Template talk:English anime licensee

Template-protected edit request on 30 December 2018

Please add "HK" for Hong Kong as it also speak English there RainbowSilver2ndBackup (talk) 22:14, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

 Done Please test in an article to make sure it works as intended. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:07, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Small text

The use of small text here violates MOS:SMALLTEXT and should be removed. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:07, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

• It also constructs a pseudo-list out of a string of divs, which is barely a step above <br>-separated entities. It should construct a list instead (for example using {{ubl}}). Hairy Dude (talk) 16:15, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Removing non-English speaking countries from this template

In line with MOS:TVINTL, the template should only include English-speaking countries since this is an English Wikipedia. If a licensor that caters to non-English speaking countries has a significant contribution to a given anime then we can give it an exemption provided with a source. That information can be further elaborated on in the anime's article body. Centcom08 (talk) 15:31, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

I don't necessarily agree with this. Sure, we can remove anything that is 'non-English', but a number of these channels in non-English speaking countries have networks that specifically cater to the "English-language", which is what Infobox animanga specifically dictates is worth inclusion in the infoboxes. In other words, the idea that the "English Wikipedia" necessitates the inclusion of only "English-speaking countries" for the licensee in the infobox is not correct given the definition of "English language licensees", which could be from any country-- English-speaking majority or not. Sarcataclysmal (talk) 21:07, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Your statement already violating MOS:TVINTL. How can you satisfy the said Manual of Style rule? Centcom08 (talk) 01:13, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

My reply above only discusses the anime side. Since this template is a combination of anime, manga, and light novels, I suggest creating a section on the template for the rule on anime per MOS:TVINTL. Centcom08 (talk) 01:45, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Whether or not it's a supposed "violation" of MOS:TVINTL isn't what I'm considering here; it wouldn't be the first or last time a project like this ignored any sort of "rule" (which is a recommended set of guidelines) to the benefit of a project/Wiki. Anyway, I don't believe this to be a case of WP:INDISCRIMINATE, which I do support, and thus don't agree with its removal from anime or whatever else unless there's significant reason besides a recommendation to given the language of the template and its usage. Sarcataclysmal (talk) 01:52, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

If you want to get technical, licensees shouldn't be listed in the infobox in the first place. Just because this is the English language Wikipedia doesn't mean that the information in the infobox should be English-centric. 216.30.147.90 (talk) 12:33, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 27 September 2023

The margin-left may need to be increased on AUS as it looks off on articles like Naruto (TV series). 1989 (talk) 23:21, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Change 1.7 in width and margin-left to 1.8. That should fix it. 1989 (talk) 00:54, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

When I look at this template in use in that infobox, I see a visual disaster. Even in the rows where the country label does not wrap, I see the country/region abbreviation in all caps and superscripted, followed immediately by normally aligned text, with no space between the country/region abbreviation and the text. This formatting is a visual mess, and it can't possibly meet accessibility requirements. I think this template needs to be overhauled to use a standard list format. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:04, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

I have made this template more sane in the sandbox. Please see {{English anime licensee/testcases}}. If you know of use cases that are more complex, please add them to the testcases page or link to them from here. Unless there are objections, I will roll out this code soon. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:40, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

I added two sections in testcases where I feel your re-model may have a flaw, as some articles like One Piece use those templates with this one. 1989 (talk) 05:37, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for those contributions. The visual rendering of the live version of this template in that article is a mess in both instances. I copied the other usage from that article into the testcases page to show its flaws. I would recommend removing the ubl formatting from that instance and just using plain text. I have no doubt that we will find other instances where this template's poor formatting has been worked around with hacks like the one you found; the hacks will no longer be needed.

