Talk:Boogiepop Phantom

Spoiler Warning

I haven't watched the series, but I was just looking through the article and just in what's there, I think there are probably some rather major spoilers (I stopped reading after I reached something I thought was spoilerish). I don't know, as I haven't seen the series, but should there be a spoiler warning here?

Done Hellspawn 23:39, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Article Editing

I'm in the process of editing this article at the moment since I think Boogiepop Phantom is a great series and deserves as much effort put into it as other quality anime shows, however I've never really tackled such large projects on my own before (I'm more a bit part editor), and there are several aspects of large scale editing that I am unfamiliar with, such as adding pictures, etc. Any and all help from editors with more experience than I would be greatly appreciated. Hellspawn 23:39, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I had already intended to work on this page, but I need to rewatch the anime first. I already have a pile of notes for this from the commentary track and other sources. I expect to rewatch it around Christmas, so I should be able to help in January. Elric of Grans 22:07, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I've started padding out this article with the plot summary, though I don't know exactly what format I should do it in. I decided to focus on one plot thread at a time, starting with the major characters such as Manaka and Boogiepop Phantom and then moving onto the minor characters such as Jonouchi Hisashi and Shizue Wakata. I also added an Allusions section, so if anyone feels like expanding upon either of these or correcting my mistakes then please feel free. I could do with the help. Hellspawn 23:39, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

One question: Should a plot summary be in past tense or present tense? Also, what is considered too much info for a plot description? Hellspawn 23:39, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Normally I would use past-tense. Plot descriptions should not include every minor plot point – people can watch the series for that – but should include the major plot developments. A good plot summary could be a little difficult with this series, but since many of the plot developments are only relevant to single episodes we can skip them. Elric of Grans 22:03, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Plot

Thought I'd paste this here incase anyone ever needed it again and since I had typed it already anyway.

• Manaka Kisaragi

Manaka Kisaragi was born a "natural evolution". Dr Kisugi had given Mayumi Kisaragi an injection of the Towa Organization's evolution drug, resulting in her being born after only about 5 months premature, but bearing the physical appearance of a baby born after the full 10 months pregnancy. However, Mayumi could not remember ever giving birth or being pregnant, and found that she could not remember anything new after her pregnancy for more than a few minutes. She is always carrying around a note pad so that she can keep her memories in written form instead. Due to her illness, she was taken away to a hospital and Manaka kept in the care of her Grandmother Meyu. Meyu had despised the fact that Manaka's father had left her mother during pregnancy, and also that Manaka was born out of wedlock. This and the fact that she was born 5 months premature led to Meyu calling Manaka a devil child. To prevent rumours from spreading, Meyu had used the fact that Mayumi had a home birth to claim that Manaka was still born and keep her a secret. To keep up this charade, Manaka was never allowed to be seen by others and was kept inside for her entire childhood.

Manaka continued to grow at an unnatural rate, and soon learned of her ability to see butterflies of light that no one else could see. These butterflies were the memories of others she gained by being in contact with them. Just prior to the Pillar of Light, Meyu had become ill and realized she was soon to die. To prevent the devil child from getting free and wreaking havoc on human society, Meyu crept up on Manaka from behind and strangled her with a thin wire. As Manaka lay dead on the floor, the Pillar of Light pierced the sky. As it dissipated, Manaka was ressurected from death. Echoes Pillar of Light had enhanced her evolution beyond what it was before, such that she had reached what would be the pinnacle of human evolution. She also gained full knowledge of what had occured during the Pillar of Light. Despite the fact that Manaka had been killed by her own Grandmother, she continued to look after Meyu. Just before her death, Meyu has a picture of the two of them taaken together, so that others would know that Manaka is her daughter rather than Mayumi's. Meyu died nearly a month after the Pillar of Light, and free at last, Manaka wandered the city. Coming into contact with so many people, she absorbed their memories and through this combined knowledge she gained a "superior philosophy" and a "higher intelligence". She learned how the universe works and words of knowledge stream forth from her mouth. Manaka however seals away this information by limiting her speeach to echoing back what others say to her in a similar manner to Echoes. Manaka learned one more thing - of the existence of the universal concoiusness, and that one day she will become light and ascend just like Ecgoes did during the Pillar of Light.

She decided to help show humans the truth, but by using the past rather than with words. Over the period of several days, she showed various memories to others she metv, including Jonouchi Hisashi, to whom she gifted a vision of the Manticore and Saotome Masami with another of their victims. Due to a lack of food and hydration however, she collapses and is taken to a hospital. After being treated, she leaves the hospital just in time to avoid confronting Snake Eye. Outside the hospital, she encounters Mamoru and Sayoko Oikawa. Manaka had spent her entire life alone, so she took Mamorou's memories of playing the pied piper and created another phantom called Poom Poom who would be her friend. Poom Poom carried around red balloons offering friendship to those he met. However those who accepted a balloon had their inner child drawn out of them and what was left behind was little more than a shell of their former self. The actions of Manaka and Poom Poom drew the attention of Boogiepop, who forced Poom Poom to go away leaving Manaka on her own, whom Boogiepop claimed was an enemy of the world.

