I think we got an problem. I've been reading up on stuff like this: http://www.kanzenshuu.com/manga/weekly-jump/ (Issue vs Release Date), and apparently the dates on the covers themselves arnt accurate? Ive been looking around and from what I've gathered JoJo was released December 2nd, 1986. Can you look into this?
Well, I seem to remember that Kai okayed using those titles to someone for the episodes and I thought we should try to be consistent. If I knew the wikia was against them, then I thought they would have been changed a week or so ago.
Also, I wanted to apologize for adding links for all 39 episodes of part 4. I thought Ryulong just missed it and I didn't realize you rollbacked his edits.
the wikia is not against them, I am, and there's why.
I work for accuracy of information, plain and simple. old chapter titles do not fall under the case of a real official english denomination having been done for them, episodes are episodes and chapters are chapters, they're different. I do not argue against episode titles since they were officially (but sloppily) translated, but I will if these translations spread more than they have to. Or else, you can change the Oingo Boingo pages to Zenyatta Mondatta immediately, then carry on to Dan of Steel, D'Arby Elder and whatnot.
I think I mentioned this somewhere, but the general rule is that we use the official translations unless there is something blatantly wrong with them. This pertains to not only name changes, but anything that deviates significantly from the source.
I haven't had time to actually go through the episodes yet, but they also apply. One title I noticed in particular is "Young Caesar," which completely eliminates the "lonliness" portion in the original wording. It's instances like this where we put precedence on non-official translations (though that isn't to say they don't have mistakes either.) Ultimately, we want a balance where the translations match the markets, but also the original source.
With that said, why are Parts 1-2 using the WSJ names again?
I didn't mean to start anything when I changed the titles, I just thought it was plenty of time to be reviewed and changed back if there were any mistakes.
Part 1 and 2 aren't using the Shonen Jump names. If you mean the list of jojo chapters page, it's set up with the volume titles instead since it's in the volume format. It'd be no problem if you think those should be changed to the jojonium titles though.
So I'm thinking we should keep the same naming convention between the categories and templates when parts are involved. Since we already use Template:Part 3 Chapters, Part 3 Characters, do you think we should go with Category: Part 3 Chapters, Part 3 Characters, etc? (Versus like Stardust Crusaders chapters)
I've actually been thinking about this for a while. I can never convince myself that one is better than the other though. The Part # templates/categories look nicer when they're all lined up and you instantly know the order of them. But when you look at the actual article pages they don't have the part in their title so I kind of see more incentive to use "Stardust Crusaders chapters."
I have exact same issues with them. The names are more consistant, but the other style looks more organized. Im thinking maybe we should juat go with Parts? The length of "Diamond Is Unbreakable Story Arcs" just seems unnesarily long for a category name.
Ah okay. We're actually currently going over that, apparently the person who changed the episode names was Ryulong, who is basing the changes off CrunchyRoll titles, it seems. If that's the case, they'll most likely be changed back, since we've never used CR as a source for names (given their history of changing them for censorship reasons or just different translations entirely, like with the Vanilla Ice episodes).
Just wanted to give you a heads up, but don't worry, you're not in trouble or anything. Keep up the good work. :)