Also, I noted in looking into the history of this template that it was based on {{Video game release}}, which has since been updated significantly to use more reasonable formatting. – Jonesey95 (talk) 05:43, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

I added another example to the ubl section on how the re-model looks when used in One Piece. With the font style gone, the abbreviation is also in italics. 1989 (talk) 06:00, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure what that is trying to demonstrate. The proper way to italicize works like Shonen Jump is to wrap the wikilink in italics. Again, if this was some sort of hack to make this template work right, it won't be needed anymore.  Fixed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 06:16, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

I attempted to fix the empty spot, I wonder how NA can be moved up in testcases. 1989 (talk) 07:55, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

I think I have it now. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:17, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

I agree, feel free to implement the changes. 1989 (talk) 18:00, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

I made a new section on how the template looks in the infobox. Is there a way for it to not make a new line like how it's shown in the test infobox? 1989 (talk) 18:37, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

I have fixed that one. This is fun. Any more edge cases? – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:05, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Is there another way to fix the text going outside the box without using width in inline block? If not, then it should be fine as is. 1989 (talk) 21:00, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

I never saw text going outside a box. Which test case was causing trouble? Was it broken in a real infobox, which is wider? I don't think fixed widths are a good idea; they are what caused the issue that started this discussion, and rendering of them may vary for different viewers. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:58, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

I saw it in the first infobox test case where the sandbox is linked. 1989 (talk) 22:08, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Did you try using the sandbox in preview in the actual article? When there is an image present, the infobox is wider. I added images to the testcases page. If you take away the fixed width in the sandbox, I suspect that the test cases will look fine. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:57, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

I reverted my changes in the sandbox, the issue is still present with the images added in. 1989 (talk) 00:46, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

I see it now. That is bizarre. I tried a couple of quick fixes that did not work. I will continue to troubleshoot it. Would you be OK with deploying the version we have now while I continue to work on it? – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:56, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

I'd like to add this is also a big visual problem with SA/SEA (Final "A" is cut off) in the license field parameters as seen from Spy × Family (TV series) and In/Spectre. If that could also be fixed, that would be very great.--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 01:43, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

The first article is fixed by the sandbox version. The second article shows "Muse Communication" extending out over the right border of the infobox, which is not good. That's what I'm working on above. It's a tricky one. – Jonesey95 (talk) 02:58, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

OK, I did some further hacking to make things fit. At this point, I don't entirely understand how all of the pieces interact with each other, so I'm not confident that this version will work in every case, but I think it's better than the weird formatting we have now, so it might be worth a try. – Jonesey95 (talk) 03:55, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. Feel free to make the change, unfortunate there wasn't another way besides width. 1989 (talk) 04:14, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

I have deployed the sandbox version to the live template, using 1989's preferred "em" width settings instead of the "71%" width setting that worked for me. I don't know which one is better, because as I said above, I don't really know why the right-hand span was leaking out of the right side of the infobox in the first place. A better solution is welcome. Feel free to report problems observed in articles. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:46, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

English licensee

Copy from Talk:Shaman King: Flowers by --HK5201314 (talk) 11:42, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

---

Per Daniel Case suggestion at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Increase, I'll discuss my views here in the event of future edits. I think that Template:Infobox animanga and Template:English anime licensee are clear enough about what is an English licensee, and as far as I can see, most of regular editors of WP:A&M project seem to understand this as well. I've tried to explain several times already to @HK5201314: why a platform that doesn't operate in an English-speaking territory (i.e. the ones included in Template:English anime licensee) and just streams anime with English subtitles is not enough criteria to be considered an English licensee, and their arguments to oppose, stated at their talk page, are rather unconvincing (to say the least) to me. I'm sorry that this kind of edits have gotten to the point of having this discussion, but I'd greatly appreciate a third-party comment for this matter. Xexerss (talk) 23:34, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

I agree with Xexerss here; the licensee listed is not an English-speaking region and thus it would be too much detail to list it in the infobox. It might be worthy of mention in the body of the article, especially if that release is particularly notable (like Heart Gear mentions how it sold 3 times better in France), but mentioning it in the infobox just serves to make it longer than it has any right to be without providing anything of value. Link20XX (talk) 04:46, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

