhist. WhisperToMe 17:05, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Wrong again. Those "Reading Stones" you're referring to are the Urum & Thummim. Also, which character are you referring to? Religion is usually never brought up in cartoons. 71.111.215.224 23:20, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Have to agree with 71.111.215.224 on this one. In my back-breaking Yuugiou research there is absolutely no allusion to Yuugi Mutoh's religion at all in the series. His only belief is in the power of his own cards and that of Atemu that lied within the Sennen Puzzle. As for Atemu, as he was at one point an Egyptian pharaoh, he probably believed in the gods of Egypt. -JD of Yuugiou Uncensored 192.168.1.21 11:15, 13 May 2006

But that doesn't mean that Yug is an athiest. 71.111.232.40 22:43, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

It really was never revealed in either version. In the dub, he believes in the power of his cards. In the Japanese version, he believes in the bond between him and "mo hitori no boku", the other him, or Atemu. Therefore, we can't just assume he was any religion at all. Remember, real-world rules don't apply. They use freaking realistic holograms and duel disks. John D'Adamo 16:41, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Why is the page in japanese?!?!

WHY IS THE PAGE IN JAPANESE?!?!?!?!

Ok Bobaboba why did you change this page into Japanese?

--Number7 00:48, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Err, there's way too many YGO related pages that are probably non-notable

We're accumulating way too many pages about various cards, most of them not notable, and basically crud in general. I propose massive deletions/redirects to trim this down.--Frenchman113 20:04, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Long Page

This page is becoming very long. Will somebody please put a message on the site saying that, or fix it yourself by putting some information on "sub-sites"?

Nate 12:09, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean? We ignore the 32 KB limit now. WhisperToMe 00:59, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Protection?

There seems to be a very large amount of vandalism on the page recently. (maybe due to extra promotions from KidsWB that the series is ending?) In any case, I am proposing to at least temporarily protect the page. Personally I would have hoped more non-registered members would have been able to make edits, but it's getting pretty bad. Any input on this? ZyphBear 04:27, 27 May 2006 (UTC)


wasn't this locked before from anonymous posters? could it be locked again?? although I don't know why the page is such a target to people with too much time on their hands (and apparently such little minds). I apologize to any anonymous poster who honestly wants to add DECENT input, but considering Wiki doesn't require blood oaths or maiden names or anything else, I don't see why people don't join/get an username if they have something to add. Bekkie 10:03, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Valon (Yu-Gi-Oh!)

Would someone please take a look at the Valon (Yu-Gi-Oh!) article? It could use a lot of cleaning up. I'm not an expert on Yu-Gi-Oh! so if someone else could take a look at it, I'd much appreciate it. Thanks, Metros232 23:52, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I redirected it to the Valon article. WhisperToMe 01:33, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Yami no Game/Shadow Game

  • This question regards the anime, in particular the Toei version in comparison to the Duel Monsters series. In the former, Yami Yugi knows what a Shadow Game is from the get-go; in the latter, he learns what one is from Pegasus (seemingly; I haven't been able to see the Japanese version). Which one is true in the manga? Danny Lilithborne 23:51, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
  • The first is true in the manga. In fact, the very first thing he does in the manga is draw someone into a Shadow Game. WhisperToMe 00:47, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

What's realy Oricalcos

Oricalcos is metal with golden shine. It is belived that it was used in city Atlantis, on buildings and as armors an weapons. The first aperance of Oricalcos is on paintings in one of piramids that show's Egyptans fighting strange warriors which are belived to come from Atlantis. As no such metal is found it could also be Bronze or even Titanium as both have golden shine.

In some fantasy stories Oricalcos has devine powers and/or can be enchanted only with "good" energies.

Project Yu-Gi-Oh! (maybe?)

The way the Yu-Gi-Oh articles are written and set up on Wikipedia needs a lot of reorganization and revision. Too many individual pages for minor charactors and an excess of card pages (this has been resolved recently) have alienated non-Yu-Gi-Oh! fans, and this should be rectified. While Wikipedia is not indescriminatory, it is supposed to be informative to those who are infamiliar. Some of the pages are esoteric and I think an effort should be put forth to re-establish the information presented on Wikipedia.

External Links

English

Official sites

Game Archive and Review sites

Information sites

Fan sites

  • Janime - Yu-Gi-Oh! Anime/Manga World - up-to-date information on Yu-Gi-Oh! (except the card game), manga scans in English and Japanese, screenshots, various movie clips and song clips, anime and manga episode summaries, character's deck lists, etc.
  • Yu-Jyo - A Yu-Gi-Oh! Episode Guide - features TV episode synopsis, with a focus on the differences between the American and Japanese versions. <- On the relevant anime pages.
  • Yu-Gi-Oh! Uncensored - Details the differences between the English and Japanese versions of Yu-Gi-Oh anime, trading card game, and the video games.
  • Pojo Yu-Gi-Oh! page - Pojo's Yu-Gi-Oh! page. <- I don't get the point of this. Pojo's isn't really a fan site as it is a commercial endeavor, either.
  • DMComet - A Yu-Gi-Oh! OCG fan site with cards news and reviews. <- On the trading cards page.
  • Final Yu-Gi-Oh! - A complete French Yu-Gi-Oh! fan site providing news and a card database. <- I believe this site violates copyrights (taking translations from DMComet), and should thus be removed.
  • Yu-Gi-Oh Revolution - Episode Guide, gallery, card lists, useful links, etc. <- The description makes it sound like it was put here as spam.

Japanese

Multi-language


Tagged for linkfarm per WP:NOT#LINK and WP:EL. From Links to be considered in WP:EL:

3. Long lists of links are not appropriate: Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links. If you find a long list of links in an article, you can tag the "External links" section with the {{linkfarm}} template. Where editors have not reached consensus on an appropriate list of links, a link to a well chosen web directory category could be used until such consensus can be reached. The Open Directory Project is often a neutral candidate, and may be added using the {{dmoz}} template.

Here are some dmoz categories:

Aeons | Talk 07:08, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Character Picture

I highly doubt that the picture of the characters of Joey, Tristan, and Tea should be a picture of 3 Japanese people. One man nude while getting a hand job from a woman and another woman watching. I don't have a picture of Joey, Tristan, and Tea and I doubt that I can find one that is under the license that Wikipedia likes. Chungster 19:29, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion?

Why is this article under speedy deletion? Is it vandalism that should be rv'ed, or is it actually a proposal? -- Efitu (Tlk Unc) 18:22, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Vandalism, already RV'ed. JuJube 18:26, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Rare YU-GI-OH cards

How can you tell if a YU-Gi-OH card is rare? Is it whether or not it is shiny?--Daniel Omy talk. 15:37, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Common- Not holographic, regular picture, black wording. Rare- Not holographic, regular picture, name of the card is silver Super Rare- Holographic picture, regular wording Ultra Rare- Picture is even more holographic than S.R., gold name wording Ultimate Rare- Name gold, picture/atribute/stars holographic, and is so holographic it has texture Secret Rare- Different shade of silver wording, holographic picture Parallel Rare- The whole card feels different, as if it were laminated, everything else looks like S.R. Does that help? Codelyoko193 15:19, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Complete Card List

Hey, could anybody make an article with a complete list of Yu-Gi-Oh! cards and their descriptions? This would include type, Attribute, ATK, and DEF for the monsters, as well as their effects. Well, actually, putting all of the Yu-Gi-Oh! cards and their effects into one complete list would be a bit much to contain in one article, so perhaps it would be easier to do it by expansion pack. Actually, I think that's a great idea! Could somebody please implement it for me? Thanks! --Luigifan 12:13, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I doubt it would fit. There are way too many cards. Here's a site I've been using for card info: http://netrep.net/registry.php. Maybe a link? --Heavyccasey 06:30, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

crtitcism

There should be a crtitcism article —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sonicrules2 (talk • contribs) 01:22, 11 May 2007 (UTC).

