Talk:Jyu-Oh-Sei

Plot Summary Rewrite

The current plot summary is a detailed account of only the first two episodes of an eleven episode series. One line is all that is reserved for the remaining nine episodes. What objections, TheFairx, do you have against my current proposal for the plot summary?

Due to the lack of response I have changed the plot summary so it includes a summary of the full series instead of just two episodes.

Addition of Setting Information section

The original writer felt the details in the plot summary important enough to include. Many were irrelevant to understanding the plot, the number of days in the planet's rotation, or the population percentage of women. However, they are important in that they provide for the unique setting the writer chose, which gives life to this particular story. Is there a particular reason this information should be excluded?

To keep the plot summary free of excessive details, I kept details of artistic interest not necessary for a summary in this section.

Too much story detail

What the heck is up with this article? The entire story is revealed, there's horrendous spoilers in the character descriptions alone. This stuff is to give a taste of what you learn in the first couple episodes and should not include massive, "shocker" plot points. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.10.160.73 (talk) 06:13, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I fixed the plot section to provide an actual summary. Relevant non-spoiler information about the story setting from the original outline was included under organized headings. Adoliver (talk) 10:25, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I've undid the changes. Plot details should not be removed on the bases of them being spoilers. After all, how does one verify that a plot detail is a spoiler? 99% of the time, one can't as "spoilage" is almost always based on a person's personal opinion. --Farix (Talk) 11:07, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

My original edit was modified to include the major plot points of the story. Informative pieces of the original plot description which were too detailed for a summary were included in the two sections about Chimera. Adoliver (talk) 12:22, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

The plot summary is always written as one section and is not divided up into multiple sections. The overall length of the previous summary seems fine, though I cannot judge its completeness. --Farix (Talk) 19:41, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

How would you suggest the additional information be presented? A separate section for the story setting? The parts about the planet and society are definitely interesting and useful to get a feel of the setting. They mostly seemed too detailed or trivial for a plot summary. The current summary is not complete at all, it summarizes only the first two episodes with only a single line encompassing the remaining nine. Adoliver (talk) 06:02, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Is explaining the setting necessary to understanding the manga's plot or anything else in the article? In most cases such sections aren't necessary and the setting detail that are required is always incorporated into the general plot summary or the character descriptions. For example, Maburaho gives a very brief overview of the world in order to provide enough context for the reader to understand the plot points that appear later in the summary and character section. --Farix (Talk) 13:58, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

It is not necessary for explaining the plot, which is why I moved it into its own section. Because plots are mostly re-hashed and unique settings are generally what give a story life, I felt it important to have that information as well. You also seem to use 'always' too frequently; more than one fourth of the "good articles" in the anime/manga category which are descriptions of stories use a section for the setting: Strawberry Panic!, Earl Cain, Little Busters!, Planetarian: Chiisana Hoshi no Yume, Shuffle!, Popotan. I think it'll be more constructive for my understanding of your objections to continue talking about the Plot section and the Setting section separately. To conclude the original issue raised in this thread, I agree that the major plot points should be included though they might be considered spoilers by some.Adoliver (talk) 08:39, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

More

I'm shocked at the poor writing in this article. For starters, there should be a massive spoiler warning before the character descriptions. Long-winded plot summaries don't belong here. These details are not only unnecessary but undesirable in this context.

"Thor . . ., defeated the Top of Ochre Ring to became the leader of Ochre ring himself. After a few years, Thor becomes the Beast King and finds out the truth behind the myth of the Beast King. Thor fell in love with Karim, though he was aware of Tiz’s feelings for him. In the end, Thor accepted Tiz’s feelings and agreed to let Tiz bear his child after he saves Chimera."

"As a result, Rai was killed by a carnivorous plant."

"She understood that Zagi was an important person to Thor and protected him with her life when a Night Ring member tried to kill Zagi for revenge."

"Third helped Thor to become the Top of Ochre Ring" "Thor became the Beast King, it was revealed that Third was actually Lt. Sigurd Heiza" "Third’s desire was to go to Earth, but later found out that Earth had been destroyed by a meteor" (is this what you'd call an earthshattering spoiler?)

"When Karim was murdered, Thor thought that Zagi was the one who killed her and challenged him to a fight, where Zagi was defeated."

"When she was murdered by a mysterious killer, Thor thought that it was Zagi who killed her.

"Cheng became handicapped later in the story" "Sun Ring’s Top loved Cheng and protected her when she was about to be killed by Zagi."

Past this, there's an episode guide, which appears to filter out all those 'unnecessary bits' and just get straight to giving away every major plot point in a concise fashion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.10.160.73 (talk) 06:29, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

The spoilers in the character descriptions have ben removed. Adoliver (talk) 10:53, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I've undid the changes. Plot details should not be removed on the bases of them being spoilers. After all, how does one verify that a plot detail is a spoiler? 99% of the time, one can't as "spoilage" is almost always based on a person's personal opinion. --Farix (Talk) 11:08, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Article largely rewritten

I finished rewriting this article a while ago, removing erroneous or unnecessary information as well as spoilers. Please keep an eye on the page, as major spoilers keep on being added by someone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.10.139.158 (talk) 23:21, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is NOT a spoiler free zone. Do not remove spoilers. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 02:41, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

For an information article about a story, especially a current one many will have not read, a description without spoilers is a beneficial courtesy. Even authors who put character lists in their books do not give away major plot points when doing so. It is acceptable to have an overview without spoilers and a warning for where they will be encountered. Wikipedia is also not meant to be a cliff-notes. See here and here for the official anime style rules which support my argument.Adoliver (talk) 11:00, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I've undid your changes. Plot details should not be removed on the bases that they are spoilers. After all, how does one verify that a plot detail is a spoiler? 99% of the time, one can't as "spoilage" is almost always based on a person's personal opinion. Wikipedia also has guidelines that prevents editors from remove details on the account of being spoilers. --Farix (Talk) 11:11, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

This is ridiculous. If you read that and don't see spoilers revealing pretty much complete story behind the series, then you're a moron and shouldn't be allowed to edit anything here. Spoilers as big as the ones in "character section" are not "personal opinion", they are obvious spoilers for anyone that attended elementary school. At the very least put a big fat SPOILER warning before character section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.53.243.34 (talk) 11:17, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

What plot details are "spoilers" is an interpretation based on personal opinion of what constitutes a spoiler. The fact taht the plot details are "spoilers" are being directly challenged and needs to be verified. Also, Wikipedia has two policies that disallow spoiler disclaimers in articles. (WP:SPOILER and WP:NDA) The first one also prevents the remove of plot details on the bases that they are "spoilers". —Farix (t | c) 13:14, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Maybe people shouldn't READ A PLOT SUMMARY of something they haven't finished reading yet rather than moan about "spoilers". Maybe people should take responsibility for thier own actions and not try and blame other people for thier own mistakes. Maybe. 86.129.63.65 (talk) 20:18, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Kill Tiz was it necessary?

Should not have happened. Tiz should have lived and been waiting for Thor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.192.82.142 (talk) 04:12, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jyu-Oh-Sei. 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:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090420065018/www.funimationchannel.com/schedule/1_e918.htm to http://www.funimationchannel.com/schedule/1_e918.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 19:01, 20 July 2016 (UTC)