On that note, it's not that I'm totally opposed to mentioning its release in other languages, but I don't see much encyclopedic value in citing any of these three primary sources just to indicate that the series is available on certain platforms, and I doubt that this would be of interest to the average reader of the English Wikipedia. Xexerss (talk) 05:32, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Systemic bias HK5201314 (talk) 08:54, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

As your point of view, is the licensed of SOUTHEAST ASIA should not be included in English Wikipedia? As all know, only Singapore is in the English speech World in that area. In that Area, only Aniplus have setup the company headquarters in that city. The other like Muse, Medialink or Remow are setup their headquarters in other languages area like Taiwan, Hong Kong and Japan. Are they is not “English licensed”? HK5201314 (talk) 09:02, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Why don't you take the time to check the articles of those regions (Southeast Asia and South Asia) and check for yourself that there is more than one country in those areas where English is the official language? So yeah, those are considered English-speaking territories, and I never said otherwise. Xexerss (talk) 09:10, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

I check it, the licensed is REMOW(The headquarters is in Japan and they use the global YouTube Channel “It’s anime” to distribute it). HK5201314 (talk) 09:17, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

In this channel, they distribute 8 anime to Singapore, 2 anime to South Korean HK5201314 (talk) 09:18, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

"Available in Central & South America." Do I have to repeat again that these are not English-speaking territories? Xexerss (talk) 09:20, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Define of your point of view in guideline format please!

In this T:English anime licensee explanation, I just understand I can put the platform is subbing in english or in english speech world.

But, in you point of view, you just accept using English be the first subbing, the headquarters is in English speech world only. HK5201314 (talk) 09:29, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

But they are NOT releasing the series for English-speaking audiences, they're releasing it through a subsidiary, AnimeOnegai, for Latin American audiences, not English-speaking audiences. What is so complicated to understand? Xexerss (talk) 09:32, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

So, I put the other area which is specifically defined that they subbing in English. HK5201314 (talk) 09:33, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Ok, I'll put it more simply. English-speaking territories are Australasia, British Isles, North America, South Asia and Southeast Asia. Is there any company from any of those territories that have licensed the series and distributing it for English-speaking audiences? (and no, I'm not talking about platforms focused on non-English speaking audiences that have their series available with English subtitles) Xexerss (talk) 09:43, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

I cannot see your point of view in guidelines and in English-speaking world article. In Southeast Asia, only Singapore is using English. The other is use their own language like Chinese, Bahasa Indonesia, Bahasa Melayu and other languages. HK5201314 (talk) 09:50, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

But why don't you check the articles of those regions and verify for yourself (as I indicated above) that this is not true? (Singapore is NOT the only English-speaking country in that region) Xexerss (talk) 09:53, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

“English is the lingua franca and the main language used in business, government, law and education. The Constitution of Singapore and all government legislation is written in English, and interpreters are required if a language other than English is used in the Singaporean courts. Statutory corporations conduct their businesses in English, while any official documents written in a non-English official language such as Malay, Mandarin, or Tamil are typically translated into English to be accepted for use.” HK5201314 (talk) 09:58, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

In your example English-speaking territories are Australasia, British Isles, North America, South Asia and Southeast Asia. Excluded Southeast Asia, all government of those area is using English be the first language. HK5201314 (talk) 10:00, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

South Asia and Southeast Asia are considered English-speaking territories because there are several countries where English is the official language (four in South Asia and five in Southeast Asia; I'm just checking the articles). Instead of listing these countries one by one, they are grouped together simply as SA/SEA, although this clearly does not imply that all countries in that area speak English. USA and Canada are usually grouped as NA (North America), even though Mexico is also part of North America and its official language is Spanish. Do you get how this works? Xexerss (talk) 10:43, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

“Asia-Pacific”

You can try to count how many article using this word in Licensed Paragraph. As your speech, those should be remove, right? HK5201314 (talk) 14:02, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