Yuugiou (yu-gi-oh), CardCaptor Sakura, &Sailor Moon deserve a place on the list of top 50 worst dubbs ever made; covering up taboo relationships, changed names, ill-fitting voice actors, missing episodes, cut scenes, targeted at wrong audience age & or gender, gender changing due to homosexual interests, highly innacurate translations, & replaced music. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.161.122.193 (talk) 03:53, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

  • Tell me about it... don't forget One Piece. Jump Guru (talk) 21:14, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

yu-gi-oh the abridged series

is this page going to mention yu-gi-oh the abridged series? its one of the most popular videos on you tube ♥Eternal Pink-Ready to fight for love and grace♥ 16:17, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I think it should as well. In fact I was surprised it was not mentioned already after skimming the article briefly. It might even merit its own page, but for now a brief mention should definitely be in order. The Raven is God 02:37, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Actually, if I recall, it DID have it's own page. Not sure what happened to it actauly. Mendinso 17:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
It wasn't notable - It was deleted. Do not mention that here - It's a non-notable fan work. WhisperToMe 17:26, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Surely if stuff on it could be referenced in accordance with the criteria then it would be notable. EvilRedEye 17:32, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

No, because it is not notable. Read WP:Notable WhisperToMe 20:09, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

How about in a section titled "Parodies" or something like that? --Heavyccasey 06:28, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

This page in a nutshell: A topic is presumed to be notable if it has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. - from WP:Notable. Really don't get your point. I mean I don't know if this type of coverage exists, but its possible that it does given the popularity of the videos. I don't see how you can make a sweeping statement that it's not notable. EvilRedEye 17:15, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

On the mentioning it side: There are entire sites based around Yugioh the Abridged Series, and many sites around the world have many of its members fans of the series. It has become very popular among the older (teenage) generation, and it is watched internationally. Among the teenage generation, if you compare the fans of the series to the fans of the abridged series, than the abridged series far outranks that of the original series. It has recieved more notability today than the actual original series, and even more people watch it than some of the actual anime series that have articles. It has also quickly become one of Youtube's most popular videos.
On the not mentioning side: It is entirely fan-work and has no notability for the actual series.
They're both very good points, but just look up any of his videos on youtube or Dailymotion and see how many views there have been. One episode alone on Youtube has over 770,000 views, and together all of the videos are in the millions. It is actually very notable. And I'm not really sure it should be called fanwork, especially if all he's doing is insulting yugioh and 4KIDS over and over. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares 15:11 (Eastern standard time), June 23 2007.

That's not enough, guys. Most people believe that fan works based on fictional properties are not suitable inclusion material for encyclopedias. WhisperToMe 20:45, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

"Not unless the fan-work has proven itself to be notable, which several AFDs and DRV have proven that it is not. --Farix (Talk) 20:52, 23 June 2007 (UTC) "

In other words, we (the Wikipedians) do not feel that it is suitable for this encyclopedia. WhisperToMe 20:54, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Like they've said, it doesn't warrant anything for itself at the moment. Maybe if it grows to the point that it starts appearing on TV or something, but right now it doesn't fit in with wiki's notability guidelines. The Splendiferous Gegiford 21:00, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

this video is just not encyclopedic (for this page), if some article specificaly about Yu-Gi-Oh! Trivia, cultural references, spinoffs, whatever; maybe this youtube info could be added; but such article might not be notable enough for inclusion on this wiki --Andersmusician $ 00:26, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
In most cases, Youtube is not considered to be an appropriate external link. See WP:EL. WhisperToMe 01:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Does it warrant a mention on the youtube article for its popularity?

No. WhisperToMe 02:49, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
hes accont has been subspended so now it might never get worthy of a mentiond on this page ♥Fighting for charming Love♥ 11:04, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Doesn't really have anything to do with YouTube - just need a few decent secondary sources. I've been thinking of searching Lexus-Nexus to see if there's been any mention of it in newspaper articles or something... need to get round to it. EvilRedEye 15:17, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
I've checked - didn't find anything... slightly disappointed, I've read articles about Internet videos in the paper before, thought something might come up. Much as I'd like to include it I simply can't find any reputable sources. Ho hum, doesn't look like it's notable for now. Maybe in the future... EvilRedEye 15:35, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

eh? i deleted the mention of abriged series, is that good Sir de wario 20:37, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Yes! it is GOOD it is a fan work, and please note if you are under the age of 13 I would suggest finding a different website. Maybe this will speak to you and your parents: enjo kosai and condoms. Jump Guru 19:54, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

It is huge... I mean, if Loituma girl has a mention, then Yu Gi Oh abridged should... It even spawned other abridged shows... It may be a fan work, but it's so well established in popularity that it deserves a mention. It's absolutely absurd that it doesn't have a mention.WhateverTS (talk) 05:29, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Whine and whine, it's disgusting. It's simple - no notable outside sources have talked about it so it doesn't get mentioned. Simple as that. JuJube (talk) 06:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Yugiohtoeilogo.gif

Image:Yugiohtoeilogo.gif 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 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 11:42, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Yugiohjplogo.jpg

Image:Yugiohjplogo.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 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 11:42, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I have just added a rationale --Andersmusician VOTE 22:34, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Please clarify...

Are there any difference between the cards used in collecting, and in tournamnets? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.69.208.57 (talk • contribs)

No, they're just the same cards u might buy in a store. MysteryMan (talk) 18:21, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

What's with all the Japanese names?

From WP:Use English:

If you are talking about a person, country, town, film, book, or video game, use the most commonly used English version of the name for the article.

Unless the article pertains only to the Japanese version and not the dub (such as YGO! R or "Season 0" of the anime) the English names should be used. This is the English wiki after all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SubStandardDeviation (talk • contribs) 02:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

The American and English Yu-Gi-Oh! manga use the Japanese names for all characters except Pegasus, as far as I know. (They have ペガサス・J・クロフォード(Pegasus J. Crawford) with Maximillion J. Pegasus as a reading.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Akata (talk • contribs) 09:39, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't there be a parody section?

I mean, so there's so many. You-Gotta-Go cards in All Grown Up? And Stu-Pi-Doh from Hi Hi Puffy AmiYumi? I don't know, please confirm. ^_^ Thanks (Irish Plusle 17:23, 22 September 2007 (UTC))

  • 1 = Yu-Gi-Oh! is a world wide fenomenon you can't put every specket of pop-culture (related to Yu-Gi-Oh!) on wikipedia. 2 = The only reason they make fun of it so much is because 4Kids Entertainment did the acting for it and pretty much butchered the whole show inside out! Many people don't realize what real anime is because of 4Kids Entertainment. If you watch the 4Kids Entertainment stuff why don't you turn over to non-butcherized stuff like Gantz. Jump Guru 15:56, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
It's more the fact that this show treats a children's card game as serious business. 4Kids is a minor note in comparison. --Sonic Mew (talk) 21:49, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

NO, they make fun of it because it's about adults playing a children's card game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.34.71.97 (talk) 15:04, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Whatever the reason it should not be discussed on Wikipedia, this isn't a forum. A parody is a parody regardless of why it was created. Eatspie (talk) 01:40, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

about the games

-Yu-Gi-Oh! Duel Monsters 5 Expert 1 - isn't listed as a japanese only game (see below) -Yu-Gi-Oh! Duel Monsters 6 Expert 2 - is the game that was cloned many times (see below)

-The Eternal Duelist Soul - is a update/localization of Yugioh DM5 EX1: the duel selection screen (where you select wich opponent you want to face), the record screen and calendar screen where the only things not "updated" and they were only "localized", but the "duel screen" was replaced with the DM6 EX2 or DM International, but with the original DM6 EX2 speed, unless you press L button, before the duel "Starts" (when you select wich rock, paper or scissors), you can play with the fast speed that is used in DM International, and the graphics of the duel screen, etc. were also changed to be the same as DM6 EX2 or DM International... the intro was removed, the menu was remade and the deck edit was updated/localized to DM6 EX2 or DM International

another thing to mention is that there is no D-Tactics (Duel Tactics), amd some music or all the music was replaced with the DM6 EX2 or DM International (i'm not quite sure if it's only the duel music)

I really can't decide what version they used to update DM5 EX1, but probably it was DM6 EX2

-Yu-Gi-Oh! Duel Monsters International Worldwide Edition - this game is the "Japanese version" of Yu-Gi-Oh! Worldwide Edition Stairaway to the Destined Duel, both are the same except that the japanese starts in japanese language and the american starts in english language, but at anytime you can change from six languages, the european version asks you what language you wish at the start

but they all have (even Japanese version) Censored graphics for the cards (Monster Reborn not being an Ankh and insted being a rare symbol)

but these games are some sort of update/localization of DM6 EX2, the things that were changed were the cost of inputting a password card was changed to 0, the starting cards were more like Yugi, but they changed it so if you choose the "black starter pack" you get either all five exodia or powerful cards as Jinzo and Slate Warrior... and the cost of unlocking the booster packs was not that higher

differences in both games: the boosters you get wen you win a fight, they were changed to pictures of cards, instead of real booster packs, unlike the Official Card Game (Ex: Volume 1 Changed to a Picture of Dark Magician), and also they put cards not obtainable in those packs like the BEWD

and the cards in the DM5 EX1 & DM6 EX2 were numbered, but they're still ordered as if they have the numbers on them


i like to point some errors, like this sentence from WCT 2004:

"Changes from Eternal Duelist Soul

This game has many obvious similarities to The Eternal Duelist Soul. The duel system is almost exactly the same, but there are a few differences."

where WWE is the predeccesor of WCT2004

in DM EX3 (NOT DM 9) the real booster packs where replaced with international ones nooo, and added more card to the packs, also the first boosters when you win a duel are from the second generation but with booster pack graphic changed, and cards included changed, there is no calendar, (in DM6EX2, INT, WWE, where hidden) and the most annoying thing is that even the japanese version has censored cards... noooo

the only relation between EDS and WTC 2004 is the game mechanics, were you fight duelists many times before other duelists appear

there must be a list of yugioh games page, because the list is huge,

and it would be cool to see more yugioh videogames pages, especially for The Eternal Duelist Soul


I hope this information helps 189.129.104.225 21:01, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Episode list

I think the title explains it all. Wheres the episode lists? Uzumaki Dude 00:29, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Too many character articles!

