Talk:DokiDoki! PreCure

Trademark filing

Will someone explain to me why there's an edit war over this reference? I put it back this morning but don't really wana get into the middle of this. Since it's from a non-user editable news feed it should be a legit reference that confirms that the title is real. If I knew how I'd probably put in the tag to propose to semi protect the page. Darkcat1 (talk) 16:23, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

• Because Doracake is being "I don't like sources I don't trust, Just official ones". I just want him to....go away, forever. The sources are legit and she still REMOVES them! Even if I talk to her personally she won't even listen, that's why don't want to go her and read her reasons why! I'be been mad for day because of her monopolizing sources!--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 13:15, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
  • I wonder if you're talknig about someone's personality instead of this article. Anyway, about the section I suggested to delete, the section was about the trademark patent leak. The leak was used to proved that the show referred by this article is determined, but generally formal Japanese editors didn't use it as a reference in this article. The point right now is the official site has been open, which is formally used to confirm that the show is indeed in plan, and the leak is confimed to be true. So the section about the leak isn't needed in this state. --User:Dorayaki 21:45, 30 November 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doracake (talk • contribs)
    • But you don't have to delete everything in there. People won't even know about it because we westerners relied on leaks to know if its true or not. Either way, its unfair if you have total monopoly on the sources, no one will know how did Toei trademarked the series in the first place. You just can't control which is true and which is not.--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 13:49, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
      • I do see your opinions, so I have no words. I think it's not what Japaneses insist, but how Wiki should be like, because trademark leaks aren't usually part of the formal articles. Unless those leaks with clear origins can show some data the show itself doesn't say, like some leaks in the previous Smile PreCure!. In this section, the leak only show the same thing that the official would do. --Doracake (talk) 22:00, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
        • That's their thing. Both Japanese and English Wikis have their own POV on things, but it doesn't need to be the same. If they don't use leaks as sources, that's their thing. It's not applied here because the contributors think differently.--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 14:20, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
          • Taking Ja wiki as example was to say that they're the original editors and they do stress on general Wiki rules. The differences are usually sources and grammar. In the leak topic, I think it's equel for all langages. --Doracake (talk) 22:30, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
            • But you forgot something. When you reverted EVERYTHING, you just erased a lot of sources. Without any third party sources to back up an article, the article will be automatically deleted by the admins. And because you wanted official sources only and no reliable third party sources, the page Doki Doki! PreCure is doomed for deletion.--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 15:25, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
              • Actually it is. An article without references to prove the existence should be deleted. The point is if the article wasn't about a series of show, but an original one, nobody can be sure for it. --Doracake (talk) 2:00, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

shesh I feel like the referee here. I wish ANN had listed their source but the fact remains that their news feed(not the encyclopedia) is pretty darn reliable in my book and also the name has also been confirmed by Toei's unveiling of the official website and by a couple of other news feeds that are also from ANN. I do admit that as the admin of the Pretty Cure Wika I use different rules than Wikipedia does but the way I understand it is that a ref is legit if you get it from a news organization that never prints rumors. Although is not obvious I know that ANN always confirms their sources before posting anything as news. Darkcat1 (talk) 16:06, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

• Yep you are correct there.--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 16:41, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
• I can admit I never use ANN in Wikipedia, but generally officials do have more "direct" source than other sites have. Unless other sites were doing interviews made by themselves, and the officials don't give these. About Wikia, I can say that we can have a more broader flexible rules for proffesional editors to identify leaks, but generally Wikipedia should rely more on references. --Doracake (talk) 2:00, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Jeez! Does everything we talk to you doesn't even convince you that much? Come on, give us a break and let those refs stay and better, we are doing all the editing on all PreCure related articles here. Again I'm gonna tell you this: YOU.CAN'T.MONOPOLIZE.EACH.SOURCES! You're not an admin of this website or a mod. It doesn't always have to be on the officials alone, there are other sources.--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 09:18, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
    • I don't have words, again, but please notice that it's the Wiki rule instead of saying someone "monopolize" impoltely. I knew that some other seriea articles had been deleted because the sources weren't qualified, now at least the official stie comes. Come back to the topic, the question is that the official site was used to prove that the staff began their plan, so do other sources show other vital information that the official site didn't mention? --Doracake (talk) 18:30, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
      • Well things always gets officially leaked before they were revealed. Of course yes, but we keep it in minimal to prevent problems like not revealing what will the cures look like. There are sources that are reliable and not reliable and the only way to know if they were real is to take the bullet.--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 10:41, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Honestly the new one on ann even has a link to a jp news site. While I can't read it other than by using google translate(which I didn't try) it seems to confirm that this is the real title. Darkcat1 (talk) 13:49, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Naming

Since the logo romanizes the title in all caps, how should we go about naming the series? Either 'Doki Doki' as it is now, 'Dokidoki' as per how Anime News Network spells it, or 'DokiDoki' to emphasize capitalization? Wonchop (talk) 12:00, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm going with "Doki Doki" because I've seen this with other anime and manga. Darkcat1 (talk) 14:12, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Cure names

A cool Asian friend of mine somehow confirmed the names of pretty cure for this series. I put them up but I don't have her source so in case they get removed I'm putting them here for discussion:

