Template talk:Infobox animanga/Archive 1

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.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Status

For earlier discussion see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Anime_and_manga/Archive 1#Infobox

I would suggest putting only what is being discussed on the page into the infobox. If separate pages already exist for other portions of the franchise, we should probably then have a mechanism for linking to them. Perhaps an "Other" box?

So:

Titles on the OVA and Movie boxes; release dates for OVA.
Do we still need the info field in the header?
I think the creator field should be moved to the header.
Image caption?

- mako 06:46, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Titles: That would depend. The naming schematic may change from area to area. For example, Viz likes to come up with names for their OVA (particularly the Ranma ones) that tend not to be in other English-language distros. Info field: Jury's still out on that one. I'll have to think on that a bit more. Creator field: Works for me; I'd say go for it. Img cap: Yes, because sometimes it's good to be able to explain what one is seeing. --Mitsukai 07:38, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

1. I'm still unsure about titles as well. Is it typical for OVAs to have distinct titles?

2. I think we can remove the info field. I don't know what purpose it has now (I had only created it in the original template because I didn't know how to get the code to properly work).

3. About moving the creator field, do you mean also removing the creator/author fields from the boxes? I think that would work for most series, except for the occasional case like Tenchi, where Hitoshi Okuda wrote the manga instead of Masaki Kajishima.

4. Image captions are a good thing, in my opinion.

--Fadeblue 09:39, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

1. Most OVAs I've run into don't have special titles. I'm envisioning code like OVA{{{title}}} where title could be just " 2" or ": something". It could also be left blank. People can debate over whether certain titles are official enough for use.

2. OK.

3. I mean just the creator; the author stuff would stay. Most series have an original creator, or creators, and that can be consolidated.

4. OK. We'll see how it looks.

- mako 16:12, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

1. I've put a title field into each module, implemented as above which makes it completely optional.

2. Info field's gone.

3. I consolidated the creator field into the header.

4. The caption only shows up as the mouseover alt text, which is good enough for me.

- mako 08:00, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The information seems pretty much complete to me. The page needs to be updated to reflect the changes to the actual templates, and the only other thing I can think of is to review the parameter names to make them as simple and standardized as possible. For example, the Anime and Manga templates say "Foreign Distribution" while the OVA and Movie templates say "Distributed by". Also, the OVA section says "Release Dates" and the Movie section says "Release Date". - Fadeblue 30 June 2005 17:56 (UTC)

The OVA section is like that because OVAs typically are released episode by episode. I would say standardizing the use of "distributed by" is preferable to the use of "foreign". - mako 8 July 2005 03:44 (UTC)

Okay. And I agree with the use of "distributed by".

What about dorama based on manga or anime? I ran across the issue when writing up the article for Kimi wa Petto. Should the dorama be put into its own article that refers back to the article about the original manga? Or should they somehow be combined?

- Fadeblue 20:01, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Hmm, good point. I think by the nature of the work it falls outside the scope of anime and manga (and therefore the infobox), but if it's closely related... Since I dislike duplicating material, I'm inclined to lump things together in one page if they're similar enough. I'd be okay with two infoboxes (animanga + TV) on the same page in that case, since it's rarer AFAIK. - mako 03:53, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Trimming

Personally I think this box needs some serious trimming, as it stands it's gonna be longer than the text of most articles, and is wrongly selective ('notable' staff etc), and suffers from trying to impose hollywood credits on anime ('producer', 'network').

Infobox animanga/Header:

Del. |creator= Guaranteed dupe of something just below it, issues of miscrediting one person only, etc

Infobox animanga/Anime:

Del. |seiyu= No room to list cast and roles, and pointless if it's only one or two people with no mention of what characters they play. Should be a section of the article.
Del. |notable_staff= Poor perspective on things, not enough room to list something useful, like episode directors/key animators. There's hardly an animator who worked on Nausicaa or Akira who's not 'notable' now.
Dunno? |network= Not many anime air on only one station, most are syndicated across several. List all?
Dunno? |anime_distributor= I take it this *really* means US licencee, which I personally don't see the relevance of

Infobox animanga/Manga:

Del. |illustrator= Most of the time this is gonna be a pointless dupe of the author field, better to have X (story), Y (art) in the same field surely.
Del. |manga_distributor= A poorly named US-releaser field? If included all translations would be far to bloaty, doesn't need to be in the box

Infobox animanga/OVA:

Del. |seiyu= As above
Del. |notable_staff= As above
Del. |network= *Network?* For an OVA? o_O
Dunno? |ova_distributor= US-again, seems box bloaty

Infobox animanga/Movie:

Del. |producer= Bloaty, bad copy from movie infobox
Del. |seiyu= As above
Del. |notable_staff= As above
Del. |distributors= What's this actually telling us? Disney (USA)... who cares
Del. |imdb_id= IMDB is a rubbish resource for anime, bad copy from movie infobox

Anyway, all that and incouraging short pictures might make the box short enough to actually be of some use. It doesn't need to be (and shouldn't be trying to be) comprehensive, the article is for that, just needs to be a decent at-a-glace reference. --zippedmartin 23:45, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Regarding your overall concerns, the box doesn't seem too large by any means. I think our objective was something more than "a decent at-a-glace reference", so we may have some conflict of philosophy here.

Creator: It was meant to be useful for spin-off-happy series, but I can see how it's redundant. It should go.
Seiyu: It's meant to highlight "stars", but there's definite bloat potential. As it stands, a lot of articles don't have seiyu sections.
Notable staff: This is intended to be where, well, notable staff are mentioned, like music, mech design, char design, etc. Notability is iffy, sure.
Network: They're not syndicated across several networks, are they?
Distributors in general: Yeah, not really essential. They can go.
Illustrator: Yeah, I'll collapse it into the author field. Should've thought of that.
Network (OVA): Oops. That was taken out a while ago; I neglected to update the main page.
Producer (movie): Yeah, people don't care about producers. Bloat.
IMDb: I would say it's rubbish for any movie: close to no summary and biased reviews. It does however have lots of miscellaneous movie-type info, so I'm weakly inclined to keep it.

Yeah, a lot could be cut. Let's hold off on any changes for now, awaiting further comments.

Regarding your edits, I'm of the opinion that infobox components should be placed in chronological order. - mako 03:42, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Glad you're open to some suggestion. I'd not actually meant to edit the template page, was experimenting with the options and hit sumbit by mistake at one point. Having said that, I *agree* that it should be in chronological order, which is why the eva manga(s) belong after the tv series and movie. I saw on your talk page that someone had objected to the nausicaa manga being above the film (silly complaint), a shorter infobox and some poking of the article in question are what's needed in my opinion. Anyway, overall most anime articles are pretty young and content-free zones, I can see how getting a comprehensive box is a good motivation to fill them out a bit, but I think some of the larger things really do need to be in the article text. As for networks, I don't know precisly. Picking an anime at random, it's on three channels, of which I think ABC is the osaka branch of tv asahi, and kids station might be related too, but I wouldn't like to say how. --zippedmartin 04:47, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

I mentioned box ordering because the Eva page says the manga began serialization before the anime appeared.

Any additional thoughts on Seiyu, Staff, and IMDb? - mako 18:03, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Alien Nine

エイリアン9 (Alien 9)
Manga
Authored by	Hitoshi Tomizawa
Publisher	Akita Shoten
Serialized in	Young Champion
Original run	?? – ??
No. of volumes	3+1
OVA
Directed by	Jiro Fujimoto (ep. 1) Yasuhiro Irie (ep. 2-4)
Studio	J.C.STAFF / GENCO
No. of episodes	4
Release dates	See release dates section

It does? Someone needs to fix that if so, manga was three-ish years later.

On other issues, I think staff and seiyū certainly don't want to be in the box, but we probably *do* want to think about how to present them. I was thinking about translation this table of trigun staff (ep director, storyboard, etc) per episode into a table somewhere on the media page - rather than clogging up the root entry. But in cases where there are 'a few interresting people' involved (a la what the box is asking for) I think it should be in the text somewhere - if they're very interesting (ie the Katsura character designs for Iria) it should go in the head.

'Nother thing, I actually found out how you can do optional parameters in a box the other day, and as it requires a sub-template for each one (and presumably is pretty server intensive), it's probably not as useful as I thought it might be. Could be used for stuff like illustrator though.