Every other series has been getting a "Characters in blah blah Series" article, why is this one different? Can someone please start merging them all to one big article? There's no way all of those are notable. Also, please do the same to the Yugioh GX article. Some of those character pages are longer then the page for the show itself! I would do it but I have no idea what Yu-Gi-Oh is about...Knowitall (talk) 17:17, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Yu-gi-oh abridged series

Should yu-gi-oh abridged series be mentioned somewhere or have an article about it. I mean it is very prominent, no to mention funny. Ahmeri18 (talk) 18:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

please provide reliable sources for the AbridgedSeries(again), not YouTube, thanks --Andersmusician VOTE 03:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
It's not relevant IT WAS A FAN WORK! That's just like if you made fan art of Yu-Gi-Oh! some person has to create a article about it! I'm sorry but if we make a part about the ambridged series (which is inofficial) then we would have to make a part for every fan work in existance. Jump Guru (talk) 00:16, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
It's not though. There would be no sources about that piece of fan art. If there were it might be worthy of inclusion. There aren't any reliable sources on the Abridged Series, despite it's popularity, thus the reason it isn't mentioned in the article. EvilRedEye (talk) 20:49, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Something I noticed

Ummm.... there is no reception section for the entire series. Seriously, am I the only one who noticed this? Yugioh may be important, but at this rate the article could get deleted if no out-of-universe info is included, and I'm sure none of you want that. I highly request a reception section be included here for the entire series. Whether or not you include the Abridged Series or not isn't my concern, but seriously, I'm sure you could find lots to put here about its reception other than a single critic. Artist Formerly Known As Whocares (talk) 01:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

  • There is for the second series anime - I posted a review by Common Sense Media. WhisperToMe (talk) 02:08, 27 January 2008 (UTC)


Yu-Gi-Oh! Characters Guide Book - The Gospel of Truth

Does anyone have an actual copy of Yu-Gi-Oh! Characters Guide Book - The Gospel of Truth (遊戯王キャラクターズガイドブック―真理の福音―)? - It would be useful to use it at least until VIZ releases it in English (if it does) WhisperToMe (talk) 02:08, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

OTHER YUGIOH ARCHFIENDS LIST These cards are included as archfiends even thou it does not say it in they names: -Shadow Tamer -Axe of Despair -Summoned SkulL -Lesser Fiend

In what medium did Yu-Gi-Oh! start?

Did Yu-Gi-Oh! first appear in Japanese manga (as opposed to anime, or a card game, or something else)? The article needs to clearly state where the franchise debuted. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 17:37, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

  • The manga first, the manga always comes first. Yugio was first in the magazine Weekly Shonen Jump later a anime and a card game. Yugio Duel Monsters GX (A.K.A. Yu-Gi-Oh! GX) on the other hand started as a anime and later a manga in the video game magazine V Jump. Both of the shonen series' anime were taken by the company 4Kids and made into crappy little kid shows; as well a shame it is.... they also tried to do series such as One Piece, Kinnikuman II Sei, and Shaman King. All the series were tragically and gruesomly destroyed. It is still unkown why thay took Kinnikuman II Sei (which is an adult series) and tried to make it into a kid series. Jump Guru (talk) 21:57, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
    • The manga doesn't necessarily come first, RahXephon being one example where the manga was adapted from the anime. EvilRedEye (talk) 13:50, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
    • Yeah, another exception is Weiss Kreuz. But these exceptions are very rare. I think most of the ideas start as a one-shot manga. It is cheap, and if it is popular, they make a series from it. Even the Death Note and Naruto started like this. 81.183.126.183 (talk) (aka DJS) —Preceding comment was added at 01:06, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Manga chapters

Should there be a page for the chapters of Yu-Gi-Oh! manga, similar to One Piece, Naruto, BLEACH, etc...? I'd like to make a page for it, although I don't have every volume from VIZ right now (I am still collecting however).Conanfan1412 (talk) 22:19, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Agreed, YGO needs a chapter listing page. I don't have all the volumes either though... still collecting. So far I have volumes 1, 2, 3, 4, 10, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, and 23 of Yu-Gi-Oh! Duelist, and volume 1 of Yu-Gi-Oh! GX, plus access to all of Yu-Gi-Oh! and Yu-Gi-Oh! Millennium World from my local library. I don't suppose anyone has the rest of Duelist, or at least a list of the official English chapter titles? Precis-chan (talk) 05:59, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes, a chapter listing would be good. A basic one can be done without having the volumes, and its something I can create relatively quickly. It would be good if someone (or several someones) can state up front if they'd be willing to add in the chapter names and proper volume summaries (100-300 words each)? -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 12:02, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I can do names and summaries for the volumes I listed above, and also for the Pyramid of Light ani-manga. Precis-chan (talk) 04:31, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I have an old sanbox of the chapters here. Feel free to use it.Tintor2 (talk) 14:33, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Trivia section

Would you be so kind as to paste the following text to the end of the article, if it suits? 81.183.126.183 (talk) (aka DJS)

Trivia

The term Yu-Gi-Oh does not refer to the protagonist, it is a quip. (Quips are pretty popular among mangas.)

Recreate

I've been a fan of this series ever since it was it was first serialized in Weekly Jump. This article has been dumping ground for all you "4Kids fans". I am planning to merge the first and second series anime to this article, they should not be seperated from their manga orgin. There should be no Trivia sections (See WP:TRIVIA). – J U M P G U R U @Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 20:59, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Support. The fact that there are several articles of the series seriously violates the manual of style. If the 3 Dragon Ball series can be merged seeing their length, why not Yugioh?Tintor2 (talk) 21:04, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm glad you wanna help. : ) We shouldn't violate the MOS, as far as i'm concerned, the whole article needs to be redone. – J U M P G U R U @Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 21:10, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
You mean the yugioh series that classed as series 0? if so Support there basically the same just the animation changed in the one that everyone knows today :)--Andrewcrawford (talk) 22:00, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
I would be against merging the anime articles as they are different series made by different production companies with different storylines, and other than being based from the same manga, they have nothing in common. I would suggest they be renamed "Yu-Gi-Oh! (anime)" and "Yu-Gi-Oh! Duel Monsters (anime)", though. JuJube (talk) 22:30, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Hmm, so Dragon Ball Z did get merged. I would have been against that, too, but precedent has been set, I suppose. JuJube (talk) 22:31, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Dont think any precident for dragonball would apply here since they tell the story of the same characters while some fo the yugioh series have storylines only loosely connected to characters in the original. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.111.105.31 (talk) 03:39, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
Support. I'd have already tagged it awhile back, but just didn't want to deal with another one while all the DB stuff was going on. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 22:52, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Might be a good idea to merge yu-gi-oh capsule monsters too--Andrewcrawford (talk) 07:38, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I want make this clear, and please read: I did not say to merge Yu-Gi-Oh! GX, Yu-Gi-Oh! R, or 5D's. I'm talking about the first and second series anime. I'll just get right down to the point.....THIS ARTICLE IS A COMPLETE TRAINWRECK, AND WE ARE GOING TO BASICALLY RECREATE THE WHOLE THING. – J U M P G U R U @Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 18:52, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Support :) What about capsule monsters it is basically 12 episode that where made exclusive for america after series 5?Andrewcrawford (talk) 19:27, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Haha, 12 episodes, you're right, that should definatly be merged. – J U M P G U R U @Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 19:29, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Abridged

We should probably focus on fixing and clearing up the article on Yugioh first, before dealing with the Abridged series. In comparison to the real Yugioh, it just doesn't seem to fit, although a separate small paragraph about it would be great.