• Aida Mana (相田 マナ) / Cure Heart (キュアハート, Kyua Haato)
• Kenzaki Makoto (剣崎 真琴) / Cure Sword (キュアソード, Kyua Soodo)
• Yotsuba Alice (四葉 ありす, Yotsuba Arisu) / Cure Rosetta (キュアロゼッタ, Kyua Rozetta)
• Hishikawa Rikka (菱川 六花) / Cure Diamond (キュアダイヤモンド, Kyua Daiyamondo)

have fun with the talk page debate ^^

The leak of story settings seem to be determined. Does anyone have the source of magazine or something before the official site renewal? --Doracake (talk) 18:30, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

This is getting pointless. Unless the officials themselves revealed everything, the leaks will be the temporary sources. User talk:Doracake pressured me too much until my arteries explode of anger.--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 13:37, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Just like Darkcat1 said above, these leaks are not usable source at all, in face of the trademark which appeared in a patent website at least. In my knowing, the leak from the official report only gave some pictures of the show, but no literal data were shown (the hero's name, date of broadcast etc). If you already know there is no source to confirm the information, then there is no way to put it together. Maybe it's okay if the information is hidden or put in the sandbox "temporarily" just like Darkcat did, but shouldn't be displayed in the page. --Doracake (talk) 18:30, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

If you don't have further opinions or improve the edits, I'll edit with make hidings and a tag fo source requirement. --Doracake (talk) 02:40, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

All content on Wikipedia must be verified by reliable sources.—Ryulong (琉竜) 10:22, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Just a heads-up that episode 4 establishes a link between Makoto and Cure Sword (basically Alice reveals she had learnt of her identity through her super boss network) so there's no need to keep them seperate anymore. Wonchop (talk) 02:29, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Is this in the episode proper or in the episode 5 preview?—Ryulong (琉竜) 07:57, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

At the end of the actual episode.Wonchop (talk) 14:28, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Okay.—Ryulong (琉竜) 17:02, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Name terms for Rosetta and Sword.

Ok to clarify both Rosetta and Sword's names were easy. Rosetta is the Italian name for Rose and that once used as a playing card symbols along with the Heart, Diamond and Sword during early times. Those were being replaced by the Club and the Spade, however, the symbols were still used for Tarot Card Readings. Refer to Card suits for the history.--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 09:01, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

This sounds like WP:OR.—Ryulong (琉竜) 10:11, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

The clover and spade part is official dude. It's in the Toei website.--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 10:23, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Well it's WP:OR to point this out.—Ryulong (琉竜) 11:03, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

WP:COMMON disagrees with you.--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 12:14, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

And WP:V and WP:RS disagree with that.—Ryulong (琉竜) 15:34, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Who cares? I'm more insulted on this.--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 14:12, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

You should care because Wikipedia is not some fansite that posts whatever people think is going to happen. This is an encyclopedia which is based on facts rather than whatever you want the content to be personally.—Ryulong (琉竜) 16:44, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

There are two parts I noticed: one is that ja:シャルル was described as Charles in ja wiki, and it should be a refereable English name. The other is that ありす can be both a traditional Japanese name and an English translation name, I guess it tends to be a Japanese name as hiragana. --Doracake (talk) 10:20, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

But the problem is its translated to Alice when Google Translator is used. And if it's Charles, then the name should be ja:シャルス/sharusu.--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 10:23, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

The link ja:シャルス is invalid, and ja:シャルル should be the direct explanation I think. I don't think web translators can give you the meaning of Arisu (有栖), since it's doing "translation". I tend to follow Japanese in the first place since it's hiragana. --Doracake (talk) 11:00, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Arisu is a given name in Japan. And there shouldn't really be any anglicizations unless they're official/easy to recognize.—Ryulong (琉竜) 11:03, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Nakayoshi January and February issues

The February 2013 issue of Nakayoshi was released recently, I was hinting they released a lot of new info on DokiDoki. I do need some scans from both this and the January 2013 issue to get some more info in the series.--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 15:09, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Name translation issues

I thought I'd air out this discussion here as it's kinda close to original research. It has to do with the name of mascot Charles (シャルル, Sharuru) which coincidentally is also the name of a female Exceed cat character from the magna/anime Fairy Tail. "Sharuru" has been translated several ways by official and unofficial translators over the course of that series before they finally settled on "Carla". It was also translated as "Charla", "Charle" and "Charles". Since the doki doki character has an identical name maybe we should translate it the same way? Darkcat1 (talk) 14:59, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Ideally it shouldn't be translated at all until TV Asahi/Toei/whomever produces something that has the characters' names written in plain English lettering.—Ryulong (琉竜) 15:09, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

I guess even though Sharuru is a male name, some Japanese plot writers just think that it sounds cute and casually give to their female characters, so you don't have to concern that too much. For example, an American feels a Korean name "Shu-Jon" mascline while it is actually for girls. About the translations, I think their origins of names are clear enough. Or all the fairies from past series would also be in the debate, because sometimes the staff give no explanations to their tricks. --Doracake (talk) 15:40, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

In all cases, there should have been erring on the side of caution. Just because シャルル is traditionally "Charles" (the French pronunciation where the S is silent and the Ch is the same as in Charlotte) does not mean that this particular character is named "Charles". There has to be a toy release at some point that has the name written in the Latin alphabet, and for all purposes we should wait for that instead of coming up with our own translations. Making the assumption that the names have to be translated is a violation of WP:OR regardless.—Ryulong (琉竜) 16:15, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