Manaka ran away in fear from Boogiepop, but her flight led her into the path of Boogiepop Phantom, who proceeded to strangle her with her metal wire. The real Boogiepop intervened, stating that Manaka has lost most of her power and will die soon. Manaka ran away from the two, and in a fit of depression despaired that she would die alone, her life a failure. Just as she began to die however, Echoes/Echoes Phantom approached Manaka and offered her his hand so that she could transcend just as he did. Filled with new hope, Manaka released all her combined memories and helped several characters of the series come to terms with their traumatic pasts. Manaka went to the Prefectural Hospital where Mayumi was being taken care of, and surrounded by light, proceeded to show Mayumi memories of her pregnancy and giving birth to Manaka, as well as Manaka's childhood. Mayumi bursts into tears with the realization that she has a daughter. Manaka began to leave, telling her mother that she was glad she was born. A pillar of light rises from the Hospital, signalling Manaka's departure.

Article Length

There seems to be some sort of problem with the article length at the moment, even though it is just 32 KB. Until it's fixed, I'll paste some of the characters here:

Secondary Characters

File:Kazuko Suema.JPG

Kazuko Suema

Kazuko Suema (末間和子, Suema Kazuko)

Seiyū: Kyo Nagasawa, voice actor: Anne Benkovitz, actor: Mami Shimizu

Five years ago, Suema was the next intended target of the serial killer stalking the city. However one day the killings stopped and Suema was saved. Due to the trauma from the event, she has developed an unusual fascination with criminal and abnormal psychology, as well as the desire to not let anything occur around her without her knowing. As a result of this, she desperately seeks the truth about the unexplained events happening in her city, and meddles with forces best left untouched. She seeks to be closer with Kirima Nagi, who seems to know the answers to the questions that have haunted her all these years.

File:Officer Morita.JPG

Officer Morita

Officer Morita (森田巡査, Morita Junsa) / Snake Eye (スネークアイ, Sunēku Ai)

Seiyū: Hisao Egawa, voice actor: David Brimmer

Morita was a police officer, but he was at some point killed by the synthetic human named Snake Eye, who assumed Morita's identity. Primarily sent to the city to track down Echoes and the Manticore, and investigate the pillar of light and its effects. However he also uses his position as a police officer to monitor the city for evolved humans, and kill those he finds.

Abilities: Can move his body like a snake, erase the memories of those who meet his gaze, and assume the form of those he kills and eats.

File:Ichiro Kishida 2.JPG

Ichirou Kishida

Shinpei Kuroda (黒田慎平, Kuroda Shinpei?)/Scarecrow (スケアクロウ, Sukeakurō?)/Ichirou Kishida (岸田一朗, Kishida Ichirō?)

Seiyū: Wasei Chikada, voice actor: Christopher Nicholas

Shinpei Kuroda was an agent of the Towa organization, codename Scarecrow. His cover job was as a private detective, a position which he would use to report any unusual activity to his superiors. After befriending Nagi Kirima, Shinpei Kuroda stole a drug from a Towa lab in order to save Nagi's life. For his betrayal, Kuroda was killed by composite human More Murder. His attire and weapon were taken from his dead body by Boogiepop. Five years later, memories of his undercover work investigating Nagi's father using the alias Ichiro Kishida were resurrected by Manaka to create Kishida Phantom. He immediately continues to investigate Nagi's father, having no memory of his life as a Towa agent, his meeting with Nagi, or his death. Kishida helps Nagi uncover the truth of the events occuring in the city.

Other Important Characters

File:BoogiepopCharacterEchoes.JPG

Echoes transforming into light

Echoes (エコーズ, Ekōzu)

Seiyū: Taiki Matsuno, voice actor: William Hirsh, actor: Yasufumi Teriwaki

A highly evolved being, Echoes was sent to the Earth to make the final decision on whether humanity was a benevolent or a malevolent species. If he decided we were the latter, he had the authority and power to destroy the human race. Captured by the Towa organization, they experimented upon him and created their composite humans with the knowledge they gained. They also tried cloning him, but the Manticore was created instead. He used his powers to escape the Towa lab and track down the Manticore when it also escaped, but was crippled in an ambush set up by the Manticore and Masami Saotome at Shinyo Academy. Near death, Echoes turned himself into light and sent himself back into space, destroying the Manticore and Saotome, and resurrecting Nagi in the process. His pillar of light is responsible for the increased rate of evolution of the human species, as well as the creation of Boogiepop Phantom and Manticore Phantom.

Abilities: Vast strength, speed, endurance, and regeneration, can shape-shift and ressurect the dead, and turn into a powerful beam of light.

File:Kisugi Makako 2.JPG

Dr Kisugi

Makako Kisugi (来生真希子, Kisugi Makako) / Fear Ghoul (フィア・グール, Fea Gūru)

Seiyū: Miki Itou, voice actor: Carol Jacobanis

As a young teenage girl, Makako Kisugi was always afraid. To overcome her fear, she decided that she would become a psychiatrist to understand her fears and help others as well. Found the Towa drug dropped by Shinpei Kuroda in Nagi Kirima's room five years ago, and took it home for experimentation after witnessing its incredible results on Nagi's health. Initially testing on rats, Dr Kisugi moved onto human experimentation by administering some of the drug to herself, resulting in her evolution. As a composite human, she could sense people's fear and began to have a dark craving for it. She began terrorizing her patients to sample the fear in their blood, before discovering that the fear induced from a strong willed person moments before their death was the sweetest delicacy. This resulted in the serial killings which saw a string of young, strong-willed teenage girls and the mother of Hisashi Jonouchi being destroyed by Dr Kisugi. Given the codename Fear Ghoul by the Towa organization. Eventually stopped and killed by the combined effort of Nagi Kirima and Boogiepop. Also administered the Towa drug to several of her patients.

