Talk:The Garden of Words

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

Reviews[edit]

Cursory glance of custom google search. Extremepro (talk) 00:03, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for listing these reviews. Sorry I've been slow to get around to this re-write. I'm preparing to move and start a new job, so my time has been a little limited—but I will work on it soon. I haven't had time to read the reviews yet, but if none of them contain production information, that would also be very helpful to find. – Maky « talk » 17:15, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Though it may still take me a while to get to this article, I'm going to start creating a list of other references that can be used:

– Maky « talk » 23:12, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update: To those following this page, I am running a bit behind on the re-write. By the end of the day, I hope to have most my sources and notes in order. The actual writing (offline first) should begin by next week at the latest... if not tomorrow morning. One thing that will hold me up is the very informative interviews included on the blu-ray disc. It's 50 minutes long, so it will take some time to listen through and take notes. In the meantime, please continue searching for and translating Japanese sources. You may either send me your translations via email or wait until I have published the new version of the article and insert the content yourself. I'm fine with either. Thanks to all of those who are helping so far! – Maky « talk » 00:45, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I sent you a translation of Shinkai's statement, and an update, via email. ❥Nina (talk) 09:47, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dareka No Manazashi redirects here for some reason[edit]

I don't know why. I guess Dareka No Manazashi doesn't have its own page, but it should just redirect to Makoto Shinkai's page, not just some other work of his. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.174.87.60 (talk) 15:52, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like someone took care of it already. I'll work on creating a short article about it, and will try to publish it shortly. Btw, great anime short! Thank you for pointing it out to me. I love Makoto Shinkai's works! – Maky « talk » 18:40, 7 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Source discussion[edit]

I was wondering if anyone had access to "INK's feature story in the latest issue of Otaku USA magazine" (dated to 9/25/2013), per this article. It sounds like a valuable reference.

Also, I was wondering what people think of this review/analysis by "Kaze" at "Beneath the Tangles" (manga/anime site for Christians). It seems to have editorial reviews, and the quality seems quite high. It also happens to be the only source I've seen that does a good job analyzing the film from the theme of "lonely sadness", which Shinkai stressed when the film was first announced. I'm very tempted to use it in some sort of analysis section (excluding the religious stuff at the end), but I'm worried that aside from some help from a few questions in various Shinkai interviews, there won't be any other meaningful insights into the film from other sources. (The only other that I know of is a YouTube review by Demolition D, which is quite serious and thoughtful... in places. However, this obviously cannot be used as a source.... *unfortunately*, since he raises good points that all other reviewers miss.) Anyway... any thoughts on an "Analysis" section primarily using the "Beneath the Tangles" source and a few Shinkai interviews? – Maky « talk » 08:09, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese sources[edit]

I've found several good Japanese sources, and though Google Translate gives me the general idea of what's being said, it's not clear enough for me to incorporate into what I'm writing. Again, either someone can try to work the material in later, after I've published the new article, or translations can be sent to me via email. Either way, the inclusion of these sources will be essential since they cover how well the anime did in Japan and offer insights from Shinkai.

As for the manga, I have this source that doesn't seem to match up with what's in the infobox. Any ideas?

Also, does anyone have access to the Oricon rankings? I do not, and the only things I can retrieve are some basic info for the DVD and BD. At present, I have a lot of review material from the English sites, but not much in the way of performance numbers. If there are rankings for the manga, I haven't seen it. – Maky « talk » 20:27, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AFAIK, Oricon does not keep an archive of the manga or DVD charts. So, we can't get sales information on them. Ryoga (talk) 16:54, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Good to know -- thanks. – Maky « talk » 21:00, 11 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You might find this long interview and this one interesting. Ryoga (talk) 04:08, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Can you read them by any chance? Otherwise they'll have to wait until a translator has time to help. – Maky « talk » 06:16, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, I can't read Japanese. Sorry I couldn't be of more help. Ryoga (talk) 12:06, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I've added them to the list above for translation and later inclusion. – Maky « talk » 17:52, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Re-write complete... mostly...[edit]

Aside from the inclusion of Japanese sources (above)—and particularly Shinkai's official site and the film's official site—my work here as a WikiDragon is done. Proof reading and a good copy edit are welcome. I might make a few other small edits, such as noting the differences between the manga and the anime (citing the manga directly), but otherwise I think I've covered everything I could find. My biggest concern is references—a few may be questionable, though I've been very careful to utilize (mostly) peer-reviewed sources. The most questionable ones are the Otaku's Study review (run by a single guy with very stringent review standards) and the analysis from Beneath the Tangles. The latter is critical for the "Themes" section, but it does appear to be peer reviewed since the site has "staff". I hope it's good enough anyway...

