Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
This Forum has been archivedVisit the new Forums
|Forums: Index → Narutopedia Discussion → Name Changes||Post|
I think the names should be changed to original names. In fact the proper way to spell Juugo is Juugo and not Jugo. He certainly doesn't look like juice to me. If not doing that then macrons should be added since that is more correct than the double uu. I highly doubt a lot of people will post in this thread. I see no good reason why the names are incorrect. Drunk Samurai 19:07, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- My view is simple, the doube "u"s or the "ou" are cumbersome at best. Unneeded at worst. "ū" and "ō" are just as appropriate as "uu" and "ou" without the unneeded bulk.--TheUltimate3 01:02, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- Please state your stance correctly. You are mixing two different debates together which is going to confuse people who try and get into the discussion. Also it is not a fact that "Juugo" is the correct spelling. It's romanji, there is no real correct spelling unless you are using kanji. "Juugo", "Jugo", and "Jūgo" are ALL correct ways to write the word depending on what style of romanization you use and what your goal is. "Jugo" is also the officially given English spelling. The fact that if we were to use Juugo, then Hyuuga would also be used instead of Hyuga, which some people may disagree with, is also being left out.
- There are two parts to this. A) You want to use Japanese names instead of English names. B) You want to use wāpuro rōmaji for romanization instead of revised hepburn.
- For those without background:
- Romanization is a technique for taking Japanese Kanji and representing it using the latin alphabet (ie: The ABC...XYZ we use).
- Now there are a few different variants of romanization in wide use,
- revised hepburn; used by Wikipedia, other encyclopedic sources, and currently used here. — it would stand to reason that Viz is using revised hepburn when they create a translated character name.
- modified hepburn; I've made a slight mistake about this one. I thought that it was what was being used by fandubs, however fandubs actually use wāpuro rōmaji.
- and wāpuro rōmaji; used primarily by fandubs, other fansites, and blogs.
- Now to help people understand the difference. The primary difference between these three forms of romanization is in how they represent long vowels like the long o and the long u.
- In revised hepburn long vowels are indicated using macrons. So a long o is represented as ō and a long u is represented as ū.
- In modified hepburn long vowels are indicated by doubling the letter used for the vowel. So a long o is represented as oo and a long u is represented as uu.
- I haven't actually used wāpuro so I don't know the exact rule. But to make it simple a long o is represented using ou and a long u is represented as uu.
- To get on with the point, and make a long story short, I'll put in my input.
- Putting the topic of wāpuro rōmaji and revised hepburn aside. The romanization used in the anime world isn't even a standardized form of wāpuro rōmaji. Wikipedia does use a variant of revised hepburn rather than strait revised hepburn, however it is standardized, and even if you only stick with revised hepburn 99.99% of the time nothing in the naming conflicts.
- By taking a look at how the English dubs and translated Manga spell character names — Hyuga, rather than Hyuuga. And Choji rather than Chooiji or Chouji — it would be reasonable to state that in the canonical live naruto universe, revised hepburn is used primarily as the standard in converting Japanese character names into English names. From my viewpoint, it's a good idea to stick to revised hepburn rather than wāpuro rōmaji, because it makes us compatible with Wikipedia, as well as the official translations. And also does give a — in my opinion — more professional stance of the site.
- Now from what I've seen from the contributions of users, and the attitudes of active editors around, it looks as if the community is leaning towards the goal of becoming a well recognized source for information about naruto, in other words and Encyclopedia. Preference to official English and romanization under a standard which is commonly recognized as one used in professional sources vs. preference to romanization and names used by fan communities without a standard, is a borderline. That borderline is what strongly separates whether the public regards the Narutopedia as an Encyclopedia, or just another fansite.
- Just judging from the early on community, and what I see in the current community. For quite some time, the Narutopedia has been a information source focused on the well read naruto fans contributing to a wiki who's target is providing information to the English speaking North Americans who have not yet gotten to a recent point in the series. This is why for quite some time, we have preferred English names, and change eastern Japanese romanized names into western order to avoid confusing the readers. As well, this is why we chose to literally translate Jutsu names, rather than simply using the romanization.
- ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Sep 13, 2008 @ 03:54 (UTC)
I would like to see proof that Jugo is the correct English spelling. Viz is no where near that part. You made that up just to try to make yourself look right. Also you say that it wouldn't be fair to Naruto fans in North America. You do realize that most people who read Naruto edited are 8-12 right? They wouldn't even care to look it up. Drunk Samurai 05:21, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- Please allow me to add my 2 cents in this discussion. Revised Hepburn (ō, ū, zu, ji for おう, うう, づ, じ) is the most common way of romanising Japanese. It's used not only by Viz, but by encyclopaedias and other authoritative publishings worldwide. If there ever was an official way of romanising Japanese, it would be with Revised Hepburn (interestingly enough, the Japanese government actually uses Kunrei-shiki [ô, û, du, zi]).
- Revised Hepburn is by far the most professional way of romanising Japanese.