Oh, and lastly, what exactly are we expecting people to put in 'genre'? As that's now the only text-parameter in the header, it's gonna be pretty prominent. But people are in my experience confused at best for any anime genres beyond 'mecha'. Most likely it'll be asking for misuse of the terms 'shōnen' and 'shōjo', then some patently inappropraite film genres like 'Thriller'.

How's the mock-up to the right look? You could manage that much info for most manga/anime in the db with little bother, fits on one screen, and covers the basics. --zippedmartin 21:10, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, we did look at those optional parameters earlier, but on a big-chunk level. The final approach was much simpler. Also, if you have too much flexibility, it defeats the idea of an infobox in the first place, which is something that is supposedly designed and standardized to handle all instances. So let's get rid of staff, seiyu, and imdb. I believe 'genre' is a must, as a concise description of what a show is like is an infobox-worthy datum. As for poorly chosen terms, a set of guidelines would be good. (Though 'shonen' may be technically incorrect, it's widely used and recognized.) I'm thinking that months/years should go in the OVA release dates box, and more specific dates elsewhere. - mako 23:07, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

If there are no further comments, changes will be introduced in a few days. Hopefully a change at the template level will not break existing instances in use. - mako 22:06, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Template:Infobox animanga/Header2

I added a weak header at Template:Infobox animanga/Header2 for simple sectional boxes. ~ Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 08:23, 2005 August 26 (UTC)

Thanks. I've added a mention on the main page. - mako 18:03, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

If the box is gutted as much as I've suggested though, it does kinda need the pic... There's currently a lot of useful info in it, but big stuff needs some standard method of display that's not a narrow box down the right hand side of the page. --zippedmartin 21:14, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

I think this was inspired by the usage on Nausicaa. - mako 23:07, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

As I said somewhere else, it's the kaze no tani no n article that needs a rewrite, not the box that needs rearrangin' --zippedmartin 16:00, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

optional image

I've now made the image parameter optional in the header. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 00:59, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

code rename

the codes jp_name and jp_name_trans should be renamed to ja_name and ja_name_trans for consistancy with the language codes found in the Japanese language article. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 23:14, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Agreed; I'll get on it. BTW, thanks for bringing your coding expertise to the aid of this template. - mako 05:00, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 06:03, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Using multiples of a specific section

Say there's a show that's based on three different manga series that all follow the same set of characters? Is there a way to get the template to accept three "Manga" sections in the info box? --nihon 02:22, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

It should work just fine; give it a shot. You should be able to put an arbitrary number/variety of components in between the header and footer. - mako 08:21, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

I tried doing it, but from the second manga section on it was all screwed up. I examined the code very carefully to see if I had accidentally deleted something, but everything was there. I'm not sure why it won't work...I was thinking it might have something to do with having multiple calls for the same information, maybe? --nihon 10:32, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

It seems to work for me: User:Mako098765/Drafts. Things looking screwed up usually points to a syntax issue, either in the box or elsewhere on the page. The markup is fairly picky about lines and spacing. If you still can't get it to work, a look at your code would be useful. - mako 08:04, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Coloring

I propose a touch of blue --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 10:38, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm okay with the coloring, but I don't like the lines. - mako 10:55, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Which lines? I did not modify the tables, just tweaked colors etc. --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 12:34, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh btw I have a Template:Oh My Goddess Infobox-Generic that can be used on other anime, it has a few OMG spesific functions (such as "angel = ") but when not used those dont get in the way. It can be used on any other anime character page as well as episode page. --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 12:50, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

It used to look like the example in the discussion directly above. Now there are lines delineating every field because you changed it from "borderless" to "bordered".

Your other template would be good for characters; more appropriate than the superhero infobox I've seen in use. - mako 01:15, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Template:Oh My Goddess Infobox-Generic, how about this being the default charatcer infobox? --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 18:34, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

You'd have to propose it to the main project. BTW, there's not supposed to be a space between the media format and the title field; see Template:Infobox animanga#Usage.