For now, though, can we just focus on dealing with the actual article? It is extremely unclear and is a pain to read. There should definitely be some mention about the other sections of the original Yugioh, such as the oricalcos season, the battle city season, and whatnot. Also, I take offense to that one comment about Yugioh only being interesting because of the abridged series. There are many fans out there who like either the characters/plot, the game, or both. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.44.162.110 (talk) 04:55, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

  • We don't deal with the Abridged series at all until reliable sources cover it. See Wikipedia:V WhisperToMe (talk) 23:40, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
    • This is already being discussed below, this doesn't need two discussion places back to back. Sides its been in the article for months now and is already cited way before your comment. ~David Craft (talk) 02:04, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

The Abridged Series

Surly somebody here watches YuGiOh the abridged series, but I don't think it's ever mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.34.71.97 (talk) 14:56, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

  • It's not notable. We have said that 1,000 times. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:36, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I AGREE! Actually, if you look up Dan Green, there is a small excerpt that says "I can do anything because I am voiced by Dan Green!" I laughed so hard at that... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.17.118.89 (talk) 22:04, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
    • Oh my gosh........ IT'S NOT NOTABLE!!!! Jump Guru (talk) 21:10, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
      • There are 13 freaking pages of links on Google for this... It's not just youtube or the official sites... There are numerous fanlistings and showings at conventions and all sorts of stuff... If YGOA isn't notable, then neither is Numa Numa or half the other crap on wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.118.164.55 (talk) 23:37, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
      • Mashups usually aren't notable, but I think this one is purely by virtue of having a huge viewership. It probably even deserves it's own article given the legal issues - though I have no idea where to start. Bananabananabanana (talk) 23:47, 14 July 2008 (UTC)


I seen Yugioh Abridged in a few trivias, such as the Dancing Banana, so if it's refrenced on wikipedia, shoudn't we make an article about it--76.89.21.167 (talk) 01:02, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

No. At best, if it is referenceable it will be mentioned here. It doesn't need a separate article. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 01:26, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Can I ask why this isn't notable, yet things like 8-Bit Theater are? --81.156.26.22 (talk) 05:45, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

It has not received significant coverage in a number of reliable sources. Its a fan made parody of questionable legality, not a legitimate aspect of the series. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 06:05, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Questionable legality? Rubbish, there is not illegality in it, the only suspicions of that came from youtube, and even they weren't asked to remove it and never gave a justifiable reason

So all it needs is to be mentioned by a few reliable sources? That's ok then. --81.156.26.22 (talk) 18:52, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
It needs "significant coverage" not a brief mention and they have to be actual reliable sources, not other fansites. If those are provided, then it could be mentioned somewhere in this article. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 19:00, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm gonna be blunt, I know no one who has any interest in Yu-Gi-Oh whatsover, other than the abridged series. 68.228.143.3 (talk) 15:41, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

And this matters in the discussion because? JuJube (talk) 17:46, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I think some people are confusing verifiability with notability, not that it makes any difference to the outcome of this discussion anyway. EvilRedEye (talk) 13:22, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Rather amusingly the latest episode of YGOA starts with Yami announcing "Yu-Gi-Oh! The Abridged Series; According to Wikipedia, we don't exist! " I'm rather surprised it doesn't have an article, or at least a mention, it is easily as popular as many of the rubbish internet things on this site. But perhaps I'm biased as a fan. Sabine's Sunbird talk 04:49, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

It's been said many many times why there is no Wikipedia article for TAS. The Cliffs Notes version: little to no verifiable outside sources write about it - some argue none but the few that do write about it are not enough to overcome the copyright violation issues. JuJube (talk) 05:54, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

What copyright issues? It's not like they're selling DVDs. It's just an internet thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.211.3.178 (talk) 20:59, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

It is still a copyright violation. They are illegally using copyrighted character images for their own purposes. Making a profit or selling some sort of physical item is irrelevant. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 00:45, 21 July 2008 (UTC)


Not necessarily, as the Abridged Series is a parody which uses 'some elements of a prior author's composition to create a new one that, at least in part, comments on that author's works' and so can be claimed under the fair use doctrine. 78.33.14.133 (talk) 09:43, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
Exactly. It falls under the parody exemption of fair use. It isn't illegal. Now, whether it is notable is another question. It'd be nice if WikiMedia would partner with Google and make us a Reliable Sources search engine. — trlkly 22:03, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes the notabilty of a subject is still as contested as ever. The more we state that it doesn't fulfill notability criteria, the more arguements arise. I'll admit I'm a fan of the work, but as for its impact, it is still not something that should sit along side an article like this on Wikipedia. 78.33.14.133 (talk) 10:54, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Section break 1

I beg to differ about it "not being notable." Yu-Gi-Oh: The Abridged Series has spawned many other "abridged series" parodies such as Naruto: The Abridged Series, Yu Yu Hakusho: The Abridged Series, and Avatar: The Abridged Series. These series all have a devoted following, and if you tally up the view count it goes into the millions. Millions of viewers for just the series' combined, and tens-of-millions of viewers (if not a hundred-million) of views if you add up all the episodes.

Moreover, Yu-Gi-Oh: Abridged is the source of many popular jokes and phrases, such as "Screw the rules, I have money!," "Super Special Awesome," and "Mind-Crush!" Also many abridged fans are to be found at many Comic-Cons, such as the 2008 one in San Diego.

More importantly, however, is the matter of the fan-made parody. Yu-Gi-Oh: The Abridged Series is the source for fan-made parodies on the internet (or at least it is the acknowledged source). Although the series is technically illegal, if you have an NPOV you will see that it has contributed something "notable" and worthy of some sort of mention. After all, there is an entire article on wikipedia dedicated to "Rick Rolling" (and it is a very good article too). I think that the fan-made parody is a new phenmonon that deserves mention.

This is wikipedia, and open encycolpedia. Knowledge is something universal, and we should not deny knowledge of something just because it is illegal. Rather we should accept it -- though it should be mentioned that it is illegal in the article.

One final note: If you feel that it should not be mentioned on the official Yu-Gi-Oh page, I think that perhaps we should at least create an "Abridged Series" page that can compile information and background on all of the notable abridged series (such as the ones mentioned above). The only problem with this (in both cases) is the citations. I don't know how you go about citing something like this, and if anyone could help to create this "Abridged Series" page, I would be very thankful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SamTheGreek (talk • contribs) 06:27, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

The Abridged Series also influenced the 4Kids dub of Yu-Gi-Oh! GX (Saiou mentioning that Kaiba hasn't aged in the last ten years, Sho talking about 'duel camp', and Manjoume claiming that he's "really good at playing card games, because that's what life is all about anyway!"). Lol, just thought I'd point that out. Precis-chan (talk) 07:13, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Original research. :/ JuJube (talk) 10:15, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
You really can't cite it. Honestly, I wouldn't be opposed if even a minor online paper did an article or something, but till then it's still unacceptable to mention it. JuJube (talk) 10:15, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Again, you may feel its notable, but no reliable sources have. Everything else stated is pure original research. We don't deny knowledge because its illegal (though we do deny links), but we also don't mention unnotable, unsourcable stuff. Its own existance is not a valid source for any of those claims. The Dragon Ball and Sailor Moon articles certainly don't mention a certain adult parody running around the net because, while it exists it is not notable. It just exists. Fanfic exists too but we don't talk about it or add tons of links to it because again, its unnnotable. Also, the Abridged Series had a page, it has been deleted multiple times and I strongly advise against recreating it again as it will be CSDed within 24 hours. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 13:21, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't think you fully understand what I am getting at. You said that we can't have pages dedicacted to fanfics, and I agree. However, wikipedia can have a page dedicated to fanfic -- as in the idea of fanfic. That is what I am getting at. (In fact, wikipedia DOES have an article on fanfic.)

The thing about this "abridged series" is that it is a parody show created by fans (in their own spare time and on their own budget) and viewed by fans (for free). Fans are now recycling material in order to entertain themselves. If you don't think that this is "noteworthy" enough to have its own page, then so be it. But don't you think they should at least mention it somewhere? Maybe as a small section on the YouTube page? Again, there is an article on Rick Rolling. Why not this? (That is, if it can be cited somehow. I understand the difficulty with that, and hopefully someone can come up with a solution.) SamTheGreek (talk) 15:47, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Rickrolling has over 40 references, that's why. This doesn't even have one reliable reference discussing it. Why would it be mentioned in the YouTube article, it isn't limited to the site and has nothing to do with it. Such parodies are already covered in the broad sense by the Parody article. Being made by the fans isn't even unique. Been done before. Its not a separate, new kind of parody, people have done it for decades. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 15:51, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
It's not so much the matter of notability but of sourcing. So far, there have been no reliable third-party sources that has covered the "Abridged Series". Simply because it exists isn't enough of a reason to mention it. "It's popular" isn't enough of a reason either. If there are no reliable sources covering it, we can't note it. --Farix (Talk) 17:10, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
     I agree that it deserves a sentence at least, showing how popular Yu Gi Oh is. GamerSam (talk) 07:32, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
No, Farix is right. No sources = Yu-Gi-Oh! Abridged does not exist in our eyes. Once reliable sources start talking about it, it exists. WhisperToMe (talk) 08:38, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Oh my gosh, this is like the fourth flippin' convorsation we've had about this. C'mon guys, this page is already sucky enough. — J U M P G U R U ■ask㋐㋜㋗■ 18:10, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

I know that this subject has been talked about a lot already, but what about the YGOA home page? Could that be used as a reference? I just thought it would be kinda cool if there was an abridged page on Wikipedia, since there's so many out there. (Both good and bad ones.) Chachi-chama (talk) 21:04, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Guys! Let's put this in perspective: I am a big fan of YTAS, but why on earth would you want an article on YTAS? What would you put in it? "It's a fan made parody made by LittleKuriboh. The End." There are THOUSANDS of videos on the internet that are parodies that do not have their own articles, there are just too many for each one to have it's own article. An abridged series is a parody, which would belong in the Parody Wiki Article (I'm not saying to go put it there). The Parody article already describes fan made parodies, but like I said, it can't name every parody ever.