Abilities: Vast strength, speed, and endurance, can sense the fear in people.

File:BoogiepopPhantomManticore (foreground).JPG

Manticore in foreground

Yurihara Minako (百合川美奈子, Yurihawa Minako)/Manticore (マンティコア, Manteikoa)

Seiyū: Mayumi Asano, voice actor: Simone Grant, actor: Ayana Sakai

The Manticore was created by the Towa organization in an attempt to clone Echoes. However the Manticore turned out to be an inferior copy that fed on humans. Treated as a failure and due for termination, the Manticore ate everyone in the laboratory before escaping the mountain complex and infiltrating Shinyo Academy. There, the Manticore killed loner student Yurihara Minako, but before being able to take her form, Masami Saotome came upon the scene. He convinced the Manticore not to kill him and that it would be easier to hide from its pursuers if it took Yurihara's form instead as no one would notice a change in her behaviour. He convinced the Manticore that together they could take over the world and that it would no longer be an inferior monster that is hunted down. Forming a relationship of twisted love, the Manticore takes the form of Yurihara Minako, as the two began experiments with the drug Type S in order to create an army of slaves to tackle the Towa organization, while killing students to feed the Manticore. They were discovered and killed by the desperate efforts of Nagi Kirima, Boogiepop, and Echoes in the pillar of light. The Manticore's death gave rise to two phantoms: Boogiepop Phantom and Manticore Phantom.

Abilities: Vast strength, speed, and endurance, can assume the form of people it kills and consumes, raise the dead as zombified slaves, and produce various dugs and poisons from its body.

File:Masami Saotome.JPG

Masami Saotome

Masami Saotome (早乙女正美, Saotome Masami)

Seiyū: Jun Fukuyama, voice actor: Crispin Freeman, actor: Hassei Takano

Masami Saotome was an ordinary high school boy who had a crush on Nagi Kirima. Although she turned him down, he wasn't as hurt as he thought he would be. A few months later he accidentally came across the Manticore in the middle of feeding, and after an initial attack, was informed that he would die and that the Manticore would take his form instead. Saotome now understood his strange attraction to strong willed women, reasoning that he had a suicidal streak that meant he wanted to be killed by such a women. Initially this was Nagi, but now the vaguely feminine Manticore was before him. However Saotome convinced the Manticore that he would be better left alive and that the Manticore should take Yurihara's form instead if it wanted to remain hidden. Confessing his love for the Manticore, they set in motion a plan to take over the world, allowing Saotome to exercise his destructive tendencies. Chased by Echoes and then Nagi, Saotome formulated a plan that led the two into a trap that saw Echoes crippled and Nagi dead. Turning himself into light, Echoes began to destroy the Manticore as Saotome flew himself at the light in either desperation or despair. His form is later assumed by the Manticore Phantom.

Hellspawn 22:27, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay, even having done that, the problem still isn't solved. I'm going to try reverting to an older version. Hellspawn 22:47, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I reverted to the previous version and now it's normal. So can anyone tell me why the article gets cut off after having added a few references even though as far as I know Wikipedia shouldn't have this problem anymore? I'm using the latest Firefox by the way.Hellspawn 22:47, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Fixed

I fixed it. It was a problem with the referencing. At any rate, you really should consider trimming the character section. It'd be redundant adding a character list and mini-bios to every Boogiepop series. That's what the List of characters in the Boogiepop series is for. Also, why do some characters credit the actor who portrays it in the live-action movie, when the article is about the anime series?--Nohansen 00:21, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

What was the problem with the referencing? I was thinking that the article might be getting a bit long, but after doing some research on Wikipedia I found that many articles these days exceed 32 KB and it is not discouraged so much anymore. I don't think the length of the character section itself is an issue, since some highly rated anime articles have far longer character sections. But the reason I added some of the characters is because either a) they have no information elsewhere and b) the list of characters article only mentions characters that are specific to the series. For instance, if someone wanted to find out about Dr Kisugi, they would have no luck because there is no article that deals with her. Or in the case of the Manticore, who isn't mentioned in the Boogiepop Phantom subsection. People shouldn't have to figure out that they should look at the Boogiepop and Others subsection. Also, both characters play important roles in the series, so at least deserve some attention in a character article. I mean half the story is about the Manticore, and another significant plot thread is Dr Kisugi and the drug, and Shinpei Kuroda.

I don't actually know why the actors are mentioned. I think someone put them there, and then I filled in the rest to be consistent. In hindsight, it would maybe be better to remove them. Hellspawn 12:04, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Further Development

I've spent many days now revamping the plot summary section many times, and it gives me a major headache. However, what we have now I feel is acceptable for the moment. After the plot summary, I plan on somehow limiting the character section (I think Suema can be removed, since she actually plays no part in this series), and also removing the list aspect of the production section and turning it back into prose. Ironic, since most of the above involves me cleaning up the mess I made. After all that, I think the article can be upgraded to be a B. Comments?

Upgrade to B

I've upgraded this article to a B, since I believe most of the information necessary is present and in a reasonable standard. I'll look towards improving the article to a GA now, after I've looked at the necessary criteria. If there are any objections or suggestions, let me know.

