A barnstar for you!

		The Special Barnstar
		You are an exceptional to-the-book editor and I just wanted you to know that. Hats off to you!

GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 03:50, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

My bad

Hi there, I am just typing because I want to admit you are absolutely right about the problem with my edits. It will not happen again, I will always check the references before publishing and my apologies if you felt really mad. Thank you so much for your support! PIKACHUNESS (talk) 08:07, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

@PIKACHUNESS: Thanks for understanding. It's not that I'm really mad about it, but I think these are things that can easily be avoided. Xexerss (talk) 08:17, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for correcting my errors!

I am writing on May 30, 3 days after you rewrote some of my work on List of Jujutsu Kaisen Characters in Naobito Zen'in's Section. I thank you for correcting my mistakes on the page. EyeMWikiReadder (talk) 09:26, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

Uh I thank you AGAIN as my grammar might not be always correct and I really do think I might have just wrote what I had thought through my mind so yeah, Good Luck on Correcting more articles!! EyeMWikiReadder (talk) 09:33, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

@EyeMWikiReadder: You're welcome. Happy editing! Xexerss (talk) 12:37, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Black Lagoon (TV series) key visual.png

Thanks for uploading File:Black Lagoon (TV series) key visual.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:09, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Finding source for existing book

Hello! I saw you revert my Doraemon Bilingual Indonesian English release. I already tried to find official source or any mention in news, unfortunately it just doesn't exist. Not even Internet Archive or old official social media post. The book info itself present in Goodreads (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/10134058-doraemon) and available to buy as secondhand on various local online shop.

Any ideas to add those info? Thank you. Christian Elbrianno (talk) 20:33, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

@Christian Elbrianno: I'll see if I can find any information on this, but if there isn't a suitable source to back it up in the article, it should simply be omitted, since Wikipedia prioritizes verifiability over truth; see WP:NOTTRUTH. Xexerss (talk) 20:48, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Date A Live page edits removed

Why am I not being allowed to make edits to the Date A Live page? Other animes like Lycoris Recoil are allowed to cite their anime corner wins despite being a shorter series. The page is practically barren despite the series being front in the light novel expo, having 9 million circulation, having an extreme merchandise selection, winning tons of awards. There are not even articles on any of the characters. While shorter newer series are allowed. RebelpilotJYZ (talk) 02:44, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

@RebelpilotJYZ: It's not that you're "not being allowed to make edits", it's just that your edits and the way you add citations are incorrect, to the point of being disruptive, even if that's not your intention. See this edit that you performed, with multiple citation errors and even an empty one. In addition, there are numerous punctuation errors, and the series title should always be in italics. I could correct them if they were minor details, but there are too many of them, and if you're going to keep editing here, it's not the idea that another editor has to keep fixing your work every time you make an edit. Xexerss (talk) 04:55, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

The Case Files of Biblia Bookstore copies update

Hi @Xexerss if you have a time can you help me to find the source of The Case Files of Biblia Bookstore reception? because sales of franchise went into 8.5 million copies in April 2026 Venom5122 (talk) 14:10, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

@Venom5122: There is a source on Japanese Wikipedia. Xexerss (talk) 22:03, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

Regarding Fujiko F. Fujio and Fujiko Fujio A.

As of 1987, Fujiko Fujio split up and parted ways with most works going to Fujiko F. Fujio while Fujiko A took over most other works, and reissues of their manga they worked together (and for retroactive purposes) were listed with their current names instead of Fujiko Fujio, is there any way to figure things out. SBF2004 (talk) 11:08, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

@SBF2004 Are you asking how to handle this in the articles about their works? Perhaps the best approach would be to list each author's name and include a note explaining that they were originally credited as a duo. That's just my opinion, but you might want to start a discussion on Fujiko Fujio's talk page. Xexerss (talk) 11:42, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Yes but I have already asked about a big split abt it on their talk page… SBF2004 (talk) 19:37, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

@SBF2004: Are you sure? I don't see any edits by you in the article's talk page revision history. When you start a discussion, I recommend posting a notice on WT:ANIME using Template:Please see so that it gets more attention from other editors. Xexerss (talk) 21:27, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

thanks, already gotten into that by now... SBF2004 (talk) 22:01, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Re: Bleach

