User talk:Shippai

Hi. I see you have again reverted the Romanized title of the single to "Everyday, Katyusha". As you probably know, the single is titled "Everyday、カチューシャ" in Japanese. As there appears to be no official English version of the title, we have to use the Romanized form on Wikipedia. The Manual of Style for Japanese articles says: Revised Hepburn romanization should be used in all cases, excepting those cases where another romanization is determined to be in common usage in reliable sources. Is there some compelling reason why the old Kunrei-shiki romanization ("Katyūsha") needs to be used here, rather than the standard modern Hepburn romanization ("Kachūsha")? --DAJF (talk) 03:50, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late reply. I know on Wikipedia we use the romanized form, but according to the manual of style when dealing with Katakana the manual of style states: If an English spelling is not available, but a spelling from another language of origin exists, use it. Which to my understanding means rather than using "Kachūsha" we should use "Katyusha". Shippai (talk) 23:42, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Do you understand the difference between Hepburn romanization and Kunrei-shiki romanization? "Kachūsha" is not English, but is Japanese romanized using the modern Hepburn system that we also normally use on Wikipedia. The antiquated Kunrei-shiki system (which would give "Katyusha") should not be used on Wikipedia unless there is some compelling reason to break with the rules. Is the romanized form "Katyusha" used anywhere in official sources? --DAJF (talk) 00:16, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think you misunderstood what I wrote. I know "Kachūsha" is not English, but it is of Russian origin. Which is why I said "Katyusha" should be used rather than "Kachūsha" and why I believe the MOS agrees with me on this. Shippai (talk) 00:46, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'm not an expert but since the Russian alphabet is Cyrillic, and the rule is for romanization, then it doesn't appear to work as it may for "Ponytail to Chouchou". Surely, it's still extremely probable that if an official romanization existed, it would be "Everyday, katyusha". In Russian Wikipedia, I was hesitant and I did add the Russian spelling "Everyday, катюша" in the parenthesis to show the word is of Russian origin. Moscowconnection (talk) 00:28, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I do believe there's a reason to list the singles released on King Records. Cause they are still promoted, there are music videos for them on the official YouTube channel, as opposed to singles under DefSTAR. YouTube videos are the actual reason I created the individual pages for all these singles. And actually, I would have added a complete singles list if I thought the articles on previous singles were complete and pleasing to browse through. The article on AKB48 is huge enough to allow a few more lines. So don't be alarmed if I add the list back some day. ^^ I won't do it now cause the articles aren't complete yet. Moscowconnection (talk) 00:11, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That is not a reason to list only the singles on King Records. AKB probably does not have the rights to add the PV from DefSTAR onto YouTube which is why they are not available. As for the singles still being promoted, that doesn't mean anything either. AKB is still promoting "Aitakatta", but that was not added to the list. The point I'm making is the discography section should only list albums and maybe #1 singles. Not selected singles from a certain label just because they are still promoting them or the music video for them are on a official YouTube channel. Shippai (talk) 18:05, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, "Singles on King Records" is not a good criteria. Still, I would suggest to add the whole list there if I didn't think most articles would scare people who wanted to browse through the AKB48's singles off. Moscowconnection (talk) 12:43, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That is the reason the discography link is right above the albums/singles and the discography article was made, so we do not have to list every single they have released throughout the years. Shippai (talk) 18:05, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! I don't think they actually gave much thought about the name for the trainee team to use on YouTube. They probably just gave someone the commentary text to translate. And I think they actually use 2 names for the team, the other is just "Trainee". Believe it or not, in the Russian language video they say "Researchers". Would you put "Researches" there too? I'll just rename the section back to "Research Students" as it was before, okay?

I confused everything!

Here: What is AKB48?

1:09: the Trainee TEAM

1:20: TEAM Trainee

1:37: TEAM Trainee

1:54: Trainee

2:08: Trainee

No "Team Trainees"! What's then?

I think "the Trainee Team" will look good in the article text but I'll call the section "Trainee Team" without "the". Moscowconnection (talk) 13:21, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote "Trainee Team" without "the". I'll also indicate the Japanese name for the trainee team in the Trainee Team section. Please don't delete it cause there's no "official name" and it's called "Team Kenkyuusei". It would be misleading if it's not indicated. And it was there, I just wanted to move it from the lead section cause most people don't have East Asian Language Support installed. Moscowconnection (talk) 13:58, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to remove the Japanese names for the teams from the article, please discuss it here: User_talk:Moscowconnection#Naming for AKB48 team or start a new topic on the Talk:AKB48 page. For the moment, I have added it back in as I was asked on my talk page, and I also added the names for all other teams back. Moscowconnection (talk) 15:14, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Japanese names are exactly the same as in English there is no reason to add the "Japanese" name. For the research team that is understandable seeing how there is no official name for them. But for Teams A, K, B, and 4 the Japanese word for "Team" is not needed. Shippai (talk) 18:05, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think they are exactly the same. And they are written in Japanese, too. The teams aren't called "Team A" etc. Moscowconnection (talk) 19:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could you point me to any Wikipedia guidelines that advise against including the info? I add useful information and you delete it. :) It is not something we should fight about cause it's not very important, but nevertheless... Moscowconnection (talk) 02:28, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I also asked User:DAJF to resolve our dispute. Here's the link cause I think you have the right to know if you're discussed somewhere: User_talk:DAJF#AKB48.27s_teams.27_names. :) But I hope he just comes here and tells us who's right. Anyway, let's not fight and just make the article better. :) Moscowconnection (talk) 03:19, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is not about who is right. It's all about what makes sense. Shippai (talk) 14:58, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Different things make sense to different people. Moscowconnection (talk) 14:31, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you "unformat" the references? I'm sorry, but I'm the one adding all the sources and correcting them a million times, and it's much more convenient like that. If you find some manual of style for references, tell me, I'll do it as it says. Moscowconnection (talk) 14:31, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

E.g. Wikipedia:Citation_templates#Examples. It looks good, I can format everything I add or correct like that. Moscowconnection (talk) 14:33, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you do this? I think people would like to access the article about Momusu's newest single without having to scroll through their huge discography page. Do you want me to list all Momusu's singles then? If you want, I'll do it. Moscowconnection (talk) 00:37, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And please, do something more constructive. Do you honestly think these articles (AKB48, Morning Musume) you've been trying to preserve in their current state are good and deserve staying like they are? You should write something, add more info. And all you do lately is minor fixes. Moscowconnection (talk) 00:37, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Btw! Do you remember the AKB48's "number-one singles" column you defended? Having only number-one singles in the list prevents from adding new releases before they charted. We should do something about it. Moscowconnection (talk) 00:53, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I listed all Momusu's singles: [1]. Is it okay now? Moscowconnection (talk) 01:11, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]