This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
I've seen in a couple places (apparently independent of each other) that the anime has been announced as planned for 51 episodes, but I haven't found a reliable source for this. If someone could find a Japanese source, that would be good, as it's something worth adding to the prose of the Anime section. (Not to be added without direct confirmation: given the rate of they're adapting chapters, that's almost exactly when the anime will catch up with Adachi, suggesting the manga and anime will end at about the same time.) —Quasirandom (talk) 15:01, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
I haven't seen anywhere reliable reporting that, so I agree it should be left out for now. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:06, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
Good call: I've also seen claims of 26, 24+, and 39. Looks like there's a lot of speculation without any firm backing. —Quasirandom (talk) 01:00, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
(Deviating into pure speculation: ignoring the anomalous opening episode, the 16 episodes have covered 56 chapters -- 4.5 per. At that rate, this catches up with the manga around episode 36/chapter 160, assuming Adachi stops taking breaks. —Quasirandom (talk) 16:43, 28 July 2009 (UTC))
We're up to 21 episodes now, so if it's only 26 eps, there are only five left. I hope it goes on for a while, though. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:43, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
And we haven't even done the first regional tournament arc, or introduced Akane. If it stops now, it'd have to be because it's been cut off. And my understanding is it's getting decent ratings, even if the DVD sales are soft. —Quasirandom (talk) 21:09, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Not to mention, they've started adding filler original stories, drawing the material out. They're definitely in it for the haul of the series. (Good stories, I might add, ones pointing up Aoba's character arc. I'd argue they consider her the protagonist more than, or at least as much as, Kō.) —Quasirandom (talk) 19:28, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Yes, and that's already mentioned in the article itself. Has been for at least a week or so. Please pay attention to date stamps on comments so you don't go replying to 6 month old comments like you did here. ^_^ ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 09:29, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
M. Kreb: if you're looking for something to do, you could always reference up the anime section. Especially the music, as I'm not at all certain we've captured the peak ranks of the singles. But only if you have nothing else to do. —Quasirandom (talk) 01:21, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Final episode count
I've added the final episode count based on the Newtype source. The only thing that will need to change in a couple weeks is to adjust the tense in the two prose sections discussing when the final episode (from future to past). I'll take care of that if someone doesn't beat me to it first. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 00:29, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
DVD releases
Has anyone seen any sign of a web page for the first DVD release? I can't get the TV Tokyo site to admit it happened -- but maybe it's through a different production company. It's about time to source the now-past "scheduled" release. —Quasirandom (talk) 01:00, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
1-2 month(s) delay on Amazon.co.jp but it's officially out there. --KrebMarkt 07:26, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Hmm. Something to keep an eye on. —Quasirandom (talk) 16:43, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Found a page from an official site to use for a reference, but apparently a second DVD has been released -- presumably they're on a monthly schedule, but can anyone find a ref for the date of the second? —Quasirandom (talk) 16:29, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Refs are at Amazon.co.jp vol 1vol 2vol 3. Facepalm that they did not update their website with DVD release info as if did not want the DVD to sell. From the blogger collecting DVDs sells on MyAnimeList, it's seems that so far the sells are very bad :( --KrebMarkt 17:00, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
I'd noticed the first didn't make the top of the Oricon list, which wasn't a good sign. But there's enough there to put it as "releases are monthly" in the article. —Quasirandom (talk) 19:28, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Ending Themes
As expected, with episode 27 we get a third ending theme song: 燃えるような恋じゃないけど by 鶴, and I'm not even going to attempt to render those -- anyone with Nihongo skillz up for it? A maxisingle with it is due out on 11 November -- for which a publisher site link to come if someone doesn't get to it first. —Quasirandom (talk) 17:15, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Here's the Warner release info page, plus a news post. The song title rōmaji is "Moeruyō na Koi ja naikedo" (roughly, "there is no passionate/burning love"), though I'm not positive I'm spacing the particles correctly, and the band seems to be called Tsuru ("crane"). Unless someone corrects my readings, I'll add this to the main article and episode list later tonight or tomorrow. —Quasirandom (talk) 20:11, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Though There Is No Burning Love (燃えるような恋じゃないけど, Moeru yō na Koi Janai Kedo) would be correct. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:21, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Do we have any information about the 4th OP being released as a single? It was already released on an album prior to being used by the show, I know (though I don't have the citation to prove it). —Quasirandom (talk) 02:37, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