I understand not adding the number of episodes, as it hasn't been properly confirmed by Crunchyroll or similar, but I don't understand removing the last part where the series was released early by Fathom/other companies in theaters, depending on the country. I understand also changing the date format, but it's also pretty notable that the series was released in theaters, and there are many sources from Variety to others. Is there a different date format to use? KoRoBeNiKi Medical Coder, chess specialist, retired SSBWiki rollback, hi? 06:03, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

@KoRoBeNiKi: I have added content about the theatrical release of The Calamity. MOS:DATENO indicates that ordinal numbers should not be used for dates; June 25, June 29, not June 25th, June 29th. Xexerss (talk) 06:11, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for adding and noted as per date format. KoRoBeNiKi Medical Coder, chess specialist, retired SSBWiki rollback, hi? 06:14, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Berserk (1997) OST.png

Thank you for uploading File:Berserk (1997) OST.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:38, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Kaiji Ultimate Survivor OST.png

Thank you for uploading File:Kaiji Ultimate Survivor OST.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notification. Please refer to the page's history for further information. DatBot (talk) 00:32, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

Ok

Uh again in sorry EyeMWikiReadder (talk) 09:40, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

Is it the way I add information or just generally? I add info like this on List of My Hero Academia characters so I'm not sure what to do now. I watch these through Netflix so on information like you just reverted. So I am very sorry. EyeMWikiReadder (talk) 09:44, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

@EyeMWikiReadder Mainly the "Senshi's Past Mining Group" section you added in this edit, with information to be added. You shouldn't publish your changes in main space as if it were a to-do list. If you want to test or draft a section, use your user sandbox. Xexerss (talk) 11:49, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

Ok! EyeMWikiReadder (talk) 13:08, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

The thing is, i cant get on Websites so i cant go on the user sandbox EyeMWikiReadder (talk) 13:08, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Bleach Thousand-Year Blood War.png

Thanks for uploading File:Bleach Thousand-Year Blood War.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:11, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Kaiji Ultimate Survivor OST.png

Thanks for uploading File:Kaiji Ultimate Survivor OST.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of non-free use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:30, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

Network article links in television articles

I have reverted your reversion of the article links in television articles per Template:Infobox television network field: "Use links if articles are available." When the articles are not linked in this field, it places the article in a cleanup field, Category:Pages using infobox television with unlinked values and it is something which every other television articles that uses Template:Infobox television on Wikipedia adheres to. If you have a concern with the links, you should start a conversation at Template:Infobox television or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Television. Aspects (talk) 21:06, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

@Aspects: Got it. I wasn't aware of the cleanup field part. I just thought it was enough to include a single wikilink in the infobox. Thanks for the heads-up. Xexerss (talk) 12:06, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

Articles for Creation backlog drive

Hello Xexerss:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive in August!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than a month of outstanding reviews from the current 3+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 August 2026 through 31 August 2026.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 5000 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

• If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.

Define "Unnecessary"

Even the Student Council Has Its Holes!

You have reverted a detail on this article for Komaro-chan meant to describe a character's visual traits, with the only justification being "its unnecessary", even though it is an accurate descriptor. On the contrary, claiming it being "unnecessary" does not make it inaccurate, especially when describing a very noticeable visual detail of a main character of the series that gets regularly emphasized. Wikipedia is for all information in the end.

So please, do define what "unnecessary" is to mention her contrasting traits? Samalik16 (talk) 19:13, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

@Samalik16: Character descriptions should be concise and free of superfluous information. Describing the size of a character's breasts as "overly mature for her age" adds no encyclopedic value. No, Wikipedia is not "for all information in the end". And one more thing: saying that a video is "viral" based on your own assessment and citing that same video (primary source) is WP:ORIGINAL. You've been doing this for a while now, and you've received more warnings since the last time I went to your talk page. If you keep doing the same thing, I'm going to take this to WP:ANI. Xexerss (talk) 19:17, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

"Character descriptions should be concise and free of superfluous information"

And where is such rule? She's small, has a large chest and sleepy eyes and a long amber ponytail. In the context of tropes known to anime, how is this "superfluous" to mention what would be a kyonyuu (oppai) loli but mentioning that Otori looks like a girl or "otoko no ko" isn't? it's not like this is a series devoid of "pink" content, as the linked previews are clearly showing.

