Template talk:RQ:Botchan

I personally like adding orginal-language information, but there isn't one correct way to format things. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 03:23, 16 February 2019 (UTC)


 * For what it's worth, I like linking Japanese text to the Japanese Wikipedia page, and English text to the English Wikipedia page. Things like English translations can be variable, but the original text isn't, and the original text may also be more recognizable to certain people. The original text might also be plain interesting as well. What do you think? —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 06:39, 16 February 2019 (UTC)


 * only worried for the template, not the usage example. If there is no Wikipedia article in either language (English or foreign) for the author or work, my preference is to put placeholders in the targeted foreign language as in and . That is until someone creates said Wikipedia article in either. Either way, what's best is fine, there's no consensus. ～ POKéTalker（═◉═） 07:10, 16 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Mm, I don't like adding links to Wikipedia pages that don't exist. It doesn't feel like the right way to treat readers, when they might be expecting something. They don't turn red like intra-wiki links do _(：3 」∠ )_
 * I also prefer the consistency and predictability of English text→English Wikipedia and Japanese text→Japanese Wikipedia.
 * As for "don't think anyone would often click on the Japanese Wikipedia pages, besides there's already English pages of them", language-learners might be interested. And the Japanese Wikipedia page may (not necessarily→provide both ja.wp and en.wp links) be more detailed than the English Wikipedia page. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 02:00, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Do you think a format like that at 靴音 would be a good compromise? It is somewhat cluttered, though. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 04:46, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
 * my suggestion is that if there is already an English or Japanese Wikipedia article on that person or song, the English article takes priority; if not, use the Name formatting. Check the s either at or, they were updated a long time ago. The use of the  on them look more easily readable in my honest opinion. Anything else? ～ POKéTalker（═◉═） 05:13, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
 * It is definitely more readable (no information overload). Yet I still want to add it all in the name of "completeness". Oh well. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 05:17, 29 September 2019 (UTC)