I agree with you so, but like I said, I'm not sure if the names from the past series shows would also be in this debate (eg, Milk/Mircu, Candy/Kandhi), or the possiblity that the staff won't give any answers. In this article, I can't find anything to prove that Trump Kingdom isn't "Toranp" Kingdom. --Doracake (talk) 16:46, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Ryulong I just wanted to start the debate since the characters are both female and share the same Japanese name.(hey discussing it is better than getting into an edit war) Darkcat1 (talk) 16:42, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

"Trump" is a Japanese word rather than a given name. And if previous series used "Mircu" instead of "Milk" then it's WP:OR and a violation of WP:V to call that characer "Milk".—Ryulong (琉竜) 17:24, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Ryulong, you must remember that YOU DON'T OWN THIS PAGE OR WIKIPEDIA ITSELF. What you were doing on the reverts and forceful rule edits are just rude to people, because they don't like to be told this and told that. Why is that dude, because you think you are in your high horse, a king who forcefully commanding people to follow you as you please. People are becoming your enemies because of your rotten attitude because you think THEIR EDITS ARE NOT SUITED TO YOUR TASTE. That's just low of you.

You are breaking WP:OWN, this means you are trying to claim this article as your own as your behavior sees. This rule is important as you must know that WE DON'T OWN.EVERY.SINGLE.ARTICE. Every Fandom you encounter are all disgraced to your behavior recently.

As for the names for the fairies, I did a literal translation in Google Translate and those are the correct translation for their names. Sharuru's name is been debated in the Pretty Cure Wikia, either Charles or Carla (see Carla in List of Fairy Tail characters and read her katakana correctly) as the translators can't actually come out with a good decision on which translated name to use. The other three were fine. This is what you call WP:COMMON, because sometimes we don't have to follow rules to add information because we all know this site like you do, something you lack. Maybe you so called WP:OR is correct, but sometimes we don't have to be bound by rules.

So please get off your high horse and let us edit in peace.--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 04:38, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm not claiming anything (I could care less about PreCure). WP:V and WP:OR are core policies of this website. The way things were run previously was wrong and the way Wikias are run is just awful so don't make that comparison. You still need a reliable source to say that in Dokidoki Precure, the characters are named "Raquel" and "Lance". Just because every other instance has those kana translated that way does not mean it is the same for this particular instance. Just look at all the other horrible translation choices that were made because you're following the fandom's lead. The villains are not called "Selfish" because the name isn't "Serufisshu" in kana. It's the Japanese word for "selfish". So what makes you think the fandom is going to be right that "Rakeru" and "Ransu" are "Raquel" (not even the right transliteration if you're going off the "Queen of Diamonds" reference) oand "Lance"?—Ryulong (琉竜) 13:16, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

SO BEAT IT THEN! Do as you want and ruin EVERY.SINGLE.ARTICLE! I don't care! Things were actually better without you around here...--Blackgaia02 (Talk if you're Worthy) (talk) 15:18, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

You need to drop the emotional attachment.—Ryulong (琉竜) 03:29, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Uh, like I've been worried about, the renewal of formal official sites don't show any English name of the fairies themselves this time. If we can't tell, I think we should follow foreign names instead of Japanese names. --Doracake (talk) 07:40, 28 January 2013(UTC)

Anime News Network seem fit to use Raquel and Lance, so they should be fine. 'Rakeru' and 'Ransu' aren't actual names in any language, anyway. Sharuru could also potentially be 'Shalulu', but that's a story for another day. Wonchop (talk) 02:22, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

They have their own internal translation guidelines. Also, Makoto has not been officially equated with Cure Sword yet (at least from what I can tell) so it's still original research even if it's blatantly obviously so.—Ryulong (琉竜) 09:04, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Okay, so from an official TV commercial for DokiDoki goods (here (requires Niconico account)), we have some official romanizations for some of the names. Arisu is officially romanized 'Alice' (the hiragana spelling of her name shouldn't be taken literally, as many shows use hiragana for English words) and Ransu is spelt 'Rance' whilst Rakeru is spelt as is. Commercial didn't seem to show romanizations for Sharuru and Dabby yet. Now the only problem is finding a source that Ryulong won't whine about (cos apparently anything that isn't ANN isn't official enough). Wonchop (talk) 22:56, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Excuse me for asking for proper sources. Now only if you'll respond on every other god damn issue I asked you to. And "Arisu" is still a name in Japanese that is not "Alice" (but probably was derived from it), but if they're using "Alice" they're using "Alice". I just want to avoid a complete abhorrence of the official names on this page as seems apt for such shows. Also, you removed "Davi" in katakana without explaining why.—Ryulong (琉竜) 13:45, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Alice might be a possible one, but Rakeru to me is very impossible if it should be an English-oriented name. If there are differen't versions of translations for all Toei merchandise, I guess it's safer to wait for official statements. Like in Chinese wiki, some editors think "Mana" shouldn't be written as "love", later Yamaguchi himself told that Mana does mean love. --Doracake (talk) 15:33, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Um, there's only one form on the official merchandise so far which is what Wikipedia should be using, regardless of what happens on other language projects. If the cards say "Alice" and "Rakeru" then so should the English Wikipedia.—Ryulong (琉竜) 16:38, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

The fact is obviously there are some issues with this translation since the principle is upside down (an English-named Japanese and a Japanese-named foreigner???), and it scarcely works. It's better to see if see other merchandies like DataCardass doing so. --Doracake (talk) 23:33, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

If those trading cards are the only reliable source for a proper translation of the characters' Japanese names then we use those trading cards. There's no "issues" with it. It's how the company is deciding to translate these terms and frankly there's nothing we can do about it. We at Wikipedia are not allowed to make up our own name for something just because we don't like the name that's already there to begin with.—Ryulong (琉竜) 02:37, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

On these cards, the given name is "Arisu". --EliOrni (talk) 14:47, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

(ﾉ `Д´)ﾉ ~┻━┻

In this case it appears we should default to the Hepburn form, as there is no standard spelling.—Ryulong (琉竜) 15:01, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

It looks like the Data Carddass cards (http://melzinha-mel-mel.tumblr.com/post/42796196164 http://melzinha-mel-mel.tumblr.com/post/42608110931/dokidoki-card (Tumblr ref, I know, but bare with me)) use Alice as the official spelling. It can be a pretty tricky to determine the correct spellings for series like these as 1)the Japanese aren't particularly great at spelling their own English sometimes and 2) for series like these, they'll often simplify things for the younger audiences (eg. why they spell out names in hiragana as opposed to kanji). I think in this instance both spellings are sort of correct, with Alice being something of the official name and Arisu being the more elementary school friendly spelling. I think this one's gonna be a bit of a thinker to decide, but since Data Carddass seems to be a more notable merchandise than the above trading cards, I'd say Alice is sort of the safer bet.Wonchop (talk) 18:42, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Question is how should Daby be spelled. I believe a trading card (forget where I spotted it) I saw read her name as 'Davi', but the recent episode (which puts a link between Daby and the manager, which naturally I won't stick in the main article til it's properly established, obvious as it may be), abbreviates it as 'DB', which hints a 'b' may be important. Hard to tell since it doesn't look like there'll be anything properly romanizing her name anytime soon. It's just that 'y' doesn't settle well with me. Wonchop (talk) 02:26, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

The strange way the katakana are set up shows that the I sound at the end is long, which usually accompanies the Y phoneme in English.—Ryulong (琉竜) 02:35, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Wouldn't that just make it look like it should be pronounced 'Dabey'? (rhymes with gravy) Wonchop (talk) 20:24, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

It should be pronounced similarly to "Bobby".—Ryulong (琉竜) 01:13, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Sure, if your name happens to be Hank Hill. I think for now "Dabi" would probably be more fitting, at least in terms of going with Hepburn when there's no romanization available.Wonchop (talk) 15:59, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

How the hell do you pronounce "Robbie" or "Bobby" then? And the problem "Dabi" is that the I at the end is lengthened so we should signify that it is as well (unless there's an official spelling that says otherwise).—Ryulong (琉竜) 16:30, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

You're not really familiar with English are you? The 'ii' bit isn't as long as say, Happy, which uses the extended vowel dooflip. Otherwise it would probably be written as Dabby. Anyhoo, here's the source I found on the trading card that reads "Davi". (ref) For lack of a better source (since it doesn't look like the Data Carddass cards really cover the fairies), we should probably use that. Wonchop (talk) 22:09, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I was born and raised in New York, thank you very much. But if "Davi" is on the cards then we should use it on the page. This B and V shit is getting a bit annoying.—Ryulong (琉竜) 02:16, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Kenzaki Makoto issues

I know there are some debates between users. It's better to decide a better format of the introduction. --Doracake (talk) 12:40, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Her true identity is Cure Sword. Kenzaki is an alias she uses in the human world. That's how we should treat it.—Ryulong (琉竜) 12:54, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

About the character title, I personally think that's not correct, as official sites format suggests. Even though we're not sure about "Kenzaki Makoto" is a true name or not, we can confirm that the royal guard is a normal girl who needs to transform into her heroine alterego when rivals come. Usually the heroine alterego is put to the last, and the names of normal human form is prior to that. --Doracake (talk) 11:00, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Why not treat it differently this year?—Ryulong (琉竜) 11:21, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Something like CureHeart/M.A.? I don't think so. The fact is in official introductions "Makoto" is the current name of Cure Sword's original form. Also, those who used fake names (Siren, Eas) didn't make them behind the heroine names. If you don't have physical proofs or other editors' agreement, the title should return to be M.K./CureSword. --Doracake (talk) 13:39, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Why does it need to be the same way as every other year? We don't know what her "real" name is, it's just the name she uses in the human world. It's a reverse situation from every previous year, and those other characters who had other names should probably be treated in this same way. I don't get why you think it has to be the same year in and year out. Surely there are exceptions to these norms and in these cases it should be such an exception.—Ryulong (琉竜) 11:58, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

In the whole series, Cure Sword is the first foreign member who appear in the beginning of the story. The most important is what's the format Toei staff use in their official character introductions and credits. If they see "Kenzaki Makoto" in the same place as Mana and Rikka, the wiki has to take it into consideration, and the Japanese wiki has to be revised as well. Like I said, M.K/CureSword is something about uniform since you're not making other characters same as her. --Doracake (talk) 13:03, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

What we do on the English Wikipedia has no bearing on what is done on other language Wikipedias. I don't know why you think the Japanese Wikipedia needs to be changed or why months ago you asked me for help on the Italian Wikipedia. As it stands, all of the Cures who were not from the human world are now listed with their original name first, their Cure title second, and their human alterego last. It honestly makes the most sense, because they were always the other person and have simply taken on a human identity.—Ryulong (琉竜) 13:19, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

The Japanese wiki follows closely to the credits and introductions provided by their local official source. Even though not everything has to be the same with the official source, I don't see your necesarity to make the format different from the official one. At least in my personal view, all titles of heroines in this series have their names of original&human form before their fighter alteregos no matter they're fake names or not. --Doracake (talk) 13:30, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Again, what does it matter what they do? We should be presenting information as it appears in the program. Not throwing things out of order because suddenly there's some amazing revelation that says otherwise.—Ryulong (琉竜) 14:15, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

The information and story are directly from the official staff source, that's why we should consider it first. And I still don't see your reason and rule about the formats. --Doracake (talk) 14:47, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

It does not matter what order all of these sources put the information in. We can present it differently if we so please. I do not know how to explain it any clearer. Is English not your first language by any chance?—Ryulong (琉竜) 16:21, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm asking about what the format and reference you're using, or you're just making it different from the official ones as you like, without any reason. --Doracake (talk) 23:20, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Section break

It's just common sense to me to have the character's actual name before any aliases. In this case we don't know Cure Sword's actual name we just know that she has the secret identity of Kenzaki.—Ryulong (琉竜) 07:52, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

The common rule like I said is the original/human name before heroine alterego, no matter they're fake names or not, because both real and fake names represent their common form in the whole story. I thought the fairy fighters and Eas were the examples. --Doracake (talk) 10:30, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

I said nothing about a "common rule". I said "common sense". We don't know Cure Sword's real name. We just know the name she uses in the human world. SO therefore that alias should go last because she was Cure Sword before she was "Makoto Kenzaki". The same thing goes for any other character who suddenly becomes a human and precure. —Ryulong (琉竜) 11:28, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

If the common sense is not from audience, offical introduction or publications but only your viewpoint, I don't think that's something Wikipedia should do. A uniform format is not only for other characters from past series, but also other characters in this article. The lack of uniform would causes chaos. --Doracake (talk) 11:44, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

But these characters are inherently different from the others. That should mean enough to show that they should have the information presented differently. And that is all I have to say on this topic because I am tired of rehashing myself in order for you to understand me.—Ryulong (琉竜) 13:00, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I can only say that if there isn't enough reason and common support from the audience and the official to make it different, your idea doesn't really effect. If you don't have other words, the format remains the same as it was. --Doracake (talk) 14:34, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

You don't get it. I refuse to continue this conversation until you say what your native language is, because you are clearly not a native English speaker. You are using phrases that make absolutely no sense and clearly cannot understand what I am trying to say here. The fact that you are taking my refusal to continue this debate as a reason to disregard everything I've said is really indicative of the fact that you do not speak English, as I cannot make myself any clearer that because she is different from the other PreCures information on her should be presented differently.—Ryulong (琉竜) 14:42, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not a native English, however unless you can't understand my words, I can understand your viewpoint. Overall, the offical data doesn't really have to make her format different. If the fact you can't say any clearer is due to the lack of reference and official data support, your viewpoint can be refuted. That's all I can say. --Doracake (talk) 15:24, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

No, I can't say it any clearer because it doesn't seem you can understand me, and you still have not said what language you speak. And there is no need for sources to justify a change in the order we present names. It's not something you need sources for. Cure Sword is different from the other Cures. So we list her differently. It is as simple as that and that is the last thing I will say concerning this unless you decide to change it without my acknowledgement.—Ryulong (琉竜) 16:38, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I personally don't think so because this topic shouldn't be relevant with editors' language, unless you asked me in my talkpage. In face of the official source who is the provider, your own viewpoint doesn't really work without a convincing thought. --Doracake (talk) 12:20, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

It's relevant because you cannot understand my point of view because you aren't a native speaker.—Ryulong (琉竜) 14:25, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Again, that's nothing about the story itself. You may say that some of my words are inexplicable and I should be sorry for that. However, if you're bothering yourself instead of making edits, I don't have to be responsible for this. If you're not going on this discussion, I have to stop here. --Doracake (talk) 14:40, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Section break 2

You are incessantly asking for a source to back up my opinion on how the page should be formatted which is inane and inexplicable in itself. It is simply a concept I am attempting to convey because the character is inherently not like the others.—Ryulong (琉竜) 14:44, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm asking for the necessity of using a different format from any other character (both past series and current series), who are equal protagonists or having same condition with Cure Sword. If the old format is well-accepted by the staff and other public publishers, you need something extra to prove that your own standpoint is available. --Doracake (talk) 15:05, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Because the character is different from the others and I've changed previous articles to match the format here. It's not that difficult to move "Eren (I can't remember the rest)" to the end of the list so stop drawing this out asking me to back up my own opinion on something.—Ryulong (琉竜) 15:52, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

In a wiki, we need a common format to make all characters available as far as possible, or some of the old formats should be revised if we really need to. About Cure Sword, her debut in the story is different, but her using human status is not really that differet from any other characters. One thing to be determined is if M.K. is the only official name available for Cure Sword's human form, her name should be before the cure name. --Doracake (talk) 16:00, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

And because the characters are different from the others that is why we are breaking that uniformity and why I've already made the change on older pages. End of discussion. Damn..—Ryulong (琉竜) 16:06, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Regardless of Milk, one thing I've mentioned is that offical data make all the human form fake names before the cure names. If their human forms are considered to be their major appearances, the don't really fit to be in the last. The other thing about Cure Sword is she only has original human form while other foreign characters have another Japanese form. Since there isn't official introduction support and the story progress hasn't explained yet, it's just like jumping to conclusions. --Doracake (talk) 16:30, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

It does not matter what order the official data puts them in. Everything in the article is based on what we currently know and it can be changed when new information comes to light. End of discussion.—Ryulong (琉竜) 17:11, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

The biggest question is your attitude, because to me you seem to impose something only conform to your view point and don't care how everyone naturally interpret it or other audience accept it or not. In my view, a non-uniform format would easily make a new reader confused. If you're not really immproving the data and you don't have a public support, you can't make it necessarily correct. --Doracake (talk) 10:20, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

You cannot assume that the reader will be confused just because it says "Cure Sword" first. If anything, it might show that the character is different from the others at first glance.—Ryulong (琉竜) 12:16, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

What I say confuse is it's not an intuitive thing to make most people differe between characters with special backgrounds or not. At least in my view, all the characters have to use transformations to become a superheroine. And all their original forms represent what their major appearance throughout the series as official pictures show, since we don't see Cure Sword standing with Mana Aida. In your word, the special case had only occurred in Super Ranger series where some fighters were born to be a superhero without an original form. --Doracake (talk) 12:43, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Your argument is so laughably nonsensical. How could anyone believe that just because the names are in a different order? I'm done talking to you now.—Ryulong (琉竜) 22:00, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

So I'm concerned that it's your attitude problem again, because it's better to make information clear and intuitive for readers. One thing I've mentioned is that your viewpoint of format is only one of possible ways (even though I'm not sure it's correct or not), the original one works too, so other things are taken into consideration. Like you said, I can still cancel your edits since you don't have more cooments. --Doracake (talk) 23:35, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

And I will say, again, just because I refuse to communicate with you on this issue any further because your arguments make no sense and are making way too many assumptions, that you have no right to revert me and if you do I will revert you back. Now, once again, I am no longer continuing this discussion with you because it is clear that you have no idea why I made the edit in the first place.—Ryulong (琉竜) 06:09, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Refuse to discuss should mean that you don't have further comments on edits, and we use discussion to prevent any edit wars. You claim to say I don't get your points, but that's not MY personal problem if it's more an effective issue. What you should do in this discussion is to point out which part from the official data format should necessarily be revised in wiki format, not make a condition that all formats are available and you insist on your own version. --Doracake (talk) 06:50, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Section break 3

There is nothing forbidding the order in which I have put the names. Just because you assume that readers may be confused does not mean that is the actual case. And I am tired of saying the same things to you which is why I keep stating I will no longer continue this discussion, but because you keep taking it to be "Ryulong does not care anymore so I will change the page to my preferred version" is why I keep responding. You are not raising any points other than "we should go by the official data". The "official data" has had ???? for Cure Sword's true identity since day one and unless you can provide something that has her presented as "Makoto Kenzaki / Cure Sword" then we should by all means stick with the version that we have here that treats "Cure Sword" as her real name and "Makoto Kenzaki" as her assumed identity.—Ryulong (琉竜) 07:14, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't think in articles concerning DC things they particularly care about whether they list Clark Kent/Superman differently from Bruce Wayne/Batman just because Clark Kent is technically Superman's secret identity. I think in these cases, it's better just to go with what flows better as an article, and in my opinion, sticking to a Human Name/Cure Name order keeps the article consistent. Plus it's how the Japanese wiki orders it. Wonchop (talk) 03:22, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

This is just the order in which the names are presented and by having it as inconsistent shows that she is different than the others at a first glance (also our articles are at Superman and Batman rather than "Clark Kent" or "Bruce Wayne").—Ryulong (琉竜) 03:44, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Showing someone is from a different region isn't really a valid reason to change a naming order. If anything, it sounds a little discriminative. There are many articles which list a character's most commonly used name over their 'official' one (for example, Lagrange: The Flower of Rin-ne lists Lan before Fin E Ld Si Laffinty, because that is what she is most commonly called. Since Makoto is most likely just gonna be called Makoto (or MakoP) when she's not transformed, that's what we should go with as her main name, regardless of whether or not that was who she was born as. (Also I meant in the context of say, listing credits for a DC animation).Wonchop (talk) 03:52, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

"Discriminative"? Really? Are you really trying to pull a race card with a shojo anime character? And what she's called by her friends when not transformed is one thing. The fact is she was "Cure Sword" before "Makoto Kenzaki" as far as we are aware, both within the context of the show and the information provided within.—Ryulong (琉竜) 04:20, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

At any rate, this is something you asked for a third opinion on and as far as the people who can be bothered to vocally argue about this goes (ie. you, me and Doracake), it's two against one in favor of Makoto/Sword.Wonchop (talk) 22:19, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

And because we are making absolutely no headway, I have listed this on WP:3O.—Ryulong (琉竜) 07:17, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Response to third opinion request:

You've spent 2878 words debating what order to put a fictional character's name in an article about an anime intended for pre-teen girls. Back up and try to get a little perspective here. If it helps, Ryulong is probably right. Gigs (talk) 18:13, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

change Only Going to As (Month) and Year

i have a better idea For The Episode On The Doki Doki Wiki instead of On-Going How About We Add 6 Episodes As March 10,2013 It Tells How Many Episodes Already Since Aired Example When Episode 7 Airs Change Episodes: 7 As March 17,2013 Think About it (LionelTheDeal (talk) 11:39, 16 March 2013 (UTC))

No. It's unnecessary when the number is only for the complete episode count. "Ongoing" allows us to not have to update a single number constantly.—Ryulong (琉竜) 22:01, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Nakayoshi reveals Cure Ace and the full title for the DokiDoki movie

So then, June Issue of Nakayoshi (released in May 1, 2013) revealed the fifth cure named "Cure Ace", and the scans were floating on the net. The July Issue of Nakayoshi (Released last June 3, 2013) revealed the Dokidoki movie, subtitled Mana is getting married!!? The dress of hope that connects to the future (マナが結婚!!? 未来につなぐ希望のドレ). I don't get these recent reveals yet until they're officially confirmed, the scans partially confirms them and the anime fully confirms those reveals. I think these info shouldn't be added yet despite the official magazine confirmation. Then...I would say, why does the PreCure fanbase never decided to source the official magazines as part of sources? These are official ONLY if they're released in the EXACT initial date anyway? It works on Pokemon, Sentai and Kamen Rider. Why not Pretty Cure too? All they rely on is Livejournal, which is annoying.--BlackGaia02 (talkpage if you dare) (talk) 12:37, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

And her name (Madoka Aguri (円亜久里)) isn't on the article yet. That really needs to be fixed.. 96.234.97.160 (talk) 05:03, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Has that name been explicitly used as the civilian identity of Cure Ace yet? Cause if it hasn't and the only reason we know that name is from rumors and other stuff, then it can't be on Wikipedia.—Ryulong (琉竜) 05:05, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

She formally introduced herself as Madoka Aguri at Episode 23. 96.234.97.160 (talk) 05:29, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

And she identified herself as Cure Ace as well or has that obvious connection not yet been made (like how everyone watching knew Kenzaki was Cure Sword but the identity was secret in the story)? Both of the official website still say "Who is Cure Ace?"—Ryulong (琉竜) 05:43, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Actually the civilian name is from the official Pretty Cure Snack released to promote the movie. However after episode 24 is aired, regarding her name, we can count the name as official. However, we still have episode 25 to fully confirm it.--BlackGaia02 (talkpage if you dare) (talk) 15:25, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Kirifuda & Ai-chan

Since Ryulong has issues about pretty much EVERYTHING we try to change in this article (which section Ai goes in, whether people actually use the word "trump card" in English language, etc), we may as well just dedicate a thread to everything he complains about to save space.

• Argument for Kirifuda: "The trump card of love" is a literal translation of "Ai no kirifuda", whilst Ryulong complains it is stilted but can't seem to back it up with anymore than "no YOU are the wrong one" arguments. As a general phrasing, it makes more sense to say "the trump card of love, Cure Ace" instead of the more repetitive "the ace of love, Cure Ace."
• Argument for Ai-chan: Barring the movies, there are only two established worlds in this series, Earth and the Trump Kingdom. Ai is blatantly not from Earth. Throw in the fact she interacts greatly with the decors and is Aguri's partner, it is safe to assume she is from the Trump Kingdom. If nothing else, she should be listed there for the fact that she is a somewhat major character on the good side.

Wonchop (talk) 14:41, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

I didn't revert anything concerning Ai so I don't know why you're bringing it up. Also, it's rude to name this after me so I've changed the title.

Anyway, my problem is that the literal translation just looks bad and stilted. "Trump card" is an archaic phrase in English. You never hear it in normal conversation and it's only ever in the realm of card playing. "Kirifuda" is used in the Japanese translation of the phrase "he has an ace up his sleeve" which is why "ace" works better, even if you feel it is repetitive. Would "wild card" be a better alternative instead?—Ryulong (琉竜) 14:49, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

There are plenty of people who use the term 'trump card', and it's applied to a lot more than just playing cards. Frankly speaking, you don't hear many people saying 'the blade of courage' in normal conversation either. It is anime after all, so nothing has to make perfect conversational sense. Using a different translation also helps distinguish the two words like how the Japanese 'kirfuda' is distinguishable from the English 'ace'. Wild card could potentially work, though I still think trump sounds better, like she's about to 'trump' her enemies. Wonchop (talk) 15:05, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with the full catchphrase being common or uncommon. It's about how "trump card" is not used commonly. "Blade" is used commonly. I really do not like having to use a literal translation for this word when it's not at all common in English. "Ace" I thought would be a possible looser translation because "acing" and "trumping" are somewhat synonymous. At least "wild card" fits better and doesn't have the repetition issues.—Ryulong (琉竜)

It may not be used commonly where you're apparently from, but it's still a word and a perfectly valid word at that (certainly more common than wild card now that I think about it). Not all literal translations are bad. Anyhoo, I'm standing by trump card, but if you're bored of arguing just try wild card and be done with. Alternatively, you could rephrase it as "The ace up love's sleeve" should you be so inclined. After all, this is less about the word itself and more about how it sounds as a complete sentence.Wonchop (talk) 22:51, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

I actually went with that translation early on but people kept changing it back to "The trump card of love" which resulted in what was previously the current situation.—Ryulong (琉竜) 23:14, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Episode 27 gives us a good excuse to translate it as "wild card." It's now been demonstrated that she can alter her attacks to take on properties of the powers of the other four Cures, and that she can pick which one to use as needed, it's not random or tied to specifically teaming up with that Cure. This truly makes her attack a "wild card" as it can emulate the powers of any of the other Cures, just like a wild card in many card games can be used as a replacement for a card of the player's choosing, so calling herself a wild card during the rollcall phrase makes sense..PrecureJunkie (talk) 03:29, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Villain title

Ira, Marmo and Bel are Jikochu Trio. Leva and Gula called Jikochu Deputies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.144.93.144 (talk) 04:56, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Netflix version happening.

So yeah, looks like Netflix are gonna be releasing the series under the name Glitter Force Doki Doki come August 18 (source), so much like Smile the other year, expect some argy bargy about name changes and whatnot. Wonchop (talk) 22:21, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

They already are. User:LaytonPuzzle27 just did vandalized the article and I had to revert it back.--BlackGaia02 (talkpage if you dare) (talk) 01:55, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

The episode list should be formatted like List of Glitter Force episodes in order to show the numbering and the episodes that were excluded from the international versions. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:51, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Correct Name

Why was this article changed from Doki Doki PreCure to Glitter Force Doki Doki? Why keep the new English name? Tokyo Mew Mew's article is called Tokyo Mew Mew instead of Mew Mew Power, so why should this article be any different? When you read the 1st sentence "Glitter Force Doki Doki, known in Asia as DokiDoki! PreCure", it makes it seem that the show was made in America and later brought over to Japan where they changed the name. Furthermore, when it comes to the character list the voice actors are listed as Japanese then English, but the characters are listed as English then Japanese. These need to be listed as Japanese then English. I think everything needs to be changed back to the original Japanese names followed by the English names. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:CE09:F040:216:CBFF:FEAF:D60 (talk) 02:56, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Toei Animation is marketing the series and the brand as Glitter Force for international broadcasting on Netflix, which means not just the English version, but multiple languages worldwide. As long as both the English and the Japanese names are retained in the article, it should be sufficient for the article. It's not like the article will drop Japanese quotes or names, unless they are for really minor characters. If you have a problem with the lost episodes, take it up with Toei Animation. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:55, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

The difference between this and Tokoyo Mee Mew is thst in the case of the later the original manga (which the anime was based on) was released under the Japanese name. That did not happen here so this is closer to Zatch Bell or Fighting Foodons.--76.65.42.75 (talk) 20:14, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes, Tokyo Mew Mew and Zatch Bell have manga that were released in English under their common names. The PreCure series is primarily an anime-driven franchise, so it is following that particular branding for international distribution. This is closer to how Pokemon: Best Wishes is marketed outside Japan as Pokemon: Black & White, and Best Wishes Season 2 is Black & White: Rival Destinies. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:53, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

What you did is absolute vandalism to Smile PreCure! and DokiDoki! PreCure. You accuses me someone cares about the articles call my edits VANDALISM! If I really did vandaised this article I would horrible to it. If you change the titles back to its original title I will forgive you. However you don't I think Wikipedia should rename themselves as the Ministry of Truth and tell everyone what you have done. LaytonPuzzle27 (bark • sniff) 23:03, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

If you have a problem with the branding of the English version, take it up with Toei Animation. Maybe they will change their strategy and not use Glitter Force anymore. It worked for Cardcaptor Sakura and Cardcaptors. Good luck. In the meantime, this is how it's best known to the English-speaking world. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 23:28, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

I do have have problem and I have a problem with YOU AngusWOOF. <Comment removed per Talkpage Policy> Mentioning bad dubs is one thing but change the article to make it look Americanized is absolutely low. Like the use above me say "These need to be listed as Japanese then English." I'm giving you choice to change the article titles back to Smile PreCure and Dokidoki as well as remove any references of Glitter Force exceptions of some info of it. This would be a win-win and satisfy most of the Precure fanbase if you do this. LaytonPuzzle27 (bark • sniff) 17:55, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Plot and character wording

What should be used when discussing the plot and characters? Should the DokiDoki names be used or should the dub descriptions be used? `Having both can make the article hard to read. Saban rewrote massive chunks of episodes just for plot consistency because they cut dozens of episodes and had to compensate for that. Several editors might have an opinion on this. @PascalMuganyizi Rctgamer3 (talk) 21:02, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Production on the dub (Glitter Force: Doki Doki)

Is it possible that the dub began production in 2016? Is it true that Saban Brands acquired the English Dub rights to the original Doki Doki PreCure in 2016? PascalMuganyizi (talk) 01:37, 8 November 2022 (UTC)