"You've been doing this for a while now, and you've received more warnings since the last time I went to your talk page."

I'll admit back in april I got a little heated over the topic of console generations because it's not lining up with what people understand them as, but the last one was over trying to prevent an article from being sabotaged by removing relevant information by someone who kept giving personal attacks to myself and even industry tier professionals, which I also got angry over because Wikipedia did nothing about his behavior until recently. Your own page says its best to assume good faith, but I'm not seeing that off the jump right now. Samalik16 (talk) 19:32, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Per WP:MOS-AM, character sections should consist of brief character outlines. Saying that a character looks small or that another character looks feminine are sufficient to provide concise descriptions of their appearances. Focusing on the fact that a character has large breasts ("overly mature for her age") is completely irrelevant and not what you'd expect in an encyclopedia; you won't even see that kind of statement in an article about a model or adult film actress. I've seen enough of your edits, which often include original research, unnecessary sentences, and so on, despite the warnings you've been given, so you can't expect me to continue to view your contributions in good faith; don't expect my patience to be unlimited. Xexerss (talk) 19:49, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Per wikipedia's rules on assuming Bad Faith, and the way they are describing it, in my humble opinion, you're stepping into that similar behavior and I think you need to calm down.

Btw, if mentioning a man looks like a girl suffices, what about replacing "small" with "kyonyuu loli" or the more (lazily used) "oppai loli" then? Because if the shoe fits, why not wear it? Because as I repeat, this series isn't gonna run away from pink humor or scenarios. Samalik16 (talk) 20:02, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

@Samalik16: How about you start tailoring your edits to the suggestions that other editors have been making to you for a while now, instead of continuing to act as if everyone else is to blame for not letting you do whatever you want here? Wikipedia isn't meant to be understood only by a select group of anime and manga fans (WP:AUDIENCE), so don't assume that every reader would know what "kyonyuu loli" or "oppai loli" mean. I still don't get why describing the size of a specific attribute of a fictional character is so important to you. Xexerss (talk) 20:12, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

"How about you start tailoring your edits to the suggestions that other editors have been making to you for a while now, instead of continuing to act as if everyone else is to blame for not letting you do whatever you want here"

Actually if I make a mistake then by all means correct it. Wikipedia first motto is "be bold", and quite frankly I'm not even trying to sabotage or destroy wikipedia, I'm just some moronic casual editor who sometimes makes mistakes but tries to contribute the best I can with what i understand. So you coming and openly admitting to bad faith towards me when I'm trying to act in good faith is kinda hurtful tbh. Seriously, calm down. Please.

Wikipedia isn't meant to be understood only by a select group of anime and manga fans (WP:AUDIENCE), so don't assume that every reader would know what "kyonyuu loli" or "oppai loli" mean.

Wikipedia also says content should not be excluded simply because it's niche. Otherwise we'd have to remove lots of anime tropes from articles if not the entire article on lolicon. Equally so, the average normie(?) user on the internet are already familiar with the concept of an "loli with a big chest" even outside of anime circles, so i dunno why it begs treating it like it's rocket science that is too complex for the average reader. Samalik16 (talk) 20:32, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

@Samalik16 I didn't say outright that I sense bad faith in your edits, but I do see that you haven't noticeably changed your editing habits and, in fact, have continued to receive warnings because of them, so even if that's not your intention, you're still being disruptive. It's one thing to have articles about certain concepts and topics, but it's quite another to use those terms as if they were everyday language and assume that everyone is familiar with them. I'm skeptical that the average 8-year-old boy, 60-year-old woman, or 50-something construction worker would know what "kyonyuu loli" or "oppai loli" means, or even the word "loli" (as used in anime and manga fandom); see MOS:JARGON. That's the problem: don't assume that Wikipedia is read only by regular internet users or "average normies"; be conscious of your own demographic biases. Xexerss (talk) 20:47, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

I didn't say outright that I sense bad faith in your edits

Oh no, don't start weaseling out now after what you just told me in this conversation: "so you can't expect me to continue to view your contributions in good faith". Like, c'mon... there's no other way to interpret this.

