Wikipedia

Talk:Hercule (Dragon Ball)/Archive 3

< Talk:Hercule (Dragon Ball)
Latest comment: 17 years ago by Ryulong in topic Requested move
Note: This move request was filed several days after the original move request (See Talk:Hercule (Dragon Ball)/Archive 2) failed. We should discuss this again on January 1, 2007. WhisperToMe 05:56, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Archived

Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Okay, that was a big mess. Let's start over. Also, try to use ":" to format your comments more often. Nemu 01:46, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was absolutely not, due to Onikage725's very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very repetitive use of vote stacking (using the non-neutral since apparently winning the last one didn't "count"), coupled with DesireCampbell's somewhat, but not quite as repetitive vote stacking (using the non-neutral logic is not enough apparently). And, of course, there was a very similar move request very recently, so there is no reason to let this proceed. -- tariqabjotu 16:45, 26 November 2006 (UTC)



Requested move

Latest comment: 17 years ago43 comments14 people in discussion

Survey

Add "* Support" or "* Oppose" followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

  • Support - Hercule isn't confined to the whole English speaking audience. Mr. Satan is used in English speaking countries and is also used in other countries. There is no reason to use Hercule over Mr. Satan. Nemu 02:20, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose 20,000 times times 11,000 - This move request just cannot, cannot work. The last one for the same move concluded on November 16, 2006 WhisperToMe 02:34, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Support - (sigh) We've been through this before, in a nutshell: Mr. Satan is the original name (and this article is about the literary character, not an adaptation of it), Hercule was introduced as a means of censorship (and Wikipedis is not censored), Mr. Satan is used in a current, popular, English language adaptation, and finally, Wikipedia guidelines state we should be using romanizations of names, not completely different names. -- DesireCampbell 03:37, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose This same move request just failed like a week ago, there should be a required waiting period before doing it again. Hercule IS n official name of his. Check the previous move request to see the reasons this shouldn't be moved. TJ Spyke 04:02, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Hercule is an official name. Mr. Satan is another. Mr. Satan is also the character's original name. I wonder which one we should choose? -- DesireCampbell 04:09, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Support I've typed up my reason so many times that I'm not going to again. If you want to know why I say move you can go read the archive. Takuthehedgehog 04:34, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Support Per WP:MoS#National varieties of English: "Follow the dialect of the first contributor." The first significant contributor, WhisperToMe, used Mr. Satan. -Anþony (talk) 04:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
    • 1. The first poster was someone else... and 2. That policy has nothing to do with this debate. "Dialect" has to do with differences of the English language. WhisperToMe 05:59, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
      • Change to Oppose. Excuse me, I was not aware that the page existed previously at Hercule. The first significant revision there is by Tristanb, using Hercule. I maintain that this is a dialect issue. -Anþony (talk) 08:48, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose-Per TJ Spyke--SUIT 05:06, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Support - It's been stated billions of times. The guidelines state we should be using the original names when possible, and Mr. Satan is the original name, considering it was coined by the author of the manga. WHICH inspired the anime (Levels of canon, just so ya know)

66.222.198.50 05:50, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Comment - Oops, sorry about that. That last vote was mine VelocityEX 05:51, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Support - As far as I can tell we use the FUNimation name for all of like two other articles, and are in the process of trying to have those changed. Every other article uses the original name or the Viz name. Articles that use the viz name are in the case when the name can be translated (i.e. Kiwi, the names of the Ginyu). We don't use altered names. We don' call Saibamen "Cultivars," call Pui Pui "Pocus," call Majin Buu "Djinn Boo," or Vegetto "Vegerott." Therefore there is no logic or consistent trend to actually use Hercule. Heck, the above examples at least had reason (trying to translate within the pun, or the last one to reconcile the name "Kakarott"). Hercule is just plain wrong, a case of censorship. Why, when we don't give primary focus to the other Viz names, or any FUNi names, is "Hercule" being treated like the holy grail? Also, there is no guideline for the romanization of the name that applies. Such would be an issue for a "Krillin" debate. Mr. Satan does not romanize to Hercule. Mr. Satan is already nice and romanized for us. Onikage725 07:16, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Support - Refer to above comments by Takuthehedgehog. CurlyJ 08:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Support Bendono 14:04, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

Add any additional comments

Note: By the way, folks, see WP:Sock#Meatpuppets - I.E. (for those of us on both sides) do not tell your non-Wikipedian friends on the forums that they should join Wikipedia just to influence the outcome of this decision. That act would be called "Meatpuppeting" WhisperToMe 02:50, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


Nemu, wait three months before making another move request. This issue has been decided. It's not good form to make a new move request like that. WhisperToMe 02:30, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

  • There was one that just concluded already. Please, wait. As Whisper said, it is not a good idea to ask for the same move request if it failed not too long ago. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:31, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Lets just do this. This whole thing has been confusing and rushed. This should just settle it once and for all. Nemu 02:33, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
It hasn't been two weeks. At least wait until 2007 hits (it's only about 5 weeks away). User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 02:35, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
If this was regular, I would agree. But this is just a bloated, confusing (just look at all the chatter and crap in the archive), and ongoing thing. By the time 2007 comes, there will already be at least 40 kb worth of discussion if the current rate keeps up. It's going to keep going, so if we reach a nice, clear consensus (hopefully), we can just end this. I'm sure everybody involved will shut up after the result of this. Nemu 02:40, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
That's all the more reason to wait five weeks. Continuing it now, TTN/Nemu, won't resolve anything. WhisperToMe 02:44, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Also, as ZScout pointed out, we will get more people looking at the page by January 1, 2007 WhisperToMe 02:47, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
If we can't resolve it now, how will it ever be resolved? Waiting five weeks will just fuel the annoyance of some people rather than cool them down as it's supposed to. I'm thinking this should do better than past discussion as we can make sure everything is read, and every point is througly discussed. In the archives, points are thrown around everywhere, but they are never addressed. How will it be any different if we just randomly discuss it and constantly make new sections without actually looking at the previous ones like we have been? If we actually try to bring it together, it should be easy to reach a consensus. Nemu 02:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
It will and can be resolved, but use this 5 weeks to figure out what everyone's main points are and try to put it in a way that makes sense to everyone. Plus, as I seen on other move requests: if someone starts a new request for something that recently passed or failed, it is usually shot down because the vote is commencing too early since the last one. Five weeks should be plenty. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:08, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I'd also like to use this five weeks to determine which names are used in the DBZ Uncut dub. And in which contexts :) WhisperToMe 03:13, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


I could tell you right now, but (again) that has nothing to do with what the page should be called. This is the most asinine thing I've ever seen. First there was a vote in which Mr. Satan won, but someone decided it wasn't a consensus. Then there was a discussion that concluded with a consensus to use Mr. Satan, and the page was moved. Now the page was moved back to Hercule. This is against a vote, against a consensus, and against Wikipedia guidelines. The page is being moved back now.

If you think that the page should be under Hercule that strongly, bring up a move request to move it there. I'm all for moving it to Hercule if there's (1) a vote in Hercule's favour, or (2) a consensus to move it there, or (3) some Wikipedia guideline to back up such a move. Until any one of those three is met, the article stays at Mr. Satan.

-- DesireCampbell 03:32, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Awesome, and now it's move protected. You know what? Fine. If Mr. Satan wins again can we keep it there? -- DesireCampbell 03:33, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Consenus =/ Majority - See WP:Consensus WhisperToMe 03:38, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Consensus = 'everyone but you'. I've already shown that there's no reason at all for using Hercule. You continue to think that you are the final word on it. You're both wrong, and a dick. -- DesireCampbell 03:40, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Where have the other move requested been debated about before. Plus, as a warning to all, please be calm and civil. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:44, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Talk:Hercule_(Dragon_Ball)/Archive_2 is the other move request WhisperToMe 03:45, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
"Consesnus =/ Majority" There's more votes in favor of it anyways. 5 - 2.(No surprise that you're one of them)

VelocityEX 05:58, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Either way it can't be moved right now (not that I supported the move)--SUIT 06:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I still want to know Whisper's definition of "decided." Whipser, you told us that you were more representative of the we on Wikipedia than the rest of us, and also that "the issue was decided." You claim that 64% in favor of Mr. Satan is not a consesnus, yet somehow 36% for Hercule is? You say no move request should go til January. Please point me to the policy that says there is a time limit. It seems like you're less interested in working with your fellow editors and determining the majority opinion, and more interested in keeping things your way, to the point of flat-out ignoring logical points and a majority vote. Onikage725 07:26, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

That's kind of my point. When an issue is brought up, you point to the poll that had majority against your position, yet apparently wasn't enough to satisfy "consensus" and say "the issue has been decided." Clearly it hasn't been, because here we are, and again seeing more support for Mr. Satan. But instead of working with your fellow editors to resolve the problem or adress any concerns brought up, you wave claim that your 36% nays were sufficient and act as if anyone who doesn't share your POV on the matter is wasting your time. Seriously, a number of us have brought up solid points, and your replies of late have been stating over and over that "this is English wiki" and point to the vote that you lost yet somehow won. Onikage725 08:02, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Am I counting wrong? It looks like the vote succeeded 8 to 4 in favor of moving to Mr. Satan. I suppose you could say that 2/3s is not a consensus, but that is certainly not a mandate for Hercule.
As for myself, I truly believe that this is covered by WP:MoS#National varieties of English, which states that, in absence of a clear consensus on what name to use of several equally valid choices, stick with whatever was used by the first significant contributor. According to the first diff, that was Hercule. -Anþony (talk) 09:00, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
1. This tally is 4 (Oppose) to 6 (Favor) - That's not Consensus. See WP:Consensus WhisperToMe 09:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
2. The previous tally was 5 to 4 - 3 votes were disqualified...
a. One poster voted after the poll closed
b. Another used an anonymous IP address
c. Another used a seldom-used account of less than 50 posts WhisperToMe 09:04, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Maybe I'm reading too fast, but I haven't been able to find those rules on who can weigh in that I keep seeing mentioned. Everything I've found has said that such things are guidelines, not policies, that aren't binding and are useful in obtaining the general public opinion on the matter. Obviously the first person you mentioned doesn't count for the poll, as it was closed. But the 2nd two being "disqualified" basically implies that only long-term registered users with an extensive update history have a say in the affairs of an article. Anyone can click the edit button and make a change, or discuss their opinion on the talk page. Anyone can also quickly and easily make a (free) account at any time. Assuming good faith aslo directly calls for us to not exclude or look down upon newer editors. I understand we have to watch out for sockpuppets. Believe me, I've run afoul of Taracka. Im just saying that a user not logged in and a user's account being semi-active doesn't automatically mean cheating. Onikage725 14:09, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.



The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate wasjust drop it already. Nothing will come about from complaining about what has happened and what will happen. Get on with editting. Go expand other articles. Find a random page and expand it.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 20:47, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Some more reasons (of a myriad) as to why the argument to use Hercule over Mr. Satan is a load of bunk.

Latest comment: 17 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

My god. Does anyone here even realize where this BS came from? The French dub. Y'see many years back, when the French dub of original Dragon Ball was underway, for whatever reason they decided to rename Piccolo Daimaō as simply "Satan". Fitting, but ultimately incorrect. Then comes along Piccolo Majunior whom they rename "Satan Petit". Cute, but again incorrect. I assume one must now be thinking "So... what does this little history lesson have to do with our Mr. Satan/Hercule debate?"

Simple; when the French dub inevitably got around to the Cell saga years later, they found they were in a quandary; here they have a new character introduced that's clearly named "Mr. Satan" yet at the same time they have a major character already named "Satan" and has gone by that name since his first appearance so many years back. What to do to avoid confusion? Again simple; rename him also. Hence somehow they dreamed up the name "Hercule" for Mr. Satan, not as a form of censorship, but to avoid confusion with another character pointlessly renamed.

Flash forward some more years later to when FUNimation (finally) gets around to dubbing the Cell saga (dead last place after the rest of the free world I might add), and they worry that God fearing soccer moms (the core demographic of martial arts anime like DBZ obviously) will object to a character named after SAAAAATAAAAAN!!!!! Hence they scramble for a rename, and in this case opt to borrow the French name of the character. Thus explaining where those European action figures of Mr. Satan as Hercule came from as they were available nearly a decade prior to FUNimation's dubbing of the Cell saga. Thus the origin of Hercule is now revealed. Again what does this have to do with our debate?

If one were to mosey on over to the French Wikipedia, and look up Mr. Satan/Hercule, they will find that the article is clearly named (loud and proud) Mr. Satan. Ditto for Piccolo, his article is named as such, not Satan Petit. They're respective French dubbed names are mentioned, though they are not the focus of the articles. The original Japanese names are. Why?

Look to any of the (common sense) reasons listed by DesireCampbell, Onikage725, and co. in the various debates on the matter. Despite whatever bias one may hold against DBZ or anime in general, this is a literary character (as he originated from a graphic novel) who has been ADAPTED (key word) in many languages and formats. This article, as EVERY article on Wikipedia does (even the French version) is supposed to cover the original literary character as its basis, not his altered adaptation counterparts. Thus all the (weak) arguments to the contrary (which essentially amount to the idea that whatever’s popular in the United States, holds sway over the rest of the world) from WhisperToMe and co. fall apart.

I mean what's the counter argument here gonna be? That the English Wiki policy is different than the French Wiki? Different how? That the French Wiki can fess up that their adaptation of a popular and long running anime/manga series does not supercede the ORIGINAL work, but such notions of proper respect to the source material do not apply to the U.S. of A? Try throwing that logic around on a Tolkien article and see where that gets you. All this and I haven't even gone into the issue regarding the fact that the U.S. ussage of the name Hercule is a clear example of a form of CENSORSHIP, something Wikipedia generally doesn't promote.

The moral of this story? Double standards suck; so don't perpetuate them. Fuad Ramses 19:06, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

By the way, dudes, see Wikipedia:Don't-give-a-fuckism - The best solution for tense debates is to simply not care about the result :) WhisperToMe 20:15, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

You do seem to do that - what with the ignoring the pro-Satan votes, the pro-Satan arguments, the Wikipedia Guidelines... --DesireCampbell 20:26, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Practice what you preach, since you seem to care an awful lot that the page stay Hercule, regardless of what anyone else thinks on the matter. Onikage725 20:18, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hercule_(Dragon_Ball)/Archive_3&oldid=1136793034"