If you have the release date of the album, that's proof enough. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 04:59, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Not released as a single after the poor performance of the least ones. Released within an album not even in the Warner Label. see [1][2]. --KrebMarkt 06:56, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Hadn't realized it was from a non-Warner album -- interesting. The producers must have wanted it. (It is danged catchy, and thematically appropriate.) —Quasirandom (talk) 14:17, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't know that we can make that call (why it wasn't released as a single). There are many theme songs which are never released as a single, especially if the song was not written specifically for the show, or if it had been out already for a while. Also, it's not uncommon for cross-label songs to be used in a show (not common either, but it happens regularly enough). ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 14:23, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Using a ref to the anime website news page would do without entering into the details. The only fact we have to prove is that this song is the last opening theme. Big label release and charts ranking are just nice bonuses. --KrebMarkt 15:16, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Credits
Here's a list of the credits for the show up through episode 6:
Opening
Created by Adachi Mitsuru (serialized in Shogakukan's "Weekly Shōnen Sunday")
音楽協力 テレビ東京ミュージック Music Co-production: TV Tokyo Music, ワーナーミュージック・ジャパン Warner Music Japan, 小学館ミュージック＆デジタルエンタテインメント Shogakukan Music & Digital Entertainment
Let me know which ones you think should be added, and I'll add them. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 03:28, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Hmm. I don't have much experience with this sort of thing, but I suspect that the most important staff would be Director, main character designor, director of photography, and music. Oh, and that it's a production of TV Tokyo in collaboration with Shogakukan-Shueisha Production, with animation produced by Synergy SP. Q: Isn't episode director a possible field in the episode template?
Question: Are episodes credits acceptable as RS for verifying seiyu cast ? If so that would solve any support cast seiyu listing issue --KrebMarkt 21:03, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Yes, though finding them listed in a magazine or something is better. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 21:12, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Soundtracks
OP single: Summer rain by Kobukuro released 15 April 2009.
Sorry Sorry to be so inept in Japanese. The singles peak rank are surprising good. --KrebMarkt 16:00, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Good pop songs from a popular franchise with strong media machines behind them. —Quasirandom (talk) 16:14, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
Here's the Oricon listing for the second ED -- looks like it hasn't charted yet, but I don't think the first reporting cycle is in. Something to watch. —Quasirandom (talk) 01:55, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
So did this ever chart? —Quasirandom (talk) 20:17, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Woo ... hoo ... ? That's pretty much a complete non-hit there, enough so I'm not sure it warrants mention. —Quasirandom (talk) 21:34, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Potted summary
The story summary in the lead has been bothering me for a bit -- it describes the initial premise of volume one, ignoring the story after that prologue. Here's what I quickly drafted for the lead of List of Cross Game chapters:
The series is about high school baseball players Kō Kitamura and Aoba Tsukishima, who are bound together by Kō's relationship with Aoba's dead sister, Wakaba, and their efforts to fulfill Wakaba's last dream of seeing them play in the national tournament in Kōshien.
This is, of course, too brief. So, inviting collaboration here on finding a middle ground. —Quasirandom (talk) 18:30, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Rewrite attempted in the lead. —Quasirandom (talk) 20:28, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
GA Review
This review is transcluded from Talk:Cross Game/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Article easily passed the "quick-fail" criteria. On to the full review.
Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:
Some minor prose questions from lead- what is issue 22/23? Unless someone subscribes (and even then) they won't know when that is - month would be better. Why "bound volumes" instead of the more accurate tankōbon (bound volume can have other connotations). Is baseball a genre?
Setting could easily be moved to start the plot. Its very short length violates WP:Layout regarding subsections. "Main characters" appears to have some kind of coding error as there is no double space between the paragraphs - would recommend either fixing to show breaks or merge into a single paragraph each. Ref 1, 7, and 31 are missing publisher info. The Manga News refs have no author; do they not note who writes their reviews? Ref 12 needs to be reformatted to be consistent with the rest.
Technically, the character second should be referenced, but for GA I do not see anything interpretive in nature, so not pinging for that.
B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
What makes the Multiply reference, #32, reliable? Looks like a self-published piece? Ditto #18. Ref #5 is a Freewebs fansite and not RS. Ref #6 is an ANN Ency ref...
Production info would be nice, but thus far isn't available so is as broad as can be.
B. Focused:
Character descriptions are a bit long for the size of the article and its having a separate list. Suggest tightening up some for the major points not already cover by plot.