but I do see that you haven't noticeably changed your editing habits and, in fact, have continued to receive warnings because of them, so even if that's not your intention, you're still being disruptive

Excuse me? the last warning was on the basis of trying to stop someone else from being disruptive because Wikipedia didn't do anything about his behavior, which I repeat, also included personal attacks on others and a refusal to come to a consensus through twisting words.The context surrounding a warning doesn't stop at the stop sign. it may not have been the cleanest method and maybe a bit too bold, but at least the editor/admin who warned me, who's a teacher btw, actually did try helping me improve the article in question by telling me what was wrong with it in said articles' talk page and I greatly appreciated that he helped me instead of saying I was wrong or something.

I'm skeptical that the average 8-year-old boy, 60-year-old woman, or 50-something construction worker would know what "kyonyuu loli" or "oppai loli" means, or even the word "loli" (as used in anime and manga fandom)

Ok this is a ridiculous argument.

First off, what 8 year old boy is going to openly search for an ecchi comedy manga when they're more occupied with junk food on TikTok or fortnite? By this very argument, most concepts on Wikipedia would have to be wiped because it's not in the vocabulary of a 3rd grader.

Second off, most people in their 50s+ don't even know what gamer terms are out there. Should articles like Boomer Shooter, Metroidvania or Souls-like also be removed for that reason because a good chunk of the those old people don't play games, or those that play games aren't the mainstream gamer in front of their Candy Crush dailies? No they shouldn't be removed, because gamers still use these terms. Using subcultural terms is not the same as "jargon". its a small phrase meant to quickly define something known in said subculture.

Additionally, the article for lolicon already exists. So claiming that "people won't get it" is looking at it from a perspective of someone who isn't the most interested in the topics of anime or otaku media to begin with, which defeats the point. In the end, only enthusiasts of the medium, either established or aspiring, are keeping a close eye on these articles if not using them as recommendations. Especially enthusiasts of ecchi or "hentai", who are going to take the most interest in this series specifically, if the promos are already a dead giveaway of who the target audience is. The average anime watcher already knows what these terms mean, especially oppai loli which was really popular 10+ years ago, no thanks to characters like Ilulu from Dragon Maid or Hestia from Danmachi, who herself was referred to as a kyonyuu loli in the book she comes from.

Komaro-chan herself is, creatively-speaking, trying to play into the kyonyuu loli trope. That much is very obvious to the target audience. Samalik16 (talk) 21:43, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

@Samalik16: Interpret my words however you like; your edits are still disruptive, you keep getting warnings, and you keep editing and interpreting things however you please. I'm saying that we should avoid using terms in character descriptions that most readers won't understand, so they don't have to look up other articles or visit other sites to figure out what they mean, and we should also use language that, ideally, everyone can understand without resorting to specific terminology unless it's necessary. If you hang out with people who regularly consume manga and anime, you might think that EVERYONE is familiar with the terms used in these works, but that’s not the case, and you shouldn’t assume that only a certain type of audience will read a particular kind of article based on your own assumptions. Wikipedia articles MUST be written for the broadest possible audience and not just for certain groups; it seems like you didn't even read the guideline I shared with you. What I find ridiculous is that you're making such a big deal out of the fact that I told you we should not use unnecessary descriptions for fictional characters, like saying that one of them has big breasts, as if the reader were going to miss out on crucial information just because they don't know this fact. Xexerss (talk) 22:00, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

@Samalik16 When articles use specific terminology, it is customary to include a wikilink, assuming that a reader may not be familiar with a particular term. I don't see any articles titled "kyonyuu loli" or "oppai loli"; even though I've been familiar with the world of anime and manga for years, this is the first time I've heard of them. Xexerss (talk) 22:05, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Wait, what? You never heard of an oppai loli is?!?! This is, like, old terminology, especially in anime and manga that is rich in moe' appeal!

At this point it begs the question what was the point in all of this arguing when you could have came out and said this. Would have moved things faster.