Anyway, feedback and fixes would be much appreciated. – Maky « talk » 11:43, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Correction regarding Dareka no Manazashi screenings[edit]

The German source that claims that Dareka no Manazashi aired at the Gold Coast Film Festival with The Garden of Words is wrong. I thought it strange that only a single non-English or Japanese source would make the claim and no others, especially given the detailed news record of the various screenings and the heavy coverage of the GCFF event. To confirm my suspicions of the error, I wrote to the GCFF staff and received a reply from the program manager, Mitch Ziems, confirming that Dareka no Manazashi did not play at the event. – Maky « talk » 18:36, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use image discussion[edit]

I have added several images to the article, all of which should fall under fair use. The question about what would be appropriate for this article was posed at Wikipedia:Non-free content review and WikiProject Anime and manga, and only minimal feedback was given. The images added mimic similar non-free image use on other GA- and FA-quality anime/manga articles, as discussed in my post. If you feel I have added too many non-free images, please discuss here. If the consensus is to remove some of them, then so be it. – Maky « talk » 13:02, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Novel serialization[edit]

Are you sure the novel was serialized in Da Vinci?? Because I cannot find "言の葉の庭" anywhere in the tables of contents for the magazine earlier this year. ServanteDeFeu (talk) 06:33, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I only have the one source I cited, though I think someone added the information to the infobox before I used this source. Hmmm... I wonder if the source is wrong. I also wonder if there's a way to find its serialization information. Would it help if I sent you a photo of the licensing page from the novel? – Maky « talk » 07:08, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Besides the info on the publisher's website there is also this note about serialisation printed in the novel itself, on page 696: ＊この作品は『ダ・ヴィンチ』二〇一三年九月号～二〇一四年四月号に掲載され、Verso.Sciolto 08:35, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Verso.Sciolto: Which version of the novel do you have? Mine only goes to page 381. Also, can you link to the publisher's info, particularly if it includes the start *and* end dates. (We need a citation still for the end date. – Maky « talk » 16:27, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I just checked, and in my copy of the novel, this quote is on page 382. I can't read any Japanese, but I checked every character from the quote above with what's in the book, and then ran that quote through Google Translate, getting: "This work was published in "The Da Vinci" September 2013 Issue - April 2014 issue". So it seems that we now have a good citation. However, I would like to know why our page numbers differ so radically, and if you can point to a webpage for this information, please do so. A double citation with one pointing to a website would make the information more accessible to the readers. – Maky « talk » 16:36, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The tables of content currently online at the publisher's website list 言の葉の庭 in the Da Vinci issues in which the instalments appeared. The first chapter was printed in the September 2013 issue - see coloured box marked Special here: http://ddnavi.com/dav-contents/154786/ . The final instalments appeared in the April 2014 issue, see here: http://ddnavi.com/dav-contents/185948/.
I have a digital edition of the novel. Released April 30, 2014 Ver. 1.0. I think I provided this info when I sent you scans regarding Shinkai's remark about Seto Inland Sea in the afterword and screen caps with visible Man’yōshū references. Verso.Sciolto (talk) 09:20, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Verso.Sciolto: Thanks for the links and clarification. Sorry, but I've got a lot of stuff I need translated, and I've overwhelmed my translator. (/wink @ ServanteDeFeu) Anyway, since you have the book and I assume you can read it, would you be able to give an overview of the kinds of extra material covered in the novel (and not the anime)? The only problem will be citing it because our page numbers differ. If it's possible, maybe you could send me scans of the pages you're citing. Or maybe we can change the citation to the digital edition and use your page numbers. – Maky « talk » 17:05, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I looked everywhere except the specials section ｡_｡ ❥Nina (talk) 08:46, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Which templates to use?[edit]

Hey there. Since this article is about a Japanese film, I thought that all films should include Template:Infobox film rather than the animanga template. However, the film infobox template that I added (and later reverted) might not make any sense here, since the current infobox covers the anime and the manga as well and can make it a bit more simpler, I think. Per WP:BRD, I'm taking this matter on the talk page. Should we use either the film infobox or the Animanga infobox? Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 08:13, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Typically with anime-related topics, we use the animanga template. I reverted some of your edits because you had essentially reverted the edits I had made as part of the good article review. Assuming I can find a translator for the Japanese sources listed above, I hope to someday take this article to FAC. For such high-end reviews, we often have to conform to existing standards. – Maky « talk » 18:41, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. I was only trying to help. I have done some article work (for example in Summer Wars which is also a GAN) as well with over 60,000 edits. I'm also thinking about taking the article for FAC if I have the chance as well, since I know Japanese and can translate some of those sources. I will help out as much as I can. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:45, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

FAC[edit]

To those of you who worked on the GAN, nice work. I intend to help take it to FAC as I have mostly done with some articles as well, using Conan the Barbarian (1982 film) as a model. Before taking to FAC, I think a peer review would help. A couple of quick suggestions:

  • Plot section - should be between 400 and 700 words and the part on the manga should be in the appropriate section.
  • Lead section - the first paragraph should include the plotline, actors and staffers as well. The second paragraph should include production information while the third paragraph should include release information, reception and home video releases. For some examples, please see The_Avengers_(2012_film) and Summer Wars, which is also a GA.
  • Cast section - we should follow the WP:MOSFILM#Cast format if its necessary.
  • Citations - all dead citations should be replaced with archived equivalents.
  • Reception - we should include box office information.

Any other suggestions or thoughts would be very much appreciated. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:52, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Title[edit]

Let's talk about the title ! Isn't it better to separate words like this : kotonoha -> koto no ha ? If you think it's better like "kotonoha", let's discuss here --Evachan39 (talk) 13:58, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I just came in here to note that the title in Japanese seems to be a play on words — the word 言葉 "kotoba" which means "word" has been separated into two words 言の葉 meaning "word leaves." I don't know Japanese enough to edit the article though. noktulo (talk) 06:15, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Japanese dictionaries I looked at have it as a headword, so I would consider it as one word. It has the same meaning as "kotoba", just archaic and literary. Opencooper (talk) 08:53, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Garden_of_Words&oldid=1207451233"