HOWEVER, [3] the yugioh wikia has an impressive article on YTAS, so in my opinion, there shouldn't be a YTAS article on wikipedia. If you want to edit a YTAS article, then head on over to the link. But drop the discussion over here! 67.180.138.159 (talk) 06:48, 21 January 2009 (UTC)


71.193.165.73 (talk) 03:56, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I've always been amazed that Wikipedia has an article on my high school but not an article on Yugioh the Abridged Series. This is bad and all the jargon about, "verifiability" isn't going to excuse it. If there's interest as there OBIOUSLY is, then there should be a page on it. Wikipedia is a resource, and if people want to write an article on the abridged series that started it all they should certainly be able to.

Aside from the fact that it has had huge impact on not only the fanbase of yugioh (I know dozens of people who only watch the abridged series and despise yugioh) it has also had tremendous effect on the show itself. Season 3 of GX copies several YGOA jokes, from, "with great cards comes great responsibility" to characters bickering over screen time and episodes (yes, they know about episodes).

But aside from all this, Wikipedia used to have a FANTASTIC article about YGOA, but it was deleted. It went to in depth description of each episode and the characters' development. Can't we just bring that article back? People WILL read it and people WILL like it, I know I did. And all the fancy jargon in the world won't make that untrue.

YGOA deserves more than a footnote. It deserves an article.

But a footnote would be nice too.

71.193.165.73 (talk) 03:56, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Nobody cares if people would like it. It does not meet policy, and none of your whining will change that. JuJube (talk) 09:39, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Last time, I argued against putting in an article, but I still think I see a couple contradictions (not sure if that's the right word). One thing I just noticed: Jujube, you're an admin at the Yugioh wiki [4] , yet you seem to have no problem with their YTAS article (the one I linked to earlier). Why is that (hopefully you reply, even though you retired)? Also: Machinimas, such as Red vs Blue use the game Halo along with sound effects from Garageband, dub their voices over it, and sell it for money. This doesn't sound so different from YTAS. Why then, does Red vs Blue have an article? 69.181.132.135 (talk) 04:57, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

So, fictional alcohol deserves its own bloody article, but not an incredibly popular internet series? Really? Are you kidding me? If Homer SImpson's beer of choice has a fecking article, I should think that something people actually care about should have one, don't you agree?

While I'll be the first to say that YTAS is more notable than Duff Beer, that doesn't change the fact that wikipedia doesn't allow OR, which means that unless you can find a source (preferably more) which talk about YTAS, you can't create an article. Well, to put it differently, the question really isn't "Why doesn't wikipedia allow this?" The real question is, why aren't there any significant websites which talk about YTAS? 80.126.65.34 (talk) 05:14, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Here, reputable source talking about it: Starbulletin from Honolulu_Star-Bulletin which is apparently the "second largest daily newspaper in the state of Hawaii" according to its own wiki article. I am sure there are more out there. It IS a sensation and can't just be ignored. Also on 4Kids official youtube account, they themselves made a comment about the series saying "Yu-Gi-Oh! is still POPULAR but we'll take anyone's support - btw Yu-Gi-Oh! Abridged is great" so even they recognize it. ~David Craft (talk) 17:05, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Since it seems like you still don't understand what I mean - Everyone keeps saying "I am sure there are more sources out there" like you just did, and I'm sure you're right! But you have to actually LOOK for those sources and post them here, and then people have to agree that those sources are good. I haven't been involved in this argument for long, but it seems to me like not many people have bothered to actually cite any real good sources. 80.126.65.34 (talk) 20:12, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
>_> I did post a source, didn't you read? I have now included this source in the main article. If more sources are found it will potentially warrant an article of its own. ~David Craft (talk) 20:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
If it's any help, here's where 4Kids mentioned the Abridged Series on their Youtube channel (if the link doesn't immediately direct to the right page, the reference is on page 115 and repeated on pages 60 and 37 at the time of writing)
Unnoticeable?! Is someone paying or threatening you to keep removing the YGOA information?!... I don't like the YGO anime itself, I have never seen one entire episode to the end. But I've just seen this video of Abridged on Youtube and I found it hilarious! The first phrase of the video was the Wikipedia reference... Is it ethical to keep removing information that is noticeable and has a great interest to a large community? If it is a recent community, it has no past history to be called a reliable source, is that it? Oh sure! Millions of users have seen the videos, have commented them... They are all unreliable folks... And they all consent they have never seen such videos, because they don't exist! Oh!!! But if some unknown journalist from a little know firm makes a reference of it, sure it exists! And if some guy on some CNN interview mentions YGOA, I suppose we can call it the YGOA Bing-Bang?... Don't get ridiculous, I wouldn't call this censoring (the first thing I did when I reached the YGO page was to head to the discussions page to search for the abridged). Maybe I would call it a dumb jealousy... (11 June 2009) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.193.3.181 (talk) 23:13, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Its videos are ranked in the top 10 rated videos of ALL TIME on YouTube.. and Wikipedia still doesn't consider that notable? 99.12.180.8 (talk) 19:54, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

If we are going to keep the section then get rid of all the bullshit about LittleKuriboh himself. 2/3 of the section right now just talks about littlekuriboh and his wife, and doesn't need to be mentioned at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.203.240.182 (talk) 05:14, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Now I do have to agree with this. The abridged information belongs in this article but not general information about LittleKuriboh himself. That section currently sounds awkward and forced ATM and goes off on a tangent. If one day 'noteable' this could be in a separate article about LittleKuriboh but not here. ~David Craft (talk) 00:20, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Well if there is going to be pointless information on Littlekuriboh at least keep it up-to-date pointless information:

"LittleKuriboh voices all of the Abridged Series characters with the exception of Rebecca Hawkins and various other bit characters, who were voiced by his ex-wife Abigail ("Abi"), better known by her screen name Safty." --Ashiiiii (talk) 08:57, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Not being covered by a news organizations isn't necessarily reason to not include a detail of an article and fan pages are covered in a number of other articles on other topics. I don't think there are any major media outlets covering the Millennium Puzzle either, yet we have a whole article devoted to it. I think people are misapplying Wikipedia:Notability here. The page very clearly says;

"These notability guidelines only outline how suitable a topic is for its own article. They do not directly limit the content of articles." —— Digital Jedi Master (talk) 17:34, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Other stuff is not a valid claim. Articles like Millenium Puzzle have to be merged.Tintor2 (talk) 17:40, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Er, did you even read the essay you linked to? It's, again, referring to the creation/deletion of articles, not the details of articles (and it doesn't dismiss using other articles as a comparison outright, either). My original point stands. The criterion for new articles is not the same as the criterion for the content of articles, which is precisely what the article I linked to stated. You guys are arguing a policy that doesn't exist. —— Digital Jedi Master (talk) 04:40, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
You referred to the article of the puzzle which is otherstuff. By the episodes still have copyright infrigements.Tintor2 (talk) 12:14, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
I believe that parody is considered fair use under US law, actually. Correct me if I'm wrong. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 15:46, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Concerning the character pages...

Everything is messy, unstructured and uncited. Someone needs to pick up the manga, a databook, or watch the anime again so we can make a fully structured list which looks nice and clean. Since Takahasi has just refused to place any concept/creation information in any of the manga volumes, it safe to say none of the characters deserve an article. Whose with me on this? RedEyesMetal (talk) 18:21, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

That sounds about right for me. I think maybe Yugi Mutou could stand alone, for sheer reception info, but I'd agree its time to clean up the character list, and start merging in articles. I usually recommend starting with the minors and working up from there. For sourcing, I would note whoever tackles it, please remember {{cite book}} and {{cite episode}} for sourcing the manga/databooks and anime, respectively. Also, take a look at List of Naruto characters for an FL character list and inspiration. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 19:49, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I've already made my position clear on this. Yugi and Seto Kaiba clearly "deserve" articles. The Scoobies (Jounouchi, Honda and Anzu) should have them as well as the major villains of each story arc. Everything else I don't object to smerging. JuJube (talk) 23:21, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I think Shaggy (Joey or Jounouichi) could stand its own article. He has a big role in the series in comparison to the other scoobies and he appears in two cards of the games.Tintor2 (talk) 23:35, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
To respond, even Yugi can't get reception! Ya think that YGO, being one of the biggest, most populat tv series' in both Japan and USA would ahve some character reception....RedEyesMetal (talk) 12:42, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
I say only yugi, kaiba and joey should have character pages as they are the main one throughout the series, the rest should be in minor characters--Andrewcrawford (talk) 16:17, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Whether or not a character gets their own article is a matter of notability (aka significant third-party coverage of the subject); it has nothing to do with their importance within the series. The Seto Kaiba article doesn't cite any sources and is merely a giant plot summary, the other articles aren't any better. The only reason Yugi Mutou might remain as an independent article would be based on his sheer recognizablity. As is stands now, none of the independent characters articles meet the requirements of WP:Notability and unless some significant improvements to the articles are made, I would recommend keeping the character coverage on the character lists. --Kraftlos (talk) 07:52, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Request for comment on articles for individual television episodes and characters

A request for comments has been started that could affect the inclusion or exclusion of episode and character, as well as other fiction articles. Please visit the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(fiction)#Final_adoption_as_a_guideline. Ikip (talk) 10:59, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Little problem I'd fix if the page wasn't protected.