I think this template should be borderless for consistency with other templates in use around WP. - mako 21:42, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

I think the colors are alright and I'm ok with the borders. I think that the background for pictures should be white instead of blue, because you know someone will come along and use a transparent image at some stage >_< - Squilibob 03:12, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Err? Thats easy to fix. the reason I like blue is consistency with entier colosal table. See in Oh My Goddess! which uses almost every bit of this template. --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 18:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

So is it ok to change the image background color to white? Even the Oh My Goddess image has a white background. - Squilibob 07:31, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Well I've gone ahead and made the change. - Squilibob 03:34, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

How titles work

Well I was confused about how the titles work. Mako has scripted it so that the titles can be flexible. (this quote is from above)

Most OVAs I've run into don't have special titles. I'm envisioning code like OVA{{{title}}} where title could be just " 2" or ": something". It could also be left blank

I admit that it isn't very new user friendly. When I started editing not long ago, I didn't realize that you have to put a space at the start of the title. You can use something like

title=: Lupin III: Fuma Conspiracy

and that will give you a colon between your text and the title template text like

Movie: Lupin III: Fuma Conspiracy

If you just want a space then use the nowiki tags.

If you just do

title=Lupin III: Fuma Conspiracy

then it will turn out like

MovieLupin III: Fuma Conspiracy

and that is hard to read without a space. - Squilibob 01:53, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I didn't realize it either -_-. It came to my attention only recently. Though I should say that something like "Movie Lupin III" doesn't make sense, it really needs a colon. - mako 07:42, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

It strikes me that I might be able to use class="hiddenStructure" to get around this messiness... - mako 07:45, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I think the way it works is fine, however people will keep coming in and changing the templates, which I'm sure is really annoying, because they think it doesn't function properly. The same thing could possibly happen if you hardcoded a colon in so there was always a colon after title - someone would change the template so it was a space instead and vice versa. The way it stands, you can have either a space or a colon and you can do other things, so that's good. The problem is when someone just uses title=name with no separator. I think the only thing that could make it easy for someone who just uses title=name with no separator is to use an if-then to check the first character of title. If it is alphanumeric then add a space. That way you can still have a colon or any other thing. I don't know how to do that since I don't know the syntax of template code. - Squilibob 09:56, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

It may be too unintuitive. I think the best solution may be to use a subtemplate that consists of a colon and italicizing, and somehow use hiddenStructure or Template:Qif on it. It'll remove the ability to have a space, but really, too much flexibility can be a bad thing. - mako 22:45, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Solution: Template:If defined to put the colon in when the title is defined. - mako 22:34, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

automatic image size rapes layouts

Take a look at Azumanga Daioh, the image there is resized automatically by the template which stretches it and makes it ugly, destroying the layout in the process. This template needs a way to control the images and not make them stretch when they're not supposed to. I can't fix it in the article because there's no clear parameter for it and I don't want to fix it in the template because I may break some other usage. Night Gyr 23:49, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Nevermind, I found the size parameter, it's just non-obvious.

Good point, I expanded the description so it lists the usage of the size parameter. - Squilibob 01:51, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Template:Infobox animanga/

Game

Because a number of anime either have a video game based off of them or are based on a video game, I've created a video game component for {{Infobox animanga}}. It is a trimmed down version of {{Infobox VG}}. However, before publishing the component to the main page, it needs to be tested. --TheFarix (Talk) 13:55, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I've tested this. It works fine. - Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 23:49, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

{{Infobox animanga/Game
| title        = 
| developer    = 
| publisher    = 
| genre        = 
| ratings      = 
| platforms    = 
| release_date = 
}}

Novel

I created an infobox for novels since some anime are based off of novels. Hopefully this would also become a component of {{Infobox animanga}}. Any ideas on this infobox? I think since many are not aware of actual novels for existing anime, this might be useful information to have. Are the fields included adequate? As you can see, I basically just copied the TheFarix had done and just modified the fields a bit to suit the needs of a novel. Delphi00 19:59, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Fixed the fields so they're the correct fields. This one works fine. - Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 23:49, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

{{Infobox animanga/Novel
| title       = 
| author      = 
| artist      = 
| publisher   = 
| first_run   = 
| last_run    = 
| num_volumes = 
}}

Both of these look fine. Let's not incite an over-proliferation of infobox components, though. - mako 01:48, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Please add a hidden-by-default field for "Serialized in". There are a few novels (ran into this problem with Inukami!) that start out in novel magazines.--SeizureDog 05:06, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