Kyonyuu loli (ロリ巨乳, rori kyonyū) is the domestic usage for an oppai loli, which is still in usage today by older fans, although kyonyuu loli is sometimes used in place of oppai loli.. Once again, Danmachi uses this to describe Hestia's bodytype. Samalik16 (talk) 22:22, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

@Samalik16: Okay, so do you have at least one authoritative source that explicitly and literally states that the character in the series is "playing into the kyonyuu loli trope"? I'm talking about factual, verifiable information. At least in Hestia’s case, it seems the author has explicitly admitted it. Xexerss (talk) 22:34, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Okay, so do you have at least one authoritative source that explicitly and literally states that the character in the series is "playing into the kyonyuu loli trope"?

lets see here, a blog, a news article on the announcement and a bunny figure for merch.

The blog congratulating the manga on winning the 2023 Next Manga Award and the news article on the announcement of the anime refer to Komaro as a "loli kyonyuu" (ロリ巨乳). And if you can't find it, revert to original language and use F3, because google likes to be censorious of lolicon related terms, the search engine made all the more hellish.

The FuRyu branded figure refers to her with "kogara" (小柄) which is in reference to her smaller stature, while also emphasizing her chest (巨乳) as something that is normally hidden under her shirt as a selling point.

Regardless of how you slice it, she is not just known as "Small". Her breast size is also treated as a key trait of her appearance, with her already being well understood to be a "kyonyuu loli" in japan.

just to add a little extra I suppose, on the kodansha IP site, she's referred to as a 小っちゃな捨て猫庶務 or "a small stray cat secretary".... or PR I suppose.... all while the cover of said volume emphasizes her breasts as she piggybacks like a kid on Ume's shoulders. Samalik16 (talk) 04:13, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

I asked you for authoritative sources. Personal blogs are user-generated sources and do not qualify as sources that warrant the use of a particular term in an article. Xexerss (talk) 04:38, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

By the way, I very much doubt that a term that was added to Wiktionary less than a month ago by an IP user, and that contains no citations, constitutes any evidence to support the claim that it is a widely used term. Xexerss (talk) 22:46, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Well, here's a KnowYourMeme page that includes a brief breakdown of "oppai loli" dating back to 10 years, showing the etymology was used as far back. KnowYourMeme, as the name implies, is all about memeology, both in the literal and internet sense.

Additionally, here's a MAL forum page about Hestia using the term as well as the usage of it from StackExchange.

My point here is that the usage of the term is real and repetitively shown, regardless of when the term was made on the ever forgotten Wiktionary. So no, it's not a made up term, if that's where you were going. Samalik16 (talk) 04:10, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

I'm not questioning the existence of the term; I'm questioning whether the term would be used in everyday language outside the world of anime and manga (more specific, lolicon enthusiasts), and how easy it would be for someone unfamiliar with it to understand. Apparently, it's common among lolicon connoisseurs, who, I'm pretty sure, don't represent a significant percentage of Wikipedia's regular readers. I insist: you should stop assuming that only hardcore otaku will read the article and that we can therefore use specialized terms without considering the general readership. Wikipedia isn't meant for that. There are sites like Fandom where you can edit and include more precise jargon without expecting readers to understand what’s being talked about and having to look elsewhere for definitions. Xexerss (talk) 04:53, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

@Samalik16: Komaro-chan herself is, creatively-speaking, trying to play into the kyonyuu loli trope. Where are you getting this from? Do you see how you bring up terms and concepts that aren't explicitly associated or supported with the work anywhere? In other words, you continue to engage in original research, but you're surprised that I don't look favorably on your edits... Xexerss (talk) 22:21, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Do you see how you bring up terms and concepts that aren't explicitly associated or supported with the work anywhere? In other words, you continue to engage in original research, but you're surprised that I don't look favorably on your edits...

Somehow using the art in the citations for Komaro's bodytype and I'm not allowed to say she's a kyonyuu loli?

Let me break down the etymology of ロリ巨乳 just so we're on the same page

Kyon = 巨 = Large

Nyuu = 乳 = Milk (referred in this context as a woman's chest)

loli = ロリ = "loli", which is reserved for characters who are on the short side with moe' appeal. Komaro herself is around 130cm tall which is around the height of a 9 year old apparently.

Compound it all together and you get the trope that reads "kyonyuu loli" (ロリ巨乳). It takes no personal interpretation to see big breasts on a small girl. That's meeting things as matter of fact.