Jakala said that while the commercials for the second series anime made the anime appear "unexpectedly dark and moody," the comic "is unexpectedly dark and moody."

That ought to read 'anime appear "completely uninteresting"', as you can see by reading the review (reference 12). You shouldn't have to, though, it's pretty obvious he can't have said that.79.182.40.36 (talk) 14:10, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Images

  1. Can i switch the current manga cover for a better Japanese version without a "free poster inside" sticker?
  2. What's the point with the Yu-Gi-Oh! logo? What is its relevance for the article?

Thanks. --KrebMarkt 18:19, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Agree with both.Tintor2 (talk) 18:23, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Done with the cover image & dusted the FUR. Thanks, Tintor2 for updating chapter list caption. --KrebMarkt 19:05, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
No prob.Tintor2 (talk) 19:07, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Reference Links Issue

If you go to the reference list at the bottom of the page, the second reference reads as, "2 ^ Takahashi, Kazuki. Yu-Gi-Oh! Volume 1. VIZ Media. Fourth Printing. September 2004. 30, 107, 116, and 186." The link is named as Takahashi, Kazuki, but the actual link goes to the wikipedia article on cocaine. I'm not exactly knowledgeable about the man, but I figure that is a mistake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.169.6.82 (talk) 06:48, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. VMS Mosaic (talk) 08:26, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Gaydar

Can anyone help explain if the following is true or if there is anything about gaydar in this series?

  • In Yu-Gi-Oh The Abridged Series, Bakura's Millenium Ring is his "Gaydar," which his father gave him to protect him from gay people since he looks "so bloody effeminate".

It's been added a few times and it seems likely there are many inside jokes and camp humor. Thoughts? -- Banjeboi 02:25, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Not in the actual series, no. It actually points to other Millennium Items. But the ring IS a gaydar in the gag dub Yu-Gi-Oh! The Abridged Series.. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 02:31, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Possible image removal?

It's highly probable and I would suggest that other editors of this page examine that the photo depicting a bunch of dutch adults playing the yu-gi-oh trading card game is to poke fun at people who engage in this hobby. LaRouxEMP (talk) 11:56, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

What's being made fun of? I'm adult and I play the game. I'm a father and I play the game. There was once a website devoted to all the YugiDads out there who got into the game because of there kids and stayed in it when they're kids moved on. Have anyone take a picture of a Regional event, and more than half will be adults between the ages of 20 and 50. The idea that kids just play the game is just a stereotype. ——Digital Jedi Master (talk) 05:32, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Characters, characters and....characters?

Can I please ask WHY there are three character lists for the original YuGiOh series (not GX or 5Ds)? One list is even repeated twice with the third being nothing but bombarded with links. I was going to go and clean it up and start some rewrites and eventually merge these 3 lists together so it looks nice. I was wondering if anyone would like to help out? RedEyesMetal (talk) 20:50, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

On the subject of characters I briefly read over the first paragraph and noticed that someone messed around and put in Pokemon jokes. If someone has the original content, could it please be restored. There may have been other sections that were tampered with as well. Snowii (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:55, 26 October 2010 (UTC).

YGOTAS

Is it worth mentioning? RTY1998 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:34, 30 December 2009 (UTC).

It has been discussed various times that it's not.Tintor2 (talk) 18:40, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
When I did it it was properly sited and passed the notable prerequisite. People got carried away and started talking about other abridged information that definitely does not belong in this article, but a small one paragraph section is not 'off topic' and is 'notable'. 4-Kids themselves have acknowledged the series so Wikipedia should as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by David Craft (talk • contribs) 03:10, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Probably we can put it under "In Popular Culture" but aside from that, it is not worth mentioning. E Wing (talk) 00:30, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Regardless if it notable it illegal so the best mention it should get is the fact someone is making illegal version of it and calling it abridged but nothing more--Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 01:11, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
After seeing at least one episode on Youtube I conclude that the one who posted it committed copyright infringement against Konami and 4Kids Entertainment, particularly the act of reproducing the copyrighted work and making derivative works of it. Better someone contact these companies as well as Youtube about it. E Wing (talk) 04:09, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Try it. Do you honestly think something like this has escaped the notice of 4Kids? Look at their YouTube channel for starters. Then, you might want to try reasoning with the fact that this is already his second channel. Third, this sounds just like a bunch of anti-TAS people trying to stir up more trouble.
Bottom line, this is a discussion page for the article, not a discussion forum on whether TAS infringes copyright. You want to discuss that, go to a forum and do it. Ggctuk (talk) 18:21, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
The fact it is illegal means it should not have a complete section devoted to it liek some fans want, but only meanted it exist but is illegal so how is this not discussing it being added?--Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 09:40, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Unindent

The fact it is illegal means techically giving guidelines it should nto be meantioend, but sicne 4kids themself have accepted it thena brief meantion is all it should gt and stating it is illegal. I aint stiring up trouble i am just sayign it does not belong on the article and if oyu do not liek it that yourproblem as your the oen that needs ot read the guideliens for informaiton that hsould be included and this is nothing important and only deserver a small meantion--Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 19:19, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't having a go at you, Andrewcrawford. Derivative works can be considered illegal in a lot of cases. At the end of the day, it's up to the copyright holder, and I don't think 4Kids shall complain about the Abridged Series if the sales of Yu-Gi-Oh! merchandise increase because of it. Ggctuk (talk) 19:33, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Apogolise then, as the context of your message was saying people who say it illegal are not welcome to post a comment on whether it should be included but i misudnerstood so i apogoilse.--Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 19:41, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
That's okay. I was merely pointing out that discussion on reporting something viewed as illegal, or even saying "TAS rocks! Let's mention it just because of that!" should not be here, because, after all, this page is for discussing editorial changes to the article. Ggctuk (talk) 19:44, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
It's not like 4kids is winning something from the merchandise, the one winning from it is the abridged series creator.Tintor2 (talk) 18:10, 17 January 2010 (UTC)


It's not illegal you elitist pricks. Oh and Andrew, learn how to spell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.225.192.28 (talk) 02:59, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Firstly i am dsylexic so i cant spell. secondly it is illegeal it has not been licensed from toei it is done without permission so is illegal regardless what you think. thirdly this is a warning be a abusive again you will be left with a ip warning which might lead to ip ban--Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 10:58, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
One word: Parody. It's protected by law —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.45.177.122 (talk) 19:20, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Once again, I must point out that Wikipedia is not a discussion forum. Please, just stick to discussing editorial changes. Ggctuk (talk) 22:39, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Apart fromt eh ip user what is being a discussion forum? discussing thing to change to the article is what is getitng done discussing the reaosn for the changes is not making wikipedia a forum if wew where chatting about the content saying oh i like etc yes that makinga forum but discussing reaosn to include or not include is not--Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 09:39, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Two or three instances, actually, and arguing (not discussing its notability to the article, but arguing by saying "Yes it's illegal/No it's not, screw you" - like the unnamed user above did) about legality/illegality shouldn't really be here either. Personally, I think somebody (I might do it myself) should go through this section and edit out anything that has nothing to do with the article. Ggctuk (talk) 16:20, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough but the fact it is illegal means it does not deserve a section on it, it should only be meantioned and meantioned that it is in fact illegal the problem is there a lot of fans who believe it is legal and want it included in teh article when it not notable for the article under notabilty and realible sources--Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 17:27, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
No, it does not warrant a mention unless actual reliable sources give it real coverage. A single brief mention in an editorial from an anime club, as claimed in the now removed "section", is not enough to make it TRIVIAworth noting. The thing is not notable, period, hence its being deleted every single time keep trying to make an article with it. And yes, some "fans" believe it is "legal" but as they are making profit from it, I'd say it isn't. In either case, it doesn't meet WP:COPYRIGHT. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 01:25, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