On an additional note, I find it odd that the "novel" box has a space for artist while the "manga" book does not...--SeizureDog 05:09, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

See discussion somewhere above. For manga, much of the time art and story are done by the same person, and we want to keep the infobox concise. - mako 06:33, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Er, can we have the "artist" field and the "last run" field optional? Since not all novels have illustrations, and some novels are not serialized (ie. published once only). _dk 09:18, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

IMDB

Do we want to add in a spot for IMDB info? --日本穣 Nihonjoe 02:04, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Grep 'imdb' on this page for mako's view and my view, the latin1 and idiocy makes me vomit. --zippedmartin 02:22, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Just how useful would a link to the IMDb really be? --TheFarix (Talk) 03:07, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

A link to www.animenewsnetwork.com or www.animenfo.com would be much more appropriate.--SeizureDog 05:04, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Search engine appearance

This section was moved to Wikipedia_talk:List_of_infoboxes#Search engine appearance by GunnarRene

What's the deal with "ja_name_trans"

Some people make it the literal translation of the Japanese title (eg. Sailor Moon) while others insist it should be the romanized version (eg. Neon Genesis Evangelion). We should standardize this, as I'm just stumped on what it is "supposed" to be. - Phorque (talk · contribs) 13:01, 06 June 2006 (UTC)

It should be the literal translation, hence the 'trans'. The romanization is typically in the first sentence of the text anyway. - mako 20:31, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

That's what I thought, but I changed the Evangelion article yesterday and it got instantly reverted to the romanized version. Furthermore, the romanized version is incorrect, it is "Evangelion" when it actually reads "Evangerion". *rolls eyes* I'll try again.

- Phorque (talk · contribs) 21:04, 06 June 2006 (UTC)

Image caption

I adjusted the header template to display the caption field. The previous version exempted it due to the formatting of the image. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 06:22, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Displaying the caption now shows a strip of white, which looks somewhat out of place with respect to the rest of the infobox. A white background, we decided earlier, is preferable in case transparent PNGs are used. So how to resolve this aesthetic dilemma? Since we're using an infobox with cell borders, creating a new (colored) row for the caption would partition it away from the image (= bad). The original intention was to have the caption be alt text, which I admit is probably overlooked by most people. - mako 08:41, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Normally, I'm all about aesthetics, and try my best to keep that in mind. In this case, however, unless you want the entire coloring scheme reworked, I'd say it's best to bite the bullet and deal with the slight amoount of whitespace. On the other hand, some sort of html background fill parameter would do nicely, but I'm at a loss on how to accomplish that. Also, come to think of it, it would just do only the text, leaving an even less-appealing whitespace if the caption goes beyond one line. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 08:51, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I'll be honest and say I don't like the change: it seems both unnecessary and unappealing. May I ask what the rationale is?--Monocrat 17:24, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I think it's better as a tooltip like before, personally. - Phorque 19:14, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Even in its current form it should still have a tooltip. The alt-text is used by accessibility browsers that read out aloud the tooltip text for the vision impaired. It should not have been removed. --Squilibob 00:11, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I went ahead and restored the tooltip. So what should we do about the visible caption? - mako 08:02, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

It would seem a discourtesy not to respond to requests for a rationale and to the complaints per se. If I don't hear beack soon, by Tuesday, I'll just revert the thing myself.--Monocrat 12:49, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I've reverted this change. It doesn't go well with the box. If we want some additional text to display below the image we can either add an additional parameter or a switch that would allow the caption to display. --Kunzite 17:54, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd have responded sooner, but I simply forgot. A tooltip is fine, and I'm not particularly vehement about having the caption actually display. I only made it display since it's common practice. The coloring of the box makes implementing a visible caption a somewhat visually displeasing action, as mentioned, so leaving it off would probably be for the best. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 21:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Size parameter malfunction

Just now the size parameter stoped working so the pic in the infobox has been resized and it becomes horribly pixilated. Here's just one example in the Kasimasi article.--Juhachi 06:57, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Fixed that. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 08:46, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I think you should leave the Infobox alone for now. You've actually done more damage then fix things. --TheFarix (Talk) 16:04, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