Additionally, the term has also been used before for gravure idols who are on the smaller side, even if they show strong maternal development in other areas, although the entomology could go even further with more in depth research.

You can have criticisms over my editing style, but don't assume bad faith by pointing at me like wikipedia is somehow my playground like you did earlier. If someone assumed such with you, wouldn't take that very well either. the least you could have done was just give a "my bad" for the nasty attitude and this topic would have already been put to rest while we work out the other stuff. I don't treat wikipedia like its a job of mine, and a majority of the 1000+ edits I have made are of topics I believe myself to have some baseline competence in trying to improve or polish, with some mistakes here and there in the past 5 years. I'm only human. Samalik16 (talk) 04:11, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Somehow using the art in the citations for Komaro's bodytype and I'm not allowed to say she's a kyonyuu loli? I'm asking you for a reliable source (not personal blogs) that provide evidence that the author has explicitly described the character using those terms. I'm not asking for your views on the character's design, such as saying, "this character is short and busty, so the author is clearly playing with the 'kyonyuu loli' trope"; that's not a source. And I didn't ask you for a breakdown of a term to justify its use in the article, either. It seems there's no way to make you understand that writing a description like, "She is a kyonyuu loli", and expecting any reader to understand it, is simply absurd. I don't know why including this piece of information is so important to you or why you think a reader would miss something important by not having it mentioned in the article. Xexerss (talk) 05:20, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

I'm not asking for your views on the character's design, such as saying, "this character is short and busty, so the author is clearly playing with the 'kyonyuu loli' trope"

Then let's go with short and busty. Don't look at me when you're the one who wanted to overcomplicate such a simple eye-catching trait that the average reader would be able to pick up on their own through checking the citation. Two, single word, details about a character's appearance isn't too much for a Wikipedia character description. it's the furthest thing from a novel, practically the length of a free account's x-tweet. I was using plain english when I first made that edit, but clearly as you can see, people keep bringing up her chest size. So yes, the reader would have missed a key trait in her visuals and would have to check the citation to see what she actually looks like.

I don't know why including this piece of information is so important to you

Honestly, this is my line. I don't know why you wanna overcomplicate adding a second word or small phrase to her bio, that is still an accurate descriptor, and keep it off the article via excessive pedantism and reinterpreting the rules of wikipedia, specifically WP:MOS-AM in regards to character descriptions. These are highschool character designs. They are oftenly extremely simple, so any oddities often stand out. It's extremely difficult to overcomplicate such designs in a slice of life.

It really begs the question, if it doesn't matter all that much to you, why keep it off? Because no reader, besides the puritan few, is gonna be blindsided by the inclusion of "mature chest" or "busty", nor is any admin going to look at the existing citations and say "she has no chest, therefore 'big breasted' should be removed", especially when everyone keeps pointing at her... other... size when talking about her character.

I'm asking you for a reliable source (not personal blogs) that provide evidence that the author has explicitly described the character using those terms

Toys People is not a "personal blog", it's a news site for hobbyists. You could probably think of them like what SiliconEra for gaming, but in their case, for taiwanese covering the world of japanese hobbies, who has been in the publication business for 15 years. They referred to Komaro as a "kyonyuu" and "kogara" when covering her figure.

Equally so for Honcierge. Don't let the basic web design fool you. Much of the japanese web hasn't exited the 2000s look, even for business. This website, owned by EightLinks Co ltd which in itself is owned by Shogakukan, differs in that it's focused on the curation of books to recommend, as in the entire medium from novels to manga. The website itself also operates off of editorial rather than open usage. Again, not a personal blog or "user generated content" but a professionally managed outlet. As a reminder, Honcierge refered to Komako as a ロリ巨乳 in their announcement of the anime. In a similar fashion of a mecha series that never calls itself mecha, it's up to the people who literate enough to point out that its mecha.

There are sites like Fandom where you can edit and include more precise jargon without expecting readers to understand what’s being talked about and having to look elsewhere for definitions.