- However, one could argue that the only authority on how to romanise the names of the Naruto characters is the author of Naruto himself. Kishimoto, as you might now because of the Pain-Pein debate, gives romanisations of the names of his characters in the databooks. He doesn't use revised Hepburn, though, nor does he use Kunrei-shiki. He uses Wāpuro (ou, uu, zu, ji). The same system used by most fan translators.
- Therefore this debate can go both ways, depending on which authority to use. Personally, I'm not sure which one I like best. In everyday writing, I use Wāpuro, because it's the easiest and most true to the Japanese writing, but it's also non-standard and unprofessional. When I do 'official' translating, I generally use revised Hepburn, but I can't stand it when people don't write the macrons (which I also consider non-standard and unprofessional and most of all lazy). I guess there should be some kind of consensus on this to solve this problem.
- Oh, by the way, since we're on the topic of rōmaji any way... it's rōmaji, not romanji. There is no n in it ^^ --ShounenSuki 12:27, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- Well Suki. Again you manage to post right before I post my own comment and now I can't do it agian. Great Job Breaking It, Hero. (Potal humor ^_^)
- Anyway on topic, I agree with Dantman said about using the Revised Hepburn. It's used on other Encyclopedias, Viz, Wikipedia, ect--TheUltimate3 12:51, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry, I don't keep track of which characters have appeared in the dub, I made a mistake with Jugo. However by Viz's current standard for romanization Jugo will be the correct spelling. But my note on English was a mistake, not malice, please don't assume malice, as they say assuming makes an ass of you and me. Wiki are founded on assuming good faith.
- As for the Naruto Demographic you state, what kind of citation do you have for that? You're assuming a false demographic. I know dozens of people around here who watch and read naruto who are well over 12. Around here naruto itself is on later on during the night in the adult programming timeslot. The naruto demographic is not 8-12, people who come here to read about naruto are a wide variety of ages. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Sep 13, 2008 @ 17:41 (UTC)
Well we should go by the style Kishimoto himself uses. That means its what he wants. What the original author wants should always be used. I said people who read EDITED Naruto are more kids than teens/adults. There are lots of teens and adults who watch Naruto. They are mostly fans of the original series however. I know a 52 year old woman who is a fan of Naruto. I do know a lot watch the dub but they also watch the original series too. Drunk Samurai 18:29, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- While its true Kishimoto uses the Wāpuro, what he is doing in and of itself, is well, unprofessional in an English perspective. As such because in TL,DR (To Long, Didn't Read) difference seems to be the writing of long vowels, from an English speaking perspective, Spelling word Jugo is more fitting to the language than writing Juugo, and it a hell of alot simpler than spelling a word Jūgo (as I do not know how one would go around and use the ū, I myself had to copy and paste it).--TheUltimate3 19:26, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
- Which is why, we have the charinsert box below the edit page with a few dozen hard to type characters ;). We could probably move the useful characters up into a separate section if you wanted. At a point in the past, I was trying to work on a bit of a helper tool. Something where you could press a keycombo with a selected u or such, have a bit of guides show up, and select a ū which it would convert the u to. Though, that would be the reason we use macrons in the translation template, but not in regular text (though, we do normally use the macron in Shippūden). Though it does work out well, 99.99% of the time the romanization we use without the macron is what ends up in the English Dub, and so we don't need to go and rewrite a pile of names.
- Actually, I know a number of teenagers who don't watch the original series. There are a fair number of people (not just kids) who can't keep up with subtitles, so they just watch dubs and wait for series to be translated. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Sep 14, 2008 @ 03:14 (UTC)
My point was you have no proof they would be confused if we used the correct names used by Kishimoto himself. Drunk Samurai 04:48, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
- When did I say they would be confused? That's yet another assumption. I said things along the lines of; We've been targeting North Americans who don't keep up with the series — dub watchers or people who don't watch Naruto actively. And also using official English names on an English wiki, and using accepted standards for romanization, is more professional than using unofficial romanizations spread throughout the net. And where did Kishimoto say "Juugo" is the spelling? Sure, if you have a scan of an official romanization, we can fix our romanization to fit. But without that kind of source, we have to regard "Juugo" as wāpuro spread by fandub translators, and "Jugo" as revised hepburn which is what we have stuck with for some time now. We might also need to check a few other pages, I'm not precisely sure what romanizations are used in the databooks, depending on what they are that statement could be reversed. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Sep 14, 2008 @ 08:22 (UTC)
You ignored what I said. I said that most people are young children who watch the show and don't watch the original. I know a lot of people who watch both the dub and original. You have no basis to say that everybody who watches the dub watches the original. Jugo is not correct and you know that. You just want it because you think Viz is a God.
- You enjoy testing my patients do you. It is you who is ignoring him. It's already been established that Kishimoto is using the unprofessional Wāpuro Japanese spelling of the kanji. We are an English speaking Wiki, we use English spelling. Therefore, we use the revised hepburn. So Jugo IS correct, cause in English we wouldn't be using two "u"s or the ũ (hey it worked Dant!), we use Jugo. And before you say it, no I don't watch the English anime or read the English manga, and I still stand here and say as an speaker of English, we should use the revised hepburn.--TheUltimate3 18:30, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Kishimoto is the correct one. It doesn't matter what Viz uses. Anything that Kishimoto says makes it the real version. It doesn't matter if he uses it incorrectly what he uses is right. I suppose you'll say that Kishimoto should have no say now? If you ever notice Viz doesn't even ask mangaka. They just make up their own terms and spellings for characters or just change them outright.