A little overdramatic, don't you think? All I did was clean up the code and fix the caption. Aside from that size variable, everything works exactly the same. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 16:13, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I tend to agree. Enough changes for now. Discuss changes here first from now on. Make prototypes in your own userspace and then display them here for scrutiny/discussion rather. - Phorque 19:10, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

A change to these templates affects hundreds of pages. I'm all for improving the template but the changes you have made are stylistic differences. I don't know what you mean by "color standardization". Are the following templates non-standard too: Template:Infobox Arcade Game, Template:Infobox VG, Template:Infobox City? --Squilibob 00:11, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Title image

As a fellow creator of this template I fail to see a reason why we cant hav images as "title". Some anime have simple, easy to read logos which can replace text just as easily. The inclusion of the image as title neither breaks the template/table nor require additional parameters. --Cat out 18:55, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I think such use is a bit tacky and encourages further abuse of the template. Also there is the trouble with WP:FUC when there is already another image in the image field that also contains the same logo. --TheFarix (Talk) 19:22, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

font-size: 92%

I changed font-size from smaller to 92%. The reason is that when smaller is specified, the resulting text is often larger than the body text. Whether this is a browser bug, or the text is smaller compared to something a lot larger than the body text, I don't know, but it causes excessively large text in anime infoboxes. I used 92%, to be consistent with other small text on Wikipedia. Shinobu 13:01, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

span id="NOINDEX"

In an article, this infobox what preceded by another. This was the resulting mess

From previous infobox:   </table>
Mess caused by the span: <p><span id="NOINDEX"></span></p>
Start of this infobox:   <table class="infobox bordered" style="width: 20em; font-size: 82%; text-align: left;">

This caused the previous infobox to be "cleared". I've corrected the problem. Shinobu 09:22, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

"Original Run" and One-shot (tanpatsu) drama

The Case Closed/Detective Conan drama has been aired for a month (October 2 2006). However, the drama is tanpatsu (one-shot)[1]; it has one one episode. How should I fill in the first_aired and last_aired fields? If I fill in the date on first_aired only, it would display October 2 2006 – {{{last_aired}}}, but if I fill in the same date for both fields, I'd get October 2 2006 - October 2 2006, which is equally silly. Is there anyone who want to correct this bug? --Samuel Curtis-- TALK 11:46, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Manhwa box?

Since manhwa isn't part of the project, should there be a box for it? ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 07:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I think manhwa have just as much validity as anime and manga do for inclusion in this project. True, the vast majority of overseas graphic novels can be classified as Japanese manga, but Korean manhwa shouldn't just be shoved under the rug just because they are not as common. Or even if manhwa isn't specifically included in this project, then perhaps we could at least leave it in a "See also" section?--(十八|talk) 08:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, think of it this way, we can make a box that can be used on those articles that is the same style as the animanga infobox, even if it's not technically the same WikiProject. -- Ned Scott 09:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I was just curious as I've seen the project tag being removed from manhwa articles by various editors who state that manhwa aren't part of the project. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 09:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

The Manhwa box was originally made separately and then was moved into a subsection of this page. It actually does not work as a modular component and isn't a part of the collection of templates at all. It is a standalone template and should not be grouped with the rest of the modular templates. Manhwa isn't part of WikiProject Anime and manga currently anyway. I like Juhachi's idea of linking to it in a See also section so that anyone wanting to replicate a stand-alone version of the Animanga template can see that it has been done before. --Squilibob 08:53, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

NavFrame was breaking other tables

The Show/Hide ability that was being used with NavFrame was breaking other tables such as the Navbox on the bottom of One Piece. The collapsibility is hard coded in the common javascript file so that any NavFrame would show by default no matter what unless there was more than 2 on the page in which case it would hide no matter what. We wanted our network_other and publisher_other fields to hide no matter what and so we nested two Navframes for each. We also used display:none as a backup. From what I have read any other NavFrames on a page would inherit the style of the first NavFrame. This would break any navbox that would use the NavFrame as they would automatically hide even if the editors wanted them to show by default. I have changed it so that the infobox uses the table style of collapsing. --Squilibob 10:18, 30 December 2006 (UTC)