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
All in all, in great shape for GA. Most things noted are fairly minor and quick fixes. Review is on hold while issues noted above are addressed. :) -- AnmaFinotera (talk·contribs) 18:47, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Fixed all issues noted above have been corrected and the article now meets the GAC. Congrats! -- AnmaFinotera (talk·contribs) 01:52, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Other notes that do not affect the GA review: The manga is the primary work, so why are the voices of the anime actors being listed at the top of the character section? Has no one beyond ANN reviewed the anime? -- AnmaFinotera (talk·contribs) 18:47, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
They do look like quick fixes. Addressing some I can off the top of my head:
Reference #32 is the text of an academic paper presented at a scholarly conference; that we are using is the author's reprint does not affect its reliability.
Reference #18 is the publisher's catalog of publications -- which they host in this format, as entries in their official blog. Why this format instead of using a database hooked into their website, you'd have to ask their webmaster, but it *is* the publisher's official blog.
Why voices at top? Because, well, I hadn't realized that putting them there suggests that anime is primary. If this is so, we need to somehow note this in a guideline.
In English, I've yet to find a reliable reviewer aside from ANN. Fifteen tons of reviewblog posts, 3/4 of them calling it one of the best of the year and the other 1/4 utterly meh, but nothing reliable-source.
Identifying a weekly magazine issue by month would be inaccurate.
No, Manga News doesn't identify authors of reviews. Somewhat annoying, that.
I'll dig into the other issues after lunch. —Quasirandom (talk) 19:20, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Seriously...that's their official site? That's...sad.... :P But alright on those two. Would be better if the paper was available at the conference site, but as long as its confirmed its the author's site and that it was presented there too, then its fine. Can the magazine be identified by date then? Cause issue # is fairly meaningless to most readers, I think. The voices thing has been discussed before...can't remember if it was ever noted in the MoS directly or if it was left out out of fear of instruction creep or something. Poor anime...looks like an interesting piece. BTW, is baseball actually a genre? :D -- AnmaFinotera (talk·contribs) 19:31, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Srsly. The publisher has an official website, but it's mostly forums -- their catalog listings are all on a separately hosted blogsite, with wretched search functions; most annoying. I confirmed that the paper was indeed presented at the conference (or that it was scheduled to be presented, to be hairsplitty) but never found a conference proceedings. Is issue number really not meaningful? It is, after all, how a bibliographic citation would be made. The voices discussion, IIRC, came to the conclusion that we didn't have consensus over whether to put voices at the start or end of a character list entry, so it's editors' choice. For the genre, I note that we have Category:Baseball anime and manga, a subcategory of anime and manga by genre. And one other query: references #7 and #31 already list Manga News as publisher -- did you mean another number? —Quasirandom (talk) 19:46, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Issue # by itself is pretty meaningless. Yeah, for the citation its great, but in the prose it tells a reader pretty much nothing other than that the series was released that year sometime. Unless you have the magazine in hand or are intimately familiar with it, you don't know if issue 22/23 came out in March, June, December, etc. I thought the conclusion was end for manga, beginning for anime...but okay. -- AnmaFinotera (talk·contribs) 23:17, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
It's actually much easier than you think. As Weekly Shōnen Sunday is a weekly magazine, the issue number is the week it was released. The magazine sometimes skips a week and issues a combined two week issue (hence the "22/23"). So, it was the issue for the 22nd and 23rd week. As the magazine always comes out on the same day, and about a week early, figuring out a date should be fairly simple. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 23:57, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
It may be easy if you are familiar with the magazine, but for many readers who are not, it is not. How would they know what date issue 1 is, and that the magazine might or might not skip a week? And how will they know if any weeks were skipped before the 22/23 issue? -- AnmaFinotera (talk·contribs) 00:42, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
It doesn't matter if they know or not as the issue number is the week number, regardless of any skipped (they are actually combined) weeks. So issue 22/23 is for the 22nd week that year, and in this case includes the 23rd week. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 02:41, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
In any case, I'm still rather dubious about stating a month for a weekly magazine, as that could apply to any of four (sometimes five) different issues. —Quasirandom (talk) 02:47, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
That's fine, I didn't notice it was a weekly magazine. But an actual date is still needed, not a non-descriptive issue number. -- AnmaFinotera (talk·contribs) 02:49, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Unless you can read the date (it's in really, really tiny print) here or here, you're just going to have to accept the week number as the date. The issue number is descriptive and accurate. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:33, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
@Nihonjoe, so is that the 18th or the 25th of May, 2005? —Quasirandom (talk) 14:20, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