"And yes, some "fans" believe it is "legal" but as they are making profit from it[citation Needed], I'd say it isn't." Nice. Now, why don't you show use some nice, little proof to support this statement? Also, take a look at this and this. --87.18.219.24 (talk) 10:21, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd love to see that evidence. Prove it. You cannot, because there is not one iota of evidence that states that LittleKuriboh makes profit from the TAS, because he doesn't. Ggctuk (talk) 22:25, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Not from TAS itself, no. But he does sell t-shirts and the like with quotes from TAS on the main abridged site, so he does make a profit off of that. That being said, I'd like to say that this discussion is not very productive, considering the actual YGO articles on Wikipedia are in absolutely horrid shape. Not that that says much about my not attempting to improve them either, but still. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 01:22, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
We're just clearing up some confusion here. Just because T-shirts have a phrase from the abridged series, as long as the t-shirt's don't have, say, a picture of Kaiba, he's perfectly entitled to make money from them. I agree that other articles should be cleaned up though. Ggctuk (talk) 19:17, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Said page is here. He does have pictures of some characters, but I don't he didn't rip them straight from the anime. Regardless, 4Kids themselves don't seem to have any problems with the series at all. Hell, some dialogue in their dub of YGO GX sounds like LittleKuriboh wrote it. In any case, I'd like to see some mention of TAS maintained on this page, but policy is policy, no matter how much me or anyone else disagrees with it. That being said, hopefully some other media sources will eventually mention TAS so that notability can be proven. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 22:13, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the legality of the material in question should not affect the notability of the material itself, or the qualifications of material for getting mentioned. Else, articles about other illegal materials (The Pirate Bay or Fangames for instance) should not exist. The reasoning behind "It's not legal so it's not notable" is absolutely laughable at best, disturbing at worst. Please don't use such nonsensical reasoning when determining the eligibility of material for a page. It just doesn't make sense. Furthermore, if you're going to claim that the legality of the material determines notability and requires a specific individual set of guidelines for said material, I am going to ask that you show me which Wikipedia guideline actually does state this. If you can't, then I really think you need to go over your reasoning again. ~Mecha DarkWarrior 03:03, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
The problem of what a user added to this article is not legality, it's that he used unreliable sources. Furthermore, when users created an article for TAS, they did not use any source.Tintor2 (talk) 13:21, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
My issue is more that the vast majority of this discussion seems to be that the eligibility of the material is in question not because of the sources, but because of the questionable legality, which I think is ludicrous. On the subject of sources, I do want to ask why The Mashable Web Awards and IMDB are not credible sources for notability? I would imagine that it's receiving at least some recognition from fairly well known sites (And IMDB is used frequently as a source for various pages and articles on Wikipedia) would account for notability. ~Mecha DarkWarrior 03:18, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
We had an Abridged section in here once before, but it was badly written. Mentioned a lot of things that had nothing to do with the fiction, like things about Martin Billany's personal life. I don't see anything wrong with adding the information as it's clearly a popular, regularly produced aspect of the mythos, though fan created. I don't know of a Wiki policy that says it shouldn't be added, as long as it's well written. —— Digital Jedi Master (talk) 09:51, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
I agree. Although the Abridged Series do not need to be mentioned detailed or even in a seperate section. So let's pretend the topic is illegal. Then assumed the policy in fact says it may not be mentioned within the article unless some other media rants about it (i would appreciate if someone could link to that policy since i can't find something like that, this section seems to talk about material used for the articles only, and other policies i found rather bring arguments for including the Abridged Series), we have to find something like this at first. But since a huge amount of people are aware of the series and various pages mention it, this does at least make it an internet phenomenon, so where's the problem about writing down a short note about it? And i don't even think that it's all that illegal afterall as it was stated multiple times as main reason above. If i got that right that the actual argument about it being illegal is not reasoned by copyright infringement but by the claim of making profit, yet i can hardly imagine that this is the case. As stated above, since the T-shirts which show quotes from the series do not contain any copyrighted images (only self-drawn similar ones), they can be sold without any harm. It's like you would try to sue someone that sells crowbars because he is playing a pirated version of Half-Life. (Sorry for the intricate syntax, hopefully my reasoning was comprehensible) — mode.ry talk 20:17, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Whether YGO:TAS is legal or not (and Konami seems to think so, since they've allowed the series to continue on YouTube for a couple of years now) is not realy relevant to whether it should be included in the article or not. Why would it be? It exists. Is a popular aspect of the Yu-Gi-Oh! culture. And even get's featured at major events. Legality is for the lawyers. Wikipedia is about information. As long as we're not the one's breaking the law, we have no reason not to talk about it. ——Digital Jedi Master (talk) 05:28, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Just to be sure, consensus is that abridged series aren't notable right? Because a couple of people are trying to add the YGOTAS voice actors to the character pages. Geg (talk) 01:29, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Removed the info as it did not any WP:Reliable source to back it up. I remember that the discussion about notability was when users wanted to give it an article but now they are adding info to this article. Being legal or not is not an issue as long as there are reliable sources to back up such info.Tintor2 (talk) 01:59, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
IMDB isn't reliable? I thought it should get a blurb in this article and that's about it. Soxwon (talk) 02:39, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
IMDB is actually user edited like wikipedia, so yes, it's unreliable.Tintor2 (talk) 02:44, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Ok, and a mashable isn't? Honestly, I think that this is enough of an internet phenomena to warrant a sentence or two (better sourced than half the things I see in this encyclopedia anyhow). Soxwon (talk) 03:12, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Mashable doesn't even mention the fandub, so it's not a source for it. And the Kami-Con article makes a trivial mention of the fandub in relation to a guest. It's a source for Kami-Con, but not about any other subject beyond that. —Farix (t | c) 10:34, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
OK, if IMDB is 'unreliable' then why don't you go through every article on Wikipedia and remove it? It is used as a source on many, many articles here without problem so why is it only this article we have a problem using IMDB? If I'm honest it seems people just don't want that bit mentioned at all, notable or not. ggctuk (2005) (talk) 17:41, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Other stuff is not a valid argument. Have a neutral point of view, the reason why the fandub series is not included in wikipedia is because each of its articles and sections were against the guidelines.Tintor2 (talk) 21:13, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
IMDB isn't reliable because anyone can edit it. And they don't require sources like Wikipedia does. If they did, we would just use those sources. (I'd like to know which articles you're referring to, because IMDB is usually shot down quick as a reference.) Mashable is not the same thing. It's a blog, technically. And we generally wouldn't use a blog unless we were referring to an official company blog or something like that.
I, however, don't believe the series should be excluded from this article as a section. It doesn't violate any of the critierion for inclusion as section. Notability is for articles, not sections. There's reason enough for it to warrant a mention. ——Digital Jedi Master (talk) 08:42, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Didn't I say this previously? The reason why it is not mentioned it's because of lack of WP:Reliable sources, not notability (the notability was when some users created the article over and over). Besides, users have to be neutral in these discussions rather than just giving opinions.Tintor2 (talk) 15:39, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
No, I don't believe you did. And okay, didn't know my neutrality was in question. You want to be more specific? As for Reliable Sources, how does that apply here? We need someone to verify that it exists? Reliable Sources are when we need to back up a statement with a credible 3rd party reference verifying that. No one is questioning TAS existence. ——Digital Jedi Master (talk) 05:18, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Check these two comments from above:

"Removed the info as it did not any WP:Reliable source to back it up. I remember that the discussion about notability was when users wanted to give it an article but now they are adding info to this article. Being legal or not is not an issue as long as there are reliable sources to back up such info." and "The problem of what a user added to this article is not legality, it's that he used unreliable sources." And yes we need to verify every information that is wikipedia per guidelines. If not I could create my own abridged series and cite them using a facebook account or the comment from fansite.Tintor2 (talk) 16:09, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

The previous TAS info was full of unverified info. I agree. But the existence of the series is not really in question, is it? We're exhorted to use common sense when applying Wiki policy, right? We aren't just linking to a random fan page. We're contextualizing a pop cultural aspect of the series. What reliable sources are we using to validate the existence of the Yu-Gi-Oh! article? So far, just links from it's own website and a couple of notations from anime websites. I can find, at least, one reference from the same website we're currently using to verify info on a Yu-Gi-Oh! villain about TAS. [5] If we really need more than that, a Honolulu newspaper reported on the series back in '07. [6] And while I agree Mashable isn't reliable as a primary source, it does host the Open Web Awards, which I think, in this and this context, is appropriate. The Globe discusses his content issues with YouTube. [7] And Billany was a headlining guest at a recent Manifest Anime Convention. [8] I'm sure I could find more in time, but as matter of discussion, what more do we need to reliably verify The Abridged Series' existence and as something more than just random fan rumbling? ——Digital Jedi Master (talk) 05:48, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
The sources you mention barely mention TAS and focus more in Spike Spencer. Facebooks is not a reliable source and so isn't Mashable. Every information about pop culture info is questionable per notability issues (can a short video I made about Yugioh be mentioned in this article?) so they need back up sources that can note they are important. That's another important part of using common sense while editing.Tintor2 (talk) 15:57, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
I didn't post a link to Facebook, so I don't know what you're talking about there. I posted a Mashable link that referred to the winners of it's Open Web Awards, an awards series that they host. Spike Spencer was only mentioned in two of the six links I posted. Did you even look at the other references? I'm trying to assume your operating in good faith here, but I can't help but feel like your picking and choosing what to take seriously. TAS was hardly "barely mentioned" in those articles. It was the subject. ———Digital Jedi Master (talk) 04:20, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Spike Spencer is the focus of the anifest sources you added. TAS is only mentioned once and there is more importance towards the author than the series. Just look at the titles from those sources. Mashable has already been unreliable, so I don't why do you keep adding those links.Tintor2 (talk) 15:06, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Let's just add a new page for the Abridged Series. It's very popular now and I think it deserves one finally. That would solve this issue as well. Srsrox (talk) 18:55, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

You still need significant coverage by reliable third-party sources that covers the subject. And because the article has been deleted so many times, it will require a deletion review at WP:DRV with accompanying evidence that it passes WP:NOTE. —Farix (t | c) 19:11, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Then let's move to do that. I see enough third party sources to make it possible. People will have to write it up of course first. Srsrox (talk) 22:58, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

"Duel Monsters" mix-up.