The example is like this paragraph

“Hulu, Netflix, and Crunchyroll streamed the series in the United States simultaneously with its Japanese release. Muse Communication licensed the series in Asia-Pacific. The English dub is set to begin airing in the United States on Adult Swim's Toonami programming block on March 31, 2024.” HK5201314 (talk) 14:03, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Asia–Pacific includes English-speaking territories, why should I say that this should be removed? I'm just saying that South America, Central America and Middle East are not English-speaking territories because the presence of English-speaking countries is not significant in these areas. I really don't get why it's so hard for you to understand all this. Xexerss (talk) 15:53, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

But it is also included more than 1600000000 Chinese and Korean and Japanese.

Also, “Asia-Pacific ” is not in your definition. HK5201314 (talk) 02:40, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

The term "Asia–Pacific", in this context (as I understand it and I assume most readers understand it), is used in a general way to refer to the English-speaking countries from South and Southeast Asia where Muse Communication has licensed the series (given that the company operates in those territories). Obviously this does not imply that the company is literally operating in all countries of Asia–Pacific. Personally, I understand this perfectly well, but I don't object if another editor prefers to change the sentence and specify that is "South Asia and Southeast Asia" instead of Asia–Pacific. Xexerss (talk) 03:03, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

So, when I revert the sentence and write a notice, just mention “ Xexerss required licences paragraph must only mention Australasia, British Isles, North America, South Asia and Southeast Asia, the other regions or area can not keep in the article. ” HK5201314 (talk) 03:24, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

I never said that, and I have never said that something should or shouldn't be done just because I say so. I named those territories because they are the ones included by Template:English anime licensee, and by simple standard, are the ones that most of our anime and manga articles limit to mention. If you still don't understand what an English-speaking territory or an English licensee is, I don't know how else to explain it to you. I've repeated myself so many times that it's already getting tiring. Xexerss (talk) 03:39, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

I am just care about is your point of stand is in guidelines or policy? Or is the parameters is call “English license ”? If not, if someone change the explanation of the parameters, no one will judge. HK5201314 (talk) 03:45, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Also, please read the talk page of Template talk:English anime licensee HK5201314 (talk) 04:05, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

What do you want me to read? If you still have concerns about English anime licensees and English-speaking territories, start a discussion there. I don't know how to make you understand that a Russian, Argentine or Korean platform streaming anime subtitled in English is not an English licensee and I'm tired of trying to reason with you. The last thing I'll tell you is that so far I haven't seen anyone supporting your edits in this discussion. Xexerss (talk) 04:30, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Also, did you have guidelines to specify defines that English licensed mean

“Use English be the first published”,

“The licensed must at least three market is using English”,

“the headquarters must in English Speech Ciy”,

“The main service area must in English speech area. ” or

have a list to told everyone that only accept “these” company be the parameters of “licensed by” HK5201314 (talk) 09:08, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Well, no. I don't make the guidelines, but for as long as I've been editing here I've seen that most editors understand what an English licensee is and what is considered an English-speaking territory, but thanks to your edits, it seems to me that this should be made clear somewhere. Xexerss (talk) 09:18, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Please do not go to ZH Wiki to read this article by using translate tools. 維基百科:避免地域中心. In English, the corresponding article is Wikipedia:Systemic bias. For “維基百科:避免地域中心”, it use a WP:Policies format to require that “Editors from various regions should not think that Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia that only serves individual regions.” HK5201314 (talk) 09:43, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

You're literally the only user I have ever seen that is so insistent on adding this content about non-English licensees in any article. At Wikipedia:Requests for page protection/Increase, you claimed that I never sought the opinion of another editor to resolve this issue, even though you didn't do it yourself and you continued with your edits the way you wanted without adhering to any kind of standard, previous discussion or consensus, and now you have the nerve to say that I'm the one who is being biased? Xexerss (talk) 10:57, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, you are totally biased to people who is not speaking in English. When you revert my edit, you cannot take out any policies or guidelines to judge my edit. HK5201314 (talk) 14:07, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