I don't know as I can't read the writing in those pics. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 18:35, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Well, I found a place which says the issue was released on 11 May, and covered the 11 May/18 May weeks, so I put that into the article. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:01, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
This is where I say "d'oh!" again. Um, the ex-#7, Nihonjoe will have to address. ex-#31 does have a publisher -- the organization who puts on the conference/awards. —Quasirandom (talk) 22:05, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Fujimidai StationI can't find it in any reliable sources, though if you look at the pic to the right and compare it to the one in the manga (or anime) when Kō sees Senda waiting for Aoba in front of the station, it's like they photocopied the image for use in the manga/anime. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 19:01, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Does the current reference not count as reliable? (You're right that's the model -- right down to identical stained glass used in the anime). —Quasirandom (talk) 19:51, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Well, I consider this blog reliable as he's been publishing since the dawn of blogs and his information is always correct (I have yet to find something which isn't). However, there are some who likely won't accept that. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:24, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm not seeing how reference #12 needs to be reformatted - explicate please? Oh, duh -- I see what you mean (I miscounted changing refnumbers). I'll have to dig up the issue number for that. —Quasirandom (talk) 20:35, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Update: I think we've addressed all concerns except the one Japanese ref, the debated date issue, and trimming the character section. I'm working the last in scratch space now (it's harder than it initially appears as there's less overlap with the Plot section than you might think -- I wrote those entries to focus on characterization rather than potted history -- but I'm hoping to get them down to a not-too-overstuffed paragraph each, and so evade the "coding issue"). —Quasirandom (talk) 16:35, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
There -- character descriptions edited down, to focus even more on just characterization instead of plot. Does that address your concern? And does it fix the "coding issue" (which I never did quite understand, I confess)? —Quasirandom (talk) 19:51, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
It was hard to try to explain in words...basically the character list was looking like it was using BR tags instead of being actual paragraphs. All that's left now, I think, is the missing publisher name on those few refs. -- AnmaFinotera (talk·contribs) 20:10, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Which ones need the publisher? Which ref #s are they now? ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:26, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
As far as I know, only #5. (#29 was also identified, but it has a publisher.) —Quasirandom (talk) 20:42, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Is there an author listed? —Quasirandom (talk) 21:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
<outdent> I would prefer to move the statement into talk page until better ref could be found. This is a Japanese blog so RS statut need to be verified and checking blogger profile doesn't give argument to give it a RS statut see [5] & [6]. I think the information is trustworthy but one ref short of the main article space :( --KrebMarkt 21:48, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
A comparison of the series to the station shows it's patently obvious, but it still needs a reliable source. Ah well. —Quasirandom (talk) 00:56, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Archive references
I recommend going through all the references and archiving them using a site like WebCite. This will make things better for any further peer reviews or FA reviews. I'll start at the top, so if someone else wants to start in one of the other sections, that would be great. Just add | archiveurl = | archivedate = to the citation. Note that this only works with online citations, so only with {{cite web}}. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 00:33, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Not a bad idea. I'll see if I can get started later. —Quasirandom (talk) 01:28, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Just pointing this out again. I'm going to do this on the list of manga chapters page, so if someone wants to make sure all of these are done, that would be awesome. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 03:25, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Semantics
"Scrimmage" and "exhibition game" are the same thing. A scrimmage/exhibition game can be held between two teams (which these really are, if you look at it: the real team, and the prefab team), or between two parts of the same team. This happens all the time with college and high school sports teams (a local college football team, for example, regularly holds first string vs. second string games which are free and open to the public). This mincing of words and insisting on linking to a disambiguation page is not beneficial. If anything, the exhibition game article should be updated to make it more clear. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 20:50, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
Eh. Sorry, you're right. I was in a cranky mood yesterday. Adjusting the exhibition game article was indeed the right solution. —Quasirandom (talk) 17:09, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
No problem. I was wondering since you seemed to act a little different than is usual for you. Perhaps a good night's rest did you well. :) ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 09:14, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Stepping away from the flamewars did more. Even if someone was being wrong on the internets. —Quasirandom (talk) 14:15, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Fixed all issues noted above have been corrected and the article now meets the GAC. Congrats! -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 01:52, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