Duel Monsters was a rip off Yu-Gi-Oh! that came out years after T.O.S.. For that reason I suggest it is removed from the chrecters section.Marrik666 (talk) 00:51, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry to say but I think you are referring to Duel Masters. Duel Monsters refer to Yu-Gi-Oh! itself. E Wing (talk) 05:06, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I did. But a television show came out... on Cartoon Network. The monsters and how the game was played was different.Marrik666 (talk) 23:45, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Official stuff

http://www.yugioh.com/en/contact

WhisperToMe (talk) 22:42, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

"nerds"

Seriously, who added THAT? The picture down the article that shows some people playing, who the hell was able to add "nerds" there despite the page being protected? 202.133.0.218 (talk) 14:50, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Removed. Also tracked down the editor who added the disparaging descriptor and gave him a warning about WP:NPOV and WP:BLP. —Farix (t | c) 17:33, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Stuff

WhisperToMe (talk) 09:18, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Repeat

So you all know, in the aka section of charecters "dark yugi" was repeated. This has been removed.(Peace is a lie 18:12, 29 September 2011 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marrik666 (talk • contribs)

Edit request on 13 July 2012

The new legendary collection's release date is october 28th.


XYubelx (talk) 20:48, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Ryan Vesey Review me! 04:02, 17 July 2012 (UTC)


Plot summary section

Does anyone think this section should just refer to the original Yu-Gi-Oh! manga and anime series, as opposed to a brief summary of it and all the spinoffs? Wonchop (talk) 18:04, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

4Kids Case Study

The company has a "case study" of the series: http://www.4kidsentertainment.com/case-study/yu-gi-oh/ - http://www.webcitation.org/6BB4YpTpR WhisperToMe (talk) 03:24, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 18 October 2012

Some text is repeated twice.

Please Change "On March 24, 2011, TV Tokyo and Nihon Ad Systems filed a joint lawsuit against 4Kids, accusing them of underpayments concerning the Yu-Gi-Oh! franchises and allegedly conspiring with Funimation, and have allegedly terminated their licensing deal with them,On March 24, 2011, TV Tokyo and Nihon Ad Systems filed a joint lawsuit against 4Kids, accusing them of underpayments concerning the Yu-Gi-Oh! franchises and allegedly conspiring with Funimation, and have allegedly terminated their licensing deal with them.[5], which led to 4Kids filing for protection"

To "On March 24, 2011, TV Tokyo and Nihon Ad Systems filed a joint lawsuit against 4Kids, accusing them of underpayments concerning the Yu-Gi-Oh! franchises and allegedly conspiring with Funimation, and have allegedly terminated their licensing deal with them[5], which led to 4Kids filing for protection" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.160.226.53 (talk • contribs) 18 October 2012

Done. Benign CE request only. I also fixed the following sentence, as it was a run-on. —KuyaBriBriTalk 19:37, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 25 December 2012

99.228.147.37 (talk) 04:44, 25 December 2012 (UTC) pokemon is more awsome then yugioh. it's crap compared to pokemon and it has a doushbag character who has a migit brain and has no balls and no brain.

Not done: Rivertorch (talk) 09:01, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

In the Media section, Instead of Yu-Gi-Oh Capsule Monsters it has Yu-Gi-Oh Capsule Mosters.

 Done Thank you for catching that mistake. - Camyoung54 talk 02:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Kana version

  • In the lead sections of this page and of other pages whose names start "Yu-Gi-Oh!", in the kana/kanji version "遊☆戯☆王", the two star signs are no sort of Japanese kana or kanji writing, but are merely advertisory ornaments. Should they be removed? 遊戯王 in Japanese means "fun clowning king" or "game king". Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:55, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 29 October 2013

Yu-Gi-Oh is a highly intellectual card game that is meant for those who can outwit others, this is by far very fun and people are always welcome, join us, it is fun!

Yu-Gi-Oh is a card game about monsters, magic and traps, the anime tells the tale about Yugi Moto, a young boy who loves games and puzzles. One day his grandfather gives him a box with the unbuilt millennium puzzle in it, he somehow solves the puzzle and uncovers the spirit of an ancient pharaoh. The pharaoh (often goes by Yami) fuses his soul with Yugi's soul and is never called Dark Yugi, he is called "the spirit of the puzzle." The card game is called "duel monsters," the shadow games are ancient Egypt's name for it. Yugi/yami plays card games, and has only played a dice game 'dice duel monsters' once. Yugi and friends have been to the Shadow Realm numerous times, and survived. Yugi/yami is the 'King Of Games,' which that title was given to him by Maxamillion Pegasus 'Bearer of the Millennium Eye.' The gamers Do Not wager their lives, they have wagered 'star chips,' and 'locater cards,' once in season three the protagonists (Yugi Muto, Seto Kaiba, Joey Weeler, Tia Gardner, Tristan Sanders, Mokuba Kaiba, Duke Devlin, and Serenity Weeler) have wagered their mortal bodies while in the Shadow Realm, but no one has ever died. these are from the animated series and all are true. Legolad350 (talk) 00:49, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Not done: This content overlaps with content already in the article. Please try to blend your changes to the existing text by expressin your request in a "please change X to Y" format. Please also try to find sources for the facts you would like to add. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 02:54, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 21 November 2013

Hi, request to add http://ygogen.com as a reference to current article due to the forum possessing members form the original production along with members directly associated with the artwork of the recently discounted game named, "Duel Accelerator". Upon further research it was discovered that the said community relates all information available to the main purpose "Yu-Gi-Oh!' based on articles presented on Wikipedia about it. In my opinion the above site should be added. Thanks you for your time.

Voice actor for series character, "Seto Kaiba" - http://ygogen.com/index.php?/user/39-seto-kaiba/ Insight on rules - http://ygogen.com/index.php?/topic/1078-revised-ygopro-dawn-of-a-new-era-rules/

DevPro (talk) 19:46, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Not done: forums are not reliable sources, and we don't link to them in External links sections under the Links normally to be avoided guideline, item 10. Sorry. --Stfg (talk) 20:54, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 April 2014

Please add information on Yu-Gi-Oh! BAM in the spin-offs section as it is a facebook spin-off of Yu-Gi-Oh! EpicNicks (talk) 22:23, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Also, please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format Dom497 (talk) 22:34, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Grammar error

"each player uses cards to "duel" each other" -- this must be changed to either "each player uses cards to duel the other" or "players use cards to duel each other". The double "each" is wrong. 31.50.70.172 (talk) 08:00, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Yu-Gi-Oh!. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:20, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 January 2019

Change "Yugi Mutou" to "Yugi Moto" as this name is officially used in the "Yu-Gi-Oh! Duel Links" mobile game. 2601:5CC:C702:75FF:D84E:E447:7494:8F75 (talk) 00:22, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. DannyS712 (talk) 00:44, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
Comment It's kind of divided. At first when I created Yugi's article it was titled "Yugi Moto". However, a fellow user into the series and the English release pointed out that Viz Media's release used the naming "Yugi Mutou" so the article was moved.Tintor2 (talk) 16:22, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 March 2020

I wish for you to add a list of all card Types and Attributes. A simple change. RhysTTime Inc (talk) 11:07, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

That might fit better in an article centered around the trading cards: Yu-Gi-Oh! Trading Card Game.Tintor2 (talk) 14:19, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Also see the response above. —KuyaBriBriTalk 14:44, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

YUGIOH

Yugioh is a game — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:5838:C901:B118:803:6B41:8883 (talk) 02:28, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Anime studio correction

In the table of anime series Yu-Gi-Oh! Capsule Monsters has "4Kids Entertainment" listed as the studio, when in fact it was produced by Gallop (albeit at the request of 4Kids)

Here's a link to Studio Gallops website listing it as one of their works (under the japanese title 遊戯王ALEX) https://www.anime-gallop.co.jp/works-5.htm

thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.154.104.156 (talk) 01:40, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

"Orichalcos Doom" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Orichalcos Doom. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 24#Orichalcos Doom until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed, Rosguill talk 23:33, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

"Doom Orichalcos" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Doom Orichalcos. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 24#Doom Orichalcos until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed, Rosguill talk 23:33, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

"Orichalcos Duels" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Orichalcos Duels. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 24#Orichalcos Duels until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed, Rosguill talk 23:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

"The Seal Of Oricalcos" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect The Seal Of Oricalcos. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 24#The Seal Of Oricalcos until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed, Rosguill talk 23:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 April 2022

Just a small edit that I can't do myself yet. In the "Anime franchise overview" table Zexal IIs episode numbers should be changed from 73 + 1 to 73 + 2. AirTortoise (talk) 05:19, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:54, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Yu-Gi-Oh!/Archive_1&oldid=1198944827"