And if I add "loli kyonyuu" to Wiktionary and wikilinked the trope under her name? Because I've already shown that its a term still in use, of which I forgot to add to the gravure books also using the term because it was 5am, but will do so right here. A more rich Fanza alternative to the DMM page exists with a mix of gravure and eromanga, but access via a VPN or modifications to cookies may be required to view it. Point being books have already been published using the term as their selling point and the term has been used for her as you can already see. (Now that I think about it, this directly contradicts what you said earlier about models and actresses, where in japan, emphasizing traits like those is a selling point) Samalik16 (talk) 21:06, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

@Samalik16: I added that she has a "large-chested build", which I think sounds less colloquial than saying that she has "an overly mature chest size for her age" and much easier to understand than saying she is a "kyonyuu loli". I hope this will bring this discussion to a close and that you'll stop replying to me with endless paragraphs on the subject. Xexerss (talk) 23:07, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Heavenly Delusion

Since Heavenly Delusion finished its initial objective, I expanded a bit the plot section from the manga article. Could you revise the prose? Cheers Tintor2 (talk) 20:07, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

(Serial Experiments Lain) Placement of "//signal." game in the infobox

Hi. I was the person that removed all the information about "//signal." from the Serial Experiments Lain article. A change you reverted.

I agree that Anime News Network and Famitsu are reputable news sources. And I was wrong to remove the content outright without consultation.

But I still have concerns regarding the placement and the framing of the game in the artcle. Currently //signal. sits in the infobox along side the 1998 playstation game, and "The Nightmare of Fabrication." Both of these are official media issued by the Serial Experiments Lain's rights holders.

//signal is NOT that. It is a third-party doujin work. A fan made game. It is compliant under lainTTL, a set of guidelines for derivative works based on Lain. That is what "officially authorized" means in this context.

Readers may mistake //signal. as an officially liscensed Serial Experiments Lain product. Again, this is NOT the case.

My proposals are the following:

1. Remove the //signal. module from the infobox.

2. Create a new "Derivative works" section in the article, and move the paragraph about //signal. in the "Video games" section to there.

Thanks. Neglectedtea (talk) 21:26, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

@Neglectedtea: I understand your point, but perhaps you should start a discussion on the talk page for the series article to reach a consensus with other editors. Personally, I don't think it's necessary to create a separate section just to mentions this video game, and the same section already states that it is an officially authorized video game (as reported by sources) and outlines the legal circumstances that led to its release (namely, NBCUniversal Entertainment's guidelines in effect through 2028). These situations don't happen often, and as far as I know, there doesn't seem to be any coverage from reliable sources regarding other authorized IP products under this guideline that have been released during the period this applies. If that were the case, it might warrant a section covering the video game and more notable products released during this period, but for just one, I insist that I don't think it's necessary. In any case, I would understand if the infobox entry were removed given that it isn't strictly "official". Xexerss (talk) 22:51, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

I feel that the words "officially authorized" is quite misleading. It's just a fan work that meets the guidelines for fan works set out by the rights holders.

But anyways, I will take your advice and make a talk page on the article.

Thanks. Neglectedtea (talk) 23:10, 12 August 2026 (UTC)

New pages patrol September 2026 Backlog drive

September 2026 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 September 2026, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin at a particularly important time for NPP. The backlog has now passed 30,000 unreviewed articles, a level that has been described in current NPP discussions as exceptionally high and potentially difficult to overcome through normal reviewing alone. Backlog drives are one of the few measures that have historically produced a noticeable reduction in the backlog, so the participation of as many active patrollers as possible will matter this month. If you can review during September, please make articles your priority. Every article that is reviewed is a meaningful reduction in the backlog. With the queue at its current size, even a relatively small increase in the number of articles each patroller reviews can add up to a substantial difference over the course of the month. This is a hybrid drive, so redirect reviewing is still included. Redirects can be a useful way for newer patrollers to get comfortable with NPP and can help people build up to reviewing articles. However, the main goal of this drive is to tackle the article backlog, and experienced patrollers are particularly encouraged to spend as much of their available reviewing time on articles as they can. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Each article review will earn 1 point, while each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Streak awards will be given out based on consistently hitting point thresholds for each week of the drive. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. If you have been thinking about doing more NPP, this is an especially good month to jump in. Whether you can review a few pages or hundreds, every review helps. And if you are already an active patroller, please consider whether you can put in some additional time during September to help bring the backlog back under control. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:49, 24 August 2026 (UTC)