Talk:Ai Yori Aoshi

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

Title[edit]

Any chance of getting a translation for the Xun Zi quote from whence the title comes?

"From the indigo, an even deeper blue." Or so this site says. I am hesitant to add it without confirmation that it is the correct quote, however; it even sources it from a different person to that of this article. Elric of Grans 05:19, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
A quick google resulted in this site. The English translation provided ("The scholar may be better than the master") is dubious, but reading the rest of the site that's roughly the meaning. My own translation is "Blue is blueness surpassing indigo which comes from indigo" or, slightly less literally and with slightly less atrocious grammar, "Blue comes from indigo yet is bluer than indigo", roughly indicating the idea of "surpassing one's master". I'm not sure how to include the explanation in the article, though. If someone else can come up with a prettier translation/explanation, please do. Tropsy 21:26, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I know this is like three years later saying this but one of the sources in indeed a quote while the other leads to a website that has block letters for me, and my computer usually can read Japanese sites. I dont know this section may have to be deleted if it does not have a good reference or two. Knowledgekid87 18:27, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Enishi the end?[edit]

The anime series was completed when its second season under the title Ai Yori Aoshi Enishi was completed in 2003

Is that official or just an assumption?08:03, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, they haven't made any more anime shows of it since then, so its a good bet that its the end of the anime series. FleetAdmiralJ 20:04, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Enishi: Special Added. Unfortuntely, I didn't know anything about the year it was made, so all I could add in regards to it was what I entered, to at the very least give some information about it. I usually come here for all my information, so was suprised to see it left out :p When I find more about it, I.E release date etc, will add. EvoBeardy 22nd Jan '09 GMT

Why have seperate articles?[edit]

Why do we need to have a seperate article for Ai Yori Aoshi and Ai Yori Aoshi Enishi? They're the same series (just different seasons) and the only other difference, really, is that Enishi was aired on a seperate TV station. Therefore I'm proposing that Ai Yori Aoshi Enishi be merged into the main Ai Yori Aoshi article, and leave a redirect at Enishi to AYA. FleetAdmiralJ 19:52, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done.PiccoloNamek 07:04, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Characters[edit]

I am seriously considering splitting the characters section into another article (as is the case with Chobits and several other anime articles.) The infobox is getting out of control and it's messing up the formatting in the characters section. If nobody objects, I am going through with it tonight. PiccoloNamek 12:11, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Characters[edit]

I think you should add the minor characters to the character list as well. Suzuki, Satou, Aoi's mother and father, Ruka Saionji, Natsuki Komiya and Chizuru Aizawa.

Harem Anime?[edit]

If I diddn't know any better, after watching the anime i would think it would be classified as a harem type anime. Anyone else agree or disagree? -julius —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.208.125.77 (talk) 21:14, 27 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Well I think it is really a romance wrapped around a harem. The first four and the last three episodes can really stand by themselves as a really good romance, while the middle episodes are a, in my opinion, weak harem comedy. I don't think it does the work justace to tag it as harem. Corumplex 19:50, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it definitely qualifies as a harem anime, granted a pretty atypical one. I base this simply on the fact that throughout the series there are at least 4 girls, in addition to Aoi, who harbor some sort of romantic interest in Kaoru. Tina has deep love for him, Mayu an intense infatuation, Taeko a definite romantic desire, and even Chika has a passing crush on him. What sets it apart is that there is never any real question about who he loves, which is what also makes it a romantic anime, still, I think it definitely has the dual nature of being harem too. DejitaruMusouka 18:59, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd call it pseudo-harem because the male lead has already decided on a girl. The other girls don't have a chance -- they just don't know that. Argel1200 (talk) 22:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • You are funny. In most harem anime title character does not make any real choice. Netrat (talk) 06:28, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think I would dispute the classification as a harem title. Even though multiple girls are in love or infatuated with the male lead, they clearly have no chance of actual ending up with him. Aoi is clearly the only girl that Kaoru is in love. The others are simply distractions who are oblivious to Kaoru's and Aoi's secret. Its really a Romantic comedy with some harem elements added to the mix. —Farix (t | c) 21:02, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, I compare this to Love Hina and unlike that one, the main two characters (Karou, and Aoi's) feelings are clearly present for each other. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:43, 10 September 2009 (AT)

Reintigrate Characters?[edit]

Y'know besides some info dumps like the manga info and the songs, this article is pretty bare. I see no reason why we couldn't merge the character list back into the main article. The previous complaint about the info box could be remedied easily enough.76.108.76.51 (talk) 08:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Things that need to be cleaned up here[edit]

- Title Section (As mentioned above it has no real references).

- Characters Section needs improvements (See Article)

- Video games section may need a rewrite as there were 4 Visual novels listed as being released in the infobox but only 2 discussed?

- Might also need spelling and grammer corrections.