- And that my friend (and I use the term loosly) is globalization. Due to the way marketing works, in Japan 重吾 is the correct way. Then when they want to use Romaji, its Juugo. Then over seas, the revised hepburn is up and its Jugo.
- And I'm gonna assume you really don't have an idea how the translation business works. The mangaka isn't in charge, his employers are. They are the real decision makers. Kishimoto's employers at Shounen Jump signed a deal with Viz, and let Viz do whatever they needed to sell their product to the Americans. What is Kishimoto's involvement in all this? Making the comics.
- But seriously though from what I've gathered from you, it seems your entire argument is built on the idea that Viz Media is an evil baby killing organization out to destroy the precious work of Kishimoto, and you see yourself as a knight protecting something you cherish. Noble, but woefully ineffective. You are speaking with an obvious bias and not taking in the full picture of what HAS happened in the past (the use of the revised hepburn for Hyuuga to Hyuga) and the language difference between two different countries (the use of doubling long vowels as opposed to simply saying it).--TheUltimate3 18:51, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
Del Rey asked Mashima Hiro what the correct names for Fairy Tail were. If you notice Viz never did that for any of their manga. I seriously would not call this an encyclopedia if the admins choose to use the incorrect names not used by Kishimoto. Its using false information that any other wikia would not use. Drunk Samurai 19:01, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
- Cause Viz is a juggernaut that doesn't have to. They went straight to the bosses and that's it. Oh oh dear Christmas, have you even BEEN to Wikipedia? I edited there for a year, and I gotta tell ya. Gai, Pein (after a MUCH heated debate), Hyuuga, Juugo, and Chouji are all wrong there. You go there and change them to those, I can tell you this now, in about five minutes, Guy, Pain, Hyuga, Jugo, and Choji will all be back to normal.--TheUltimate3 19:25, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
- Eh? Not an encyclopedia? That's a pretty controverted statement... Last time I checked Wikipedia was recognized one of most professional online community driven encyclopedia projects... And their stance on the name is pretty obvious. However I am getting pretty tired of you putting words in my mouth. I really don't care about Viz, they're not Gods, I just care about citable information. Facts are things you can derive from official canonical sources. And whether you like it or not, the fact is that Viz is the officially delegated source of facts for the English version of Naruto. So unless you've got more information to put into a discussion other than the same stuff you've been repeating over and over. Or some other users actually join in on this discussion, there is little point to this continuing. The current state of this is just like what we've dealt with many times in the past. A single user on a vendetta against a decision that the rest of the community has made, simply because they don't like it personally. This discussion isn't helping the wiki, and this isn't a very civil discussion, traditionally editors here like to avoid any conversation where one of the sides will attack them, which may be why only the 3 most active users have bothered to reply to this discussion.
- ^_^ Oh btw... for some fun facts here's a graph of a comparison. We have more recorded traffic than naruto-kun.com, and over the past while, our level has grown and is now starting to rise above leafninja.com's recorded traffic. ^_^ I wonder if we can ever grow enough to get more traffic than narutofan.com. That would be interesting, and definitely not impossible if we get our self inside of a magazine. (Oh ya, don't know if I mentioned it. But one of wikia's founders Jimmy Wales has offered to help any Wikia wiki get an article about them published in any magazine they feel would be good). Oh right, as for more naruto stats take a look here. Apparently 84% of our viewers are 12-34. And 16% of our audience is Asian, that's small compared to the 52% of Caucasians, but above average in comparison with other types of sites. Oh, and most viewers come from the US, followed by Germans, then people from the Philippines, and then Canadians. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Sep 14, 2008 @ 19:46 (UTC)
I said that kids watch the edited dub and read the edited manga more than teens and adults. Teens and adults mostly watch the original version or both. Statistics like that are invalid because they never factor in which ones watch which version. Saying that it would be unfair to the dub fans is not true at all. Most of the members probably don't even know about this thread. They would need to see a link on their talk page or else a direct link here for a discussion on the main page. Drunk Samurai 20:10, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
- You're twisting my words yet again. I said nothing about the naruto demographic. I just posted a set of interesting statistics to make the conversation more enjoyable to everyone. And the stats you give have no bearing either, unless you can provide a valid citation behind them instead of just making another personal assumption. As for other editors, we do have more who actively watch the recent changes. Editors like Jace and Gojita actively watch the recent changes, and as such they normally pick up on discussions. It's abnormal when one of them or a few other editors don't chime in on a discussion that has been around for a few days. Also, btw... topics like this take first note on the Community portal. ~NOTASTAFF Daniel Friesen (DanTMan, Nadir Seen Fire) (talk) current discussion Sep 14, 2008 @ 20:19 (UTC)