I reverted your edits due to reasons that I have explained and repeated to you about 10 times and you refuse to understand, making absurd statements (like saying that a platform with a statement in English on their website or that a platform streaming anime subtitled in English count as English licensees). Not to mention the incomprehensible and poorly structured sentences that you wrote in the article (as pointed out by Daniel Case, your English may not quite be up to this). I wouldn't object to having content about releases in other territories if it had no more details than necessary and the mentions were supported by reliable secondary sources and not just primary ones (i.e. the own platforms). Xexerss (talk) 16:44, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

While I know this is a cross-media example, but this is the standard for video games too (see WP:VG/RELEASE). I don't think this is a systemic bias issue (which is not a policy anyways) and expecting every version of Wikipedia to have identical content just in a different language is a terrible idea in my opinion. Link20XX (talk) 15:51, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Just go to ZH Wiki and judge this WP:Policy

In ZH Wiki, 魔女之旅 (電視動畫) is Wikipedia:Good articles

In licensed paragraph, ZH wiki required that it must list out all regions with licenses. Is this very terrible? If the editors do not try to list out all licensed based on biased policy, then they can not get “Good article” chops.

木棉花已在東南亞和南亞地區獲得授權，並在Muse Asia的YouTube頻道上播放該作。木棉花香港的YouTube頻道也播放了該作。在台灣，除了木棉花官方YouTube頻道外，也在中華電信MOD、中嘉bb寬頻、巴哈姆特動畫瘋、愛奇藝、MyVideo、Hami Video、遠傳friDay影音、LiTV 線上影視、KKTV、LINE TV等平台播放。在中國大陸，則由bilibili和騰訊視頻進行網絡播放。Funimation在其網站上向北美和不列顛群島播放該作，AnimeLab在澳大利亞和新西蘭同步播放，Wakanim在歐洲部分地區播放本作。

Muse has been authorized in Southeast Asia and South Asia, and the work has been broadcast on Muse Asia's YouTube channel. Muse Hong Kong's YouTube channel also played the work. In Taiwan, in addition to the official YouTube channel of Muse, it is also used in China Telecom MOD, Zhongjia bb Broadband, Bahamut Animation, IQIYI, MyVideo, Hami Video, friDay Video, LiTV , KKTV, LINE TV and other platforms to play. In mainland China, it is broadcast online by Bilibili and Tencent Video. Funimation broadcasts the game to North America and the British Islands on its website, AnimeLab plays it simultaneously in Australia and New Zealand, and Wakanim plays the game in parts of Europe. HK5201314 (talk) 03:16, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

This is the last comment I'm gonna make here since I've already said how I felt, but I'm of the opinion that indiscriminately listing every place it's been released and how seems to be WP:UNDUE and in violation of WP:NOTDIRECTORY. They might do something else on the Chinese Wikipedia, but that's what the Chinese Wikipedia does and we don't necessarily have to follow exactly everything they do. Link20XX (talk) 03:44, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

As ZH Wiki have their rules and I do not want to suit the rules in here. But they have policy and guidelines to teach editors how to use each parameter and what should be included. But unfortunately, here is only use “English-licensed ” in essay format and do not explain what is English-licensed. Someone claims that Asia-Pacific is in. And someone claims that series is using English Subbing is in. HK5201314 (talk) 03:53, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

---

• AU
• BI
• CN
• EU
• HK
• IEIN
• JP
• MY
• NA
• NZ
• PH
• PK
• SA
• SEA
• SG
• TW
• UK
• US

In this template, the parameters (licesed) support those area, in this disscussion, User:Xexerss suggested that delete all non-english speech licesed, Did any one agree delete those area or city?--HK5201314 (talk) 11:54, 11 March 2024 (UTC)