GA Nomination

Well, I've went through this article and can't spot any more grammatical or spelling errors. All that I can reference has been referenced. The article is now stable, I have tried to keep the prose neutral, and the images have fair use rationale. Therefore, I have decided to go for a Good Article nomination. Even if the article fails, at least I might get some helpful insight on what needs to be done.Hellspawn 16:26, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Since I'm part of WP:ANIME, I won't be reviewing the nomination. However, let me point out some things before the GA-reviewer comes along:

• • The Production section lacks citations. Statements like "Boogiepop Phantom was conceived as an original story taking place after the events of the novels", "production staff later commented that the colour shceme was more effective than they had originally intended" and "a mixed media campaign was planned" need sources.
  • Same with Artistic Homages. I know most of that stuff is pretty obvious but, do you have anything --like an interview-- where Kadono acknowledges the allusions and homages?
  • Since the work is Japanese, the article needs to include its Reception in Japan. Also, I don't think the "legendary anime cult phenomenon" quote is valid. It comes from the back of the boxset and is more like a sales pitch from Right Stuf International.
  • This one is just personal preference and maybe the GA-reviewer won't mind. But the plot summary is too long. It's not even the plot, but background info (from the film and novels) needed to understand the series, right? Let the viewers worry about that, no need to make it easy for them.--Nohansen 14:32, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the help.

• • I've been looking for quotes to back that up for a few days now, and I'm having trouble. To be honest, I took it from the japanese counterpart, but they don't seem to source things at all. But I seem to remember reading elsewhere that the movie was supposed to come first, and as a prequel that would make sense (excluding George Lucas). But if you could point me to any japanese interviews or the like, then I would be very grateful. My knowledge of Japanese is very poor.
  • In regards to the homages section, I've started looking up books which can corroborate the various mythological references. For the music, just taking one look at the novels confirms that Kouhei Kadono is a sucker for music references. Nearly every character and chapter has a music reference. Therefore, I'm not sure if the musical homages mentioned can really be contested. He admits himself at one point that he loves to reference music. I'll see if I can find that quote in my book to source from.
  • Do you know where I could find out how well Boogiepop Phantom did in Japan? I didn't know the "legenday anime cult phenomenon" was from the boxed set. If it is, I'll see how I can change it. But otherwise, is it any more biased than the director and producer who took about how great the series is on the commentary?
  • I see what you mean about the plot summary. However, you have to understand how much of a pain in a cavity that section was to write. Boogiepop Phantom has a multi-thread story, and including them all or even some of them proved impossible for my skills, and I gave up. Therefore, I considered what should go in the section: Dr Kisugi and Echoes actually form a major part of the plot, and in the case of Dr Kisugi some new material is even created just for the series. Thus I considered that those two events should be "briefly" summarized to give the jist of where the series has come from. The two initial paragraphs are the result, and try as I might I really could not trim it down any further. Then to summarize the current events in the series, I chose to focus on what proves to be the pivotal moment in the show (the moment the light appears in the sky) and so focussed on the children who were evolved by Echoes, which is actually the main story because the anime is about change. Anyway, to cut a long story short, what we have is the fruit of many of my blood, sweat, and tears. I don't want to revisit the section, because it gives me nightmares again.Hellspawn 16:26, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

There's no problem with the plot summary: it's not that long, and the background info is needed as the article has to be understood even by readers who haven't had any contact with the novels and other media. About the Japanese reception, don't bother (unless you really have access to it). Not even FAs like Lain and Excel Saga have Japanese reception, and they're FA nontheless. The whole thing needs references though, specially "Production" and "Artistic homages". EDIT: Now that I think about it, you should also remove one of the images in the plot summary: more than one image in the same section is not well seen, specially if that section is a plot summary (which, wikipedia-wise, are the least useful sections). Kazu-kun 07:01, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for all the input. As for the references, I've been looking for some time but with no luck in regards to production elements. Unfortunately, Boogiepop Phantom is not covered nearly as much as Lain. I seriously doubt, until the day I meet the author in person, that I will ever be able to cite material for those homages (although I have just this second thought of one for the Manticore). The only other material I have is for aspects of the English production. Do you think I should include this in the production section? (I am aware that one of the criteria for GA is that the article is stable, but I don't care at this point. The whole idea was to get feedback, and it can always be renominated) Hellspawn 23:12, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I've added some more references. In terms of the homages section, I've added about as many references I can find. Do you think the rest should be deleted until they can be verified, and information on english production? (I have stuff about the casting process, changes made from japanese, and other tidbits from the commentaries) Hellspawn 11:53, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Before deleting anything make sure to check on the references you already have: maybe some reviewers have pointed out some of those homages. For the production section, you can use the production notes included in the DVDs (they should do the trick just fine). Also some images need fair use rationale; some already have it, but need a better one. EDIT: and what's the purpose of having images for two DVD boxed sets? I think just one image would be enough. EDIT2: and yeah, the info about english production (casting, changes from the Japanese, etc.) should be added too. Kazu-kun 19:45, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I added explicit fair use rationale for all the images. I also deleted one of the images as suggested. I checked the reviews of both the series and first novel, and there are no mentions of the homages. Therefore, unless someone else finds references for them, if this article is to ever become a GA then that section will have to go. Likewise for the lead in the Production section. But what do you mean the production notes in the DVD? Are you talking about the audio commentary? If that's the case, then we'll only have information on english production and a few tidbits about the japanese element. Is that acceptable in terms of wiki guidelines? Hellspawn 21:13, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

(De-indent) I did some rephrasing to the lead, I hope you don't mind. The rest of the article should follow the same "out of universe" style. Meaning, don't say "Five years ago" but "Five years before the events of the series" or "At the time of Boogiepop and Others (film)."--Nohansen 21:15, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't mind. I did slightly change the implied meaning of one of the sentences though. The killings did not last five years, rather five years before the series there was the serial killings, and then they stopped shortly afterwards. And do you think that english production should have its own subsection, or be part of the lead as is typical with japanese anime articles? Hellspawn 21:36, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I honestly don't know. Neither of the two articles I've worked on have info on the English production... maybe The Big O, and that's because the second season was co-produced by Cartoon Network.

Also, not to give you nightmares, but the plot section "should comprise a succinct description of the plot and major subplots, but please avoid excessive details of twists and turns in the story."--Nohansen 21:26, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

True. But when I look at other plot summaries for other articles, I see lengths that roughly equal mine with just as much detail. See Madlax for instance, and that's a FA. Plus it's not as if I go into too much detail regarding the plot. There's a lot of stuff I miss out. I could talk about the story of Mo Murder for instance, who is actually quite important in the serial killer arc. Or Naoko Kamikishiro, who helped Nagi and Echoes and was the one who really saved the world. Then there's the Manaka and Manticore Phantom arcs. But including it all would result in too much detail and too great a length for the Plot summary. What we have is as good as I could do in terms of a summary, and in the end I do include stuff which is pretty important in the series. Hellspawn 21:43, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Wait, I'm losing track here: Nohansen and I are two different people (I don't know if that was clear). Now on the production... no subsection, just add the info to the lead as you said. About the production notes, I was going with what the article says (producer and character notes). Ok, if these notes don't have info on the production process, we'll have to look elsewhere. Actually, where do statements such as "Production staff later commented that the colour scheme was... " come from? If it's a review, interview, or anything else except a fansite, it may work as reference. Kazu-kun 21:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, there are producer and character notes. Basically, the english producer talks for a bit about what the series is about and various things like that. Then there are early character sketches with further notes or observations. I'll take another look at that tomorrow. I got the production info from the japanese wikipedia article on Boogiepop, which seemed to be more informed than I am on the subject. I was hoping to find something to verify it, but that seems impossible. And as far as I'm aware, it's not encouraged or accepted when you reference other wikipedia articles. Hellspawn 22:21, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

I've just looked, and the producer notes are basically the producer talking about what he thought was good about the series. Nothing on actual aspects of production. That's handled in audio commentary. But otherwise, we don't seem to quite have a consensus in regards to english production aspects in the article. I'll past here the material I have (it is in a condensed form, and some of it is in a context only I'll understand), and you can judge for yourself whether or not it's worth putting in:

Episode 1 - show is complex both visually and sonically, some of the best sound design seen yet (Joe), 6 months spent working on it, have actors record lines over previously recorded lines, most complicated show ever worked on, classical, electronic, gregorian music, jeff watched episode 1 from a screener tape and was fascinated by show, showed the show to someone else, person recommended show, watched screener of episodes 2 and 3, series deals with time strangely, casting compressed into 2 or 3 days with some casting done earlier or later, knew wanted David Brimmer as Morita and Simone Grant for BP, record lines over previously recorded lines in order to produce more natural sound, Joe was fascinated by show and asked to record dub, sound design is awesome, 5.1 mix allowed chance to take sound design to next level, series invites 5.1, decided to make stereo mix and surround mix different, one fundamental difference between English and Japanese – stream of consciousness thought is phase shifted concept in Japanese while in English is a dead in the middle of your face, dry narrative approach because it sounded more modern and brings those worlds to viewers attention, also allows to go into ambience of room and places characters go and get confused between what characters are doing and thinking, eyecatch – In Japanese boojiepop phantom, in English boogiepop phantom, producer recognizes that English production is a separate product even though it is as close as possible to Japanese, some voice actors given video tapes and scripts in advance to show development of the characters over the series, at the end of each audition day the voice actors would be shown the last ten minutes of each episode and encourage them to watch the show, Moto’s confession was more buried in the English because the audience already knows what she is saying, own version of coming attractions in English,

Episode 2 – bugs in sub called spiders in dub because they have eight legs and two body parts, end credits look different because of technical limitations in source material that meant need to create material

Episode 3 – problem getting names consistent because Japanese pronunciations are different and change from characters to character, video tapes come in from Japan with Japanese stereo then get music and effects tracks, hire actors to come and work off adaptation script which is written off a translation script, record the lines on a separate track an octave lower with phase shift

Episode 4 – important to get script consistent due to nature of the show, two parallel tracks where previously recorded lines are mimicked about an octave lower, angel of death is used rather than death due to lip flap and the typical western idea of angel of death rather than the figurehead of God, originally Crispin Freeman was the sole ADR Adaptor for first two volumes and then he took head adaptor status while other people did the actual adapting due to hand damage,

Episode 9 – sure he wanted Deb for Boogiepop but maybe Lillis instead

Episode 10 – sure wanted Jessica Calvello for Moto Hellspawn 22:21, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, this is what I think it could work on the article (properly re-worded, of course):

one fundamental difference between English and Japanese – stream of consciousness thought is phase shifted concept in Japanese while in English is a dead in the middle of your face, dry narrative approach because it sounded more modern and brings those worlds to viewers attention, also allows to go into ambience of room and places characters go and get confused between what characters are doing and thinking,

producer recognizes that English production is a separate product even though it is as close as possible to Japanese, some voice actors given video tapes and scripts in advance to show development of the characters over the series, at the end of each audition day the voice actors would be shown the last ten minutes of each episode and encourage them to watch the show, Moto’s confession was more buried in the English because the audience already knows what she is saying, own version of coming attractions in English Kazu-kun 03:48, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I'll ask on the wikiproject page, and see what others think first. Hellspawn 09:13, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I found this on anime news service:

"Likewise in the 90's such works as Kouhei Kadono's Boogiepop and Keiichi Sigsawa's Kino's Journey sold three million units and went onto become hit anime."

Do you think this is an acceptable replacement for "legendary anime cult phenomenon"? Hellspawn 09:13, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

It's better. At least it's not bias since it's coming from a news outlet rather than a company trying to convince to buy their product. And I wanted to ask you: should I keep editing the article, tightening the prose... and you fix whatever mistake I make?--Nohansen 20:31, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I also found this on a japanese trailer:

"The hit novels become the video sensation of 2000! Now playing on TV Tokyo!...A TV series unique in anime history, showing multiple inner viewpoints."

But I'll use the other one for the now. In regards to editing, that seems fine with me. But if any of edits are major or involve the omission of information (see recent plot summary edits), I would at least like to know first so we can come to a consensus. Thanks. Hellspawn 20:42, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, removing the line about Shinpei dropping the drug was an oversight. I do a lot of copying-and-pasting when editing and forgot to put it back. I originally phrased it as "He was mortally wounded by Towa agents as he fled from the hospital, leaving the drug behind in the process." I wasn't going to add Kisugi picking it up because it implied (Shinpei left it at the hospital, the doctor works there and looks over Nagi).--Nohansen 21:47, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I've just noticed that the link to Boogiepop at Dawn that was at the beginning of the plot summary is now gone. Any particular reason? Hellspawn 09:20, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Red links are an eyesore for some GA and FA reviewers, they sometimes don't pass an article until all the red links are made into articles or removed. Also, as Boogiepop at Dawn is already linked inside the plot summary, the "see also" was redundant.--Nohansen 13:01, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Surely that also applies to the Boogiepop and Others link in the "see also" and main prose? Hellspawn 14:56, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Looking at the current stat of the pictures in the characters section, it's pretty clear that they need to be changed. To solve this problem, I have tried alternating left and right but that causes the pictures to overlap with the next characters prose, and I have tried reducing the image size, which doesn't help. The only other ways I can think of which work are creating space between the characters or turning the image into plain rather than thumbnail (see Serial Experiments Lain). Suggestions? Hellspawn 15:31, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'll just do the pictures as in Serial Experiments Lain, and if anyone has any objections they can edit themselves or post here. Hellspawn 18:27, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Production Section

I've been having a lot of trouble from this section for some time. I simply can't find references or material on the japanese aspects of producing the series. So I call out to any and all who are interested in seeing this article reach GA and maybe FA status in the future to help me out with this endeavour. All help is appreciated. Thanks. Hellspawn 15:43, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I said this before: "don't worry about it." Only some of the animanga good articles have a production section and there you have them. You could do without it. But when the time comes for the article to become featured, you'll need a well referenced "development and design" section. Just read your response.--Nohansen 16:00, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I do know there's one japanese Newtype that has a Boogiepop article. Anyone who has a copy is more than welcome to contribute. It can be seen (or parts of it can be seen) here - http://megaten.net/boogiepop/frames.html Hellspawn 16:02, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

References

I've been looking through recent debates regarding the criteria for GA's, and specifically the criteria for inline citations, and noticing that some want references for most sentences. I also noticed that the recent review of Fist of the North Star stipulated that the character section should have references. Should I add more references to the plot summary and character sections? Hellspawn 15:07, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

If I'm reading this right, summary sections don't need citations. As the Characters section is (or should be) a "summary" of the Characters article, it's fine the way it is. Besides, citing every single sentence would just clutter up the article.--Nohansen 15:51, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Failed GA nomination

First of all I feel a need to apologize for sitting on this review for over 2 weeks. I've copied my notes and suggestions to /Comments — I hope these are not excessively critical. Please message me if anything needs clarifying. / edg ☺ ★ 17:11, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again for your time.Hellspawn 08:59, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

GA Nomination Comments

Here's the comments left by edg ☺ ★ regarding the GA Nomination. I've pasted them here so we can access them more easily and discuss the areas of weakness highlighted. Once the concern has been addressed, just score it through:

Plot summary

• The article is about a television series, but the Plot Summary section seems to be referring to the books, and in this section it is not immediately made clear to the reader if Boogiepop at Dawn is an episode, a series, or a book.

• If I understand this correctly, the two books which were not TV series, preceed the TV series which is the subject of this article. Perhaps Plot summary should be broken up into subcategories for Background, detailing the books (and explaining that this is what is being summarized), then TV series for the last paragraph. Okay I see now this is made clear down in Production. It should also be stated in Plot summary. Wait, is Boogiepop and Others a prequel, or an earlier chapter? If the latter, this should be taken out of the Plot summary and given its own treatment, perhaps in its own article — prequels are intended to be seen afterward, and viewers are not expected to have seen them first. A brief mention, like "this is elaborated in the prequel, Boogiepop and Others" would be okay, but mostly it's just confusing to have these details introduced here.

• • Boogiepop and Others and Boogiepop at Dawn are not prequels, but rather Boogiepop Phantom uses the events that occur in them to set the premise for the story. Since the two events play such an important part in the story of Boogiepop Phantom, it seemed only right to briefly summarize them. Do others agree? Hellspawn 10:39, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Well, you already know how I feel... And with a Boogiepop and Others article, there's no need to reiterate the Others in the Phantom article.--Nohansen 21:56, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Characters

• Boogiepop: 2nd sentence has no predicate. "and acts as mechanical as it claims to be" presupposes the reader knows this is claimed. Can it just be said "and acts mechanical", or is important that the character makes this claim?

• Kazuko Suema: "... she developed a fascination for criminal and abnormal psychology, and the desire to not let anything occur around her without her knowing." Confusing compound here — change 2nd phrase to "a desire".

Themes

• Third paragraph: "Commentary" is orphaned, presumably belongs in the footnote.

• This section might be easier to read (for people unfamiliar with the series) if organized a little more invitingly. Perhaps a summarizing intro paragraph, or a few subsections. As each theme gets a sentence or so, I'm not sure which are emphasized in this series, and which are fleeting, or if different episodes have different themes.

Artistic homages

• Pink Floyd single of the same name, which itself is a possible allusion to 2001: A Space Odyssey with its themes of evolution and transcendence. Unless 2001 has some direct reference from or relevance to Boogiepop Phanton, the possible allusion Pink Floyd are making isn't worth mentioning in this article. There's a confusing level of detail in this article, and anything superfluous needs to come out.

• Too bad so few of the references are to web pages I can check. Some of these things could use more explanation.

• Boogiepop refers to an obscure Prince (artist) inspiration? Is that the name "Spooky Electric" or something else? The Black Album (Prince album) article doesn't clear it up for me. This needs to be clarified (or removed as trivial). There may be too many examples here.

• Per WP:MUSTARD, the AC/DC single "Snake Eye" and the Prince song "Poom Poom" should get quotes, not italics. (And the term Poom poom predates Prince musically, dunno the artist. A big hit went all I wanna do is zoom zoom zoom in a poom poom. Are you sure Boogiepop took this from Prince?)

• "Mythology" should probably be a subcategory under Artistic homages.
  • In fact, Artistic homages and Mythology belong in a "Design" or "Influences" section.--Nohansen 21:56, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

• Many of these references (e.g. Gravity's Rainbow) are overexplained; detail not pertaining to the story (or easily digested by the reader) should be excised. When you have to list many loosely-related things, reading is easier if one need not stop repeatedly for explanations — the reader can click thru if they don't know what Gravity's Rainbow is. If specific details from Gravity's Rainbow are needed for understanding important aspects of Boogiepop Phantom, make it clear. Otherwise the reader just feels burdened by off-topic information.

• These paragraphs that are basically lists of things in prose form should be given some kind of narrative flow — this will never make FA status without it. Until then, a little organizational revision and more paragraph breaks should make it sufficiently readable for GA status.

Releases

• Opening with the subject of licensing and distribution deals is just killer boring. I'm sorry to phrase it this way, but either give the reader something inviting here, or find a way to make this business interesting. Is there something unique or important to how Boogiepop was distributed?

• • Well, I don't know what is the norm, but Boogiepop Phantom was previewed at several film festivals which might be regarded as uncommon. Apart from that, there's nothing really special that I'm aware of regarding how Boogiepop Phantom was released. There's nothing I can do to change that. For that reason, I'm scoring this one out.Hellspawn (talk) 22:40, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

• Again, broadcast runs into DVD release runs into distribution. Either break this up into paragraphs with transitional phrases, or make sections.

• Lots of detail is hard to read. Is all this needed?

• • The reason I have it in the order J-TV to US DVD to US TV is because that is typically the way anime is handled when it is brought over. Also, articles such as Madlax which are featured have their releases section in a similar order, and I was using that as a guide.Hellspawn 09:15, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
  • The section could be split between broadcast history and DVD releases. It might look better. Some details ("DVD was delayed until 09 October due to air traffic problems") are not necessary.--Nohansen 21:56, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

• • I've already started on trimming the section. I'll effect the changes once I feel it looks better. Though again, the standard format for release sections seems to be: JTV to USDVD to USTV. Hellspawn 20:55, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

• • • Taken some of the suggestions given. I feel that the section flows quite a bit better now, so I'm scoring this one out until further advice is given.Hellspawn (talk) 22:40, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Critical reception

• Disease does not need to be wikilinked in this context. Again, many facts, not organized. Hard to read.

• • The facts as I see them are pretty organized. The first paragraph covers the plot and story-telling, while the second covers the visuals and audio. Hellspawn 09:03, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Perhaps an introductory paragraph would be good, something that summarizes the reception instead of diving right into the critics' opinions. It'd be good to separate the visuals and audio into two paragraphs to make the section easier on the eyes. Also, I kind of get Edgarde means by not organized: the section reads like a list, stringed together by some "however"s, "also"s and "have noted"s.--Nohansen 21:56, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
  • I agree about the intro paragraph and the splitting of the audio and visuals. However, I don't agree with the organization aspect. Only about five out of fourteen are as you described. I really can't see how else I can string together a coherent paragraph without somewhere along the line using such words, especially when the preceding and current sentences cover the same point. Hellspawn 20:52, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
  • I did some rewording on the first paragraph. It's now shorter, but I think I managed to say all that needed to be said.--Nohansen 22:46, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Kazuko Suema.JPG

Image:Kazuko Suema.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 08:03, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Kazuko Suema.JPG

Image:Kazuko Suema.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 08:03, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Manaka Kisaragi.jpg

Image:Manaka Kisaragi.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 08:52, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Changing City.JPG

Image:Changing City.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:28, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Boogiepop.jpg

Image:Boogiepop.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 06:19, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:BoogiepopPhantomLimitedEdition.jpg

Image:BoogiepopPhantomLimitedEdition.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 06:20, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Miyashita Touka.jpeg

Image:Miyashita Touka.jpeg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 02:44, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Manticore Phantom 2.jpg

Image:Manticore Phantom 2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 03:36, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Pillar of light.JPG

Image:Pillar of light.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:56, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Poom Poom.JPG

Image:Poom Poom.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Boogiepop Phantom/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

==GA review 2007-09-13== Content-wise, this article has enough to reach Good article status. What is most needed now is some prose re-writing for readability, plus some fixes to avoid confusion for readers unfamiliar with the subject matter. Here are my notes for each section, written as I read this article a week ago: ===Plot summary=== The article is about a television series, but the Plot Summary section seems to be referring to the books, and in this section it is not immediately made clear to the reader if Boogiepop at Dawn is an episode, a series, or a book. If I understand this correctly, the two books which were not TV series, preceed the TV series which is the subject of this article. Perhaps Plot summary should be broken up into subcategories for Background, detailing the books (and explaining that this is what is being summarized), then TV series for the last paragraph. Okay I see now this is made clear down in Production. It should also be stated in Plot summary. Wait, is Boogiepop and Others a prequel, or an earlier chapter? If the latter, this should be taken out of the Plot summary and given its own treatment, perhaps in its own article — prequels are intended to be seen afterward, and viewers are not expected to have seen them first. A brief mention, like "this is elaborated in the prequel, Boogiepop and Others" would be okay, but mostly it's just confusing to have these details introduced here. ===Characters=== Boogiepop: 2nd sentence has no predicate. "and acts as mechanical as it claims to be" presupposes the reader knows this is claimed. Can it just be said "and acts mechanical", or is important that the character makes this claim? Kazuko Suema: "... she developed a fascination for criminal and abnormal psychology, and the desire to not let anything occur around her without her knowing." Confusing compound here — change 2nd phrase to "a desire". ===Themes=== Third paragraph: "Commentary" is orphaned, presumably belongs in the footnote. This section might be easier to read (for people unfamiliar with the series) if organized a little more invitingly. Perhaps a summarizing intro paragraph, or a few subsections. As each theme gets a sentence or so, I'm not sure which are emphasized in this series, and which are fleeting, or if different episodes have different themes. ===Artistic homages=== Pink Floyd single of the same name, which itself is a possible allusion to 2001: A Space Odyssey with its themes of evolution and transcendence. Unless 2001 has some direct reference from or relevance to Boogiepop Phanton, the possible allusion Pink Floyd are making isn't worth mentioning in this article. There's a confusing level of detail in this article, and anything superfluous needs to come out. Too bad so few of the references are to web pages I can check. Some of these things could use more explanation. Boogiepop refers to an obscure Prince (artist) inspiration? Is that the name "Spooky Electric" or something else? The Black Album (Prince album) article doesn't clear it up for me. This needs to be clarified (or removed as trivial). There may be too many examples here. Per WP:MUSTARD, the AC/DC single "Snake Eye" and the Prince song "Poom Poom" should get quotes, not italics. (And the term Poom poom predates Prince musically, dunno the artist. A big hit went all I wanna do is zoom zoom zoom in a poom poom. Are you sure Boogiepop took this from Prince?) "Mythology" should probably be a subcategory under Artistic homages. Many of these references (e.g. Gravity's Rainbow) are overexplained; detail not pertaining to the story (or easily digested by the reader) should be excised. When you have to list many loosely-related things, reading is easier if one need not stop repeatedly for explanations — the reader can click thru if they don't know what Gravity's Rainbow is. If specific details from Gravity's Rainbow are needed for understanding important aspects of Boogiepop Phantom, make it clear. Otherwise the reader just feels burdened by off-topic information. These paragraphs that are basicly lists of things in prose form should be given some kind of narrative flow — this will never make FA status without it. Until then, a little organizational revision and more paragraph breaks should make it sufficiently readable for GA status. ===Releases=== Opening with the subject of licensing and distribution deals is just killer boring. I'm sorry to phrase it this way, but either give the reader something inviting here, or find a way to make this business interesting. Is there something unique or important to how Boogiepop was distributed? Again, broadcast runs into DVD release runs into distribution. Either break this up into paragraphs with transitional phrases, or make sections. Lots of detail is hard to read. Is all this needed? ===Critical reception=== Disease does not need to be wikilinked in this context. Again, many facts, not organized. Hard to read.

Last edited at 09:23, 15 September 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 10:02, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Boogiepop Phantom. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.animeondvd.com/news/article.php?article_view=266
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.office-augusta.com/kyoko/discography_kyoko.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.animeondvd.com/news/2001/0101news.php
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.funimationchannel.com/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.animenewsservice.com/archives/jan07.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.scifi.com/sfw/issue239/anime.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.scifi.com/sfw/issue253/anime.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.animeondvd.com/reviews2/disc_reviews/813.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070608193553/http://www.vap.co.jp:80/boogie/ to http://www.vap.co.jp/boogie/

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 22:44, 5 November 2016 (UTC)