- Reception section needs expanding (Working on now)

Knowledgekid87 18:27, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Split off the anime episode list, and I might do the same for the manga. By the way, the theme songs do not need a reference. Also, I doubt animeworld.com is a reliable source, though it's only being used to say that Geneon licensed the anime which probably isn't necessary. AngelFire3423 (talk) 21:18, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The animeworld.com reference is temp but yes a reference should be included to state that geneon licensed the anime. As for putting down most of the work ive done this article is in better shape than it was before in my opinion. Good job on the Anime section you did, id leave the manga section alone for now though. I actully never started work on the anime section myself other than added the music references (Which youre right on). Ive worked on the lead and Manga sections as well as create a reception section for the article. Knowledgekid87 22:49, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's going to be kind of hard since, though I haven't tried all that hard yet, since Geneon site for Ai Yori Aoshi disappeared when they moved from Pioneer Entertainment and ANN doesn't have a news article on it. AngelFire3423 (talk) 10:49, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the character section, there are actually alot of articles that have the character section and the plot section merged. In fact it the style is preferred "to prevent the article from looking like SparkNotes" as it states in the manual of style for anime. Well maybe its not preferred per say, but if there is a list of characters article then it usually is. Examples would be the FA Tokyo Mew Mew, GAs: Fullmetal Alchemist, Kashimashi ~Girl Meets Girl~, etc. In fact, I think all the GAs that have list of character sections have the character section merged with the plot. Though for future reference, this just how articles with anime and manga as the original work are handled. AngelFire3423 (talk) 10:49, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at it sure, sorry for that. I am actully not an expert editor here as you can prob tell, I help as best as I can though improving articles and saw how bad of shape this one was in. As for the subsections in the anime section people do look up Ai yori aoshi enishi on wikipedia and it redirects here, plus it looks more neat and you can tell that there were diffrent parts of the anime section overall. The Geneon release will be hard yes to find, I guess amazon is a good temp solution.Knowledgekid87 12:57, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would rather you not do make those subsections because the main article (ie the list of episodes) is where people will see that seperation by season, though in the list of episodes you might want to make a new section -- I won't really have an opinion on that until sources are found for it. The anime section is just an overview and it's undesireable to have sections with just one paragraph except in certain cases (though there are quite a few of these cases) if it can be helped. I would say from reading the anime section the way is structured, it's already pretty easy to tell which part is from where. And it's for those reasons that all of the Good Articles and Featured Articles don't put subsections like that.
Also, about Geneon licensing it in English, you put that after you mention it being licensed in Japan going with the idea of how anime+manga articles cover the original work first. Usually actually, there's an entire paragraph devoted to the English release since this is the English wiki, but I thought that, that would be a little confusing for the layout since there are three paragraphs for the three "seasons" (if you count the special). Sorry for being long-winded, just explaining some of the reasoning. I'm going to change it back, complaints? AngelFire3423 (talk) 21:38, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What photos do you request? Just so you know if it's characters, that won't work because of the argument that goes something like this: You don't need to know what the characters look like to understand the article; non-free use images should be kept to a minimum. Also, something useful for striking off things done is using <s></s>, which gets you done. AngelFire3423 (talk) 16:38, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

True, a picture of characters would be better suited in the list of characters section. I am thinking more along the lines of a DVD picture or maybe a picture of one of the video games. This is just to make the article look nicer and wont hurt to do. Thanks also for the striking off advice as well.Knowledgekid87 15:58, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree on these changes, and there should be something done in the episodes page. There's no consistency in the synopsises in the episodes. There are some have a question at the end, some were ok, and others had two short sentences about the episode. 

 1. Remove the questions and expand on the synopsis.
 2. Two sentences doesn't give the readers know what the episode is about.  Expand these areas.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by YCMCA1956 (talk • contribs) 06:32, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seinen? Tell me more.[edit]

Calling Ai Yori Aoshi seinen is the silliest thing ever. You have one week to provide sources. Netrat (talk) 06:28, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How so? The series was orginally in a seinen magazine. The only other main Ddemographics are: Shōnen, Shōjo, and Josei (I have taken out Kodomo since this is not a made for kids anime). - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:11, 10 September 2009 (AT)
The demographic is always determined by what what manga magazine it was serialized in. If you are going to challenge this as not being a seinen series, then you are also challenging Young Animal as a seinen magazine. And since this is the same magainze that ran Ai-Ren, Futari Ecchi, Berserk, and Yuria 100 Shiki, that would be a hard position to argue. —Farix (t | c) 20:51, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Licensed by Funimation[edit]

The wiki claims that in 2010 distributor Funimation Entertainment has rescued both Ai Yori Aoshi and Enishi, but the source given only mentions Ai Yori Aoshi. Can someone please find a source pointing to Enishi being licensed as well? 84.108.63.63 (talk) 20:23, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

d — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.93.159.158 (talk) 10:19, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Ai Yori Aoshi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:37, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ai_Yori_Aoshi&oldid=1214610868"