FANDOM

Fieryfurnace999

Admin
  • I live in England
  • I was born on December 7
  • I am Female
A FANDOM user
  Loading editor
  • Hey, I recently dicussing the wiki and databook. I was wondering if you could tell me if it was written by Muira or someone else?

      Loading editor
    • The Guide Book is published by Hakusensha, though Miura didn't write it. The names given in the reference are the writers/editors of the book (well, the best approximation of their transliterated names I can give using translation software... Hopefully the Dark Horse release can clear up the editor names). We don't know if Miura was consulted for the ages, heights, and weights of the characters given in the book. We don't know if any instances of the characters' ages and heights being given outside of the manga episodes themselves come from Miura or from the editors at Hakusensha, and if they come from Hakusensha, whether Miura approves of them/was consulted about them. The only things in the Guide Book that we know definitely come from Miura are the interview and the brief comments about the characters provided for the book. He was definitely contacted about the book, but the extent to which he oversaw its information is unknown.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • First of all, welcome back! It's become pretty lonely around here with just AzureKesil and (occasionally) myself being the only frequent editors. Hope you had a successful senior year on your Miura-like hiatus ;)

    About DH's newest vol releases: have they improved any other fuzzy translations of note?

      Loading editor
    • Thanks, man! I hope things have gone well for you over the past few months as well.

      "Miura-like hiatus" – I love it. It's been difficult this year but all things considered it went okay. I just hope I get the results I need to get into university at this point.

      About DH's translations – I don't know. I haven't seen other changes in the volumes I own (admittedly from 2017) compared to scans of older releases, or any mention of other translation changes on the internet, unfortunately, so its likely that there weren't other improvements. There could be some, but if you buy volumes online there's no telling if you'll get the 2016, 2017 or 2018 reprints, so not many people own the newest releases. I don't buy manga digitally so I couldn't say whether or not the digital release has the newest translation. (Knowing DH, it won't.) Sorry for the unhelpful answer. :/

        Loading editor
    • Can I come back as well?

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Kindly review the changes to: http://berserk.wikia.com/wiki/Guts%27_Traveling_Party

    Casca does not have true neuological "amnesia" as explained in the link provided. If she did, indeed if her current mental condition was neurological, we would have a very, very different story. This is not just "semantics"; her actual condition explains or at least "fits" with her behavior actually which is why the distinction proves important.

    Wikipedia actually does a decent job explaining this, partially, the difference between that and what another editor understandably equated with what, as best as anyone can hope to determine, is her condition--though compliments to him for recognizing the psychological condition.

    Whether or not links to outside sources should be allowed in any case, let alone this one, I have no opinion. A Reader can certainly search the term on his own.

    Anyways, I leave it at that "and have nothing more to say."

      Loading editor
    • . . . other than to reaffirm that, despite the claim that they "are the same overarching condition," they are the same as cardiac ischemia and gastroesophageal reflux.

      Or, since this is Beserk, pregnancy and a sword in your gut. . . .

        Loading editor
    • Links to outside sources are certainly allowed to clarify terms readers may not be familiar with.

      From what is indicated by Wikipedia and elsewhere, the term "amnesia" by itself is not always used to indicate neurological amnesia, nor do I think "true" amnesia is always neurological in nature.

      What Recludam says is correct; "amnesia" can be used as an umbrella term encompassing both neurological amnesia and psