Talk:Is the Order a Rabbit?

Related discussion

I do consider this article notable, given ja.wp sources, but have mentioned it among 7 articles on manga of the same magazine at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Free! (manga). Cheers. In ictu oculi (talk) 10:35, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

'Yuri' Genre

To prevent this from evolving further into an edit war, I would like to start the discussion here as to why the 'Yuri' genre should be applied to the series. So far, nobody has provided any sources from the author, publisher, or studio indicating that they label it as such, and there is no reason to believe it falls under the 'Yuri' genre based on the show or the manga, given that there are no romantic relationships between any of the girls. Can anybody provide a source indicating as to why we should label this series as 'Yuri'? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.185.185.178 (talk) 17:35, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

There's a pretty valid reason, Yuri is Girls' love, and given that Sharo and Chino are in romantic love with Rize and Cocoa, respectively, it's a good enough reason to classify it as yuri, even though Chino mostly showed it only in episode 12. It's questionable if Chiya and Megu also love Cocoa, especially in the manga. So the show and manga are more than enough to prove that it's yuri. 189.154.18.199 (talk) 01:51, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

This is pure interpretation on your part, which is in violation of Wikipedia's policy on no original research and verifiability. —Farix (t | c) 04:42, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Is not interpretation at all. It's clearly showed in the manga and the show. Those are facts that can be verified watching the show. Don't expect official sources saying what genre is this series because that type of stuff never happen, the Slice of Life and the Comedy genres are also here because they're also facts that can be verified watching the show, you won't find official sources classifying it as Slice of Life or Comedy, and despite of that both genres are accepted here. That's why I think the yuri genre is as valid as the other 2.189.154.18.199 (talk) 14:42, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

If information is disputed, it must be sourced to a reliable source. That is one of core content policies of Wikipeida. "Verified by watching" is taking your interpretation of what constitutes "yuri" as a genre. That is a textbook case of "combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion", which is called a synthesis and is a form of original research. If you cannot provide a reliable source to support the genre, then it cannot be on the article. As for sourcing of the other two genres, that can clearly be made from ANN's 2014 Spring Spotlight page at http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/anime-spotlight/2014/spring/ No where dies it state that the genre is "yuri". —Farix (t | c) 20:01, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

ANN is not and will never be a reliable source. It mostly translates what japanese blogs say, which are also interpretations of the show, sometimes even before it airs. Using ANN as a source is as valid as using the interpretation of anyone. Actual valid official sources only give demographies, in this case "seinen", but genres are given by interpretations of the western community, never from something official.189.154.33.81 (talk) 18:47, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Only the encyclopedia and forum sections of ANN are considered unreliable. The encyclopedia is unreliable because it is based on user-edited content, much like Wikipedia. However, the link I provided is an article and those have editorial oversight. Various editors have attempted to challenged ANN as a reliable source many times before, but the news, articles, and reviews have always passed muster. You can read the details at WP:A&M/ORS#Situational. —Farix (t | c) 19:04, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Also, whether or not you think that ANN is unreliable the consensus at this point is that it is reliable meaning that there are two options available for you to make the proposed addition stick. You will either need to achieve a new consensus overturning the previous consensus that ANN is a reliable source or you will need to find a different reliable source that actually calls this work Yuri. If neither of these happen Yuri won't be added as a genre.--67.68.162.111 (talk) 23:48, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Comment: Simply making a deduction using your own intuition such as observing the characteristics of the Anime and Manga counts as unacceptable original research on Wikipedia. You need to provide a reliable source such as a reputable review or the like to support your additions. —KirtZ^Message 19:29, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Despite how obviously gay some of the characters are, yuri is sadly not one of GochiUsa's primary genres. It's a light-hearted slice-of-lice comedy about girls working in cafés first and foremost. Same with several other series, including some that may have canonical lesbian characters. For yuri to be classified as a genre, it needs to either be one of the series' key focuses (such as the main character falling in love with another woman or a lesbian couple teaming up to fight zombies or something) or, at the least, verifiable by an official source (such as an online store like Amazon categorising it as a yuri series). If you can find a source of Koi going 'yup, GochiUsa is totally a yuri series' (you can probably just use Google Translate to ask them on Twitter), then that's perfectly fine, but otherwise it's just OR. Wonchop (talk) 02:27, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Comment This manga is not as straightforward as Strawberry Panic! to give an example, like are the two main characters shown to be in love? Manga distributers label manga genres different country by country so citing one of them counts as a reliable source here. Genres are normally not contested but when they are you need to provide a source. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:29, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

CommentPerhaps you can meet half-way and just call it Shojo-ai? Lucia Black (talk) 02:46, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Is there a reliable source that supports that genre? —Farix (t | c) 11:32, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Shoujo-ai is just a westernized term for 'non porny yuri' (which most actual yuri fans detest using from what I can tell), so same kinda things apply. Wonchop (talk) 16:26, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

The problem here is not even whether the work is yuri, if it has lesbian characters, but that many such works do not go beyond the subtext, which leads to the appearance of many, often completely strange interpretations. Yes, Sharo is a very obvious lesbian and her sublpot lives openly at the expense of yuri tropes, but Chino was never implied or declared as a lesbian, not to mention their age difference. The Japanese wiki also does not contain a mention of her feelings, other than friendly or sisterly. All this interpretation of her behavior is based on the fact that she became more kind to Cocoa during the show, although even the supporters of this pairing recognize that there is not the same dynamics between girls as Manga Time Kirara's subtext yuri pairings. This phenomenon is called Yuri Goggles and it was about it that Erica Friedman spoke on her website when she spoke about the tendency when two girls are declared lesbians only because of any interaction between them, in fact reducing any friendship, respect or rivalry to the lesbian attraction. Therefore, I want to emphasize even more strongly that we need authoritative sources, so that only facts confirmed by sources can get to Wikipedia. Solaire the knight (talk) 11:32, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

The origin of the characters’ names

At the moment, the origin of each characters' names are written in this article, but I think this is an [WP:NOR|original research]. Neither the official staffs nor Koi have ever mentioned about what word do the character names come from. In fact, the origins of the characters' names have been deleted from the Japanese wiki, since it was determined as original research. Are there any opinions about deleting these informations? --Kororo135624 (talk) 06:03, 12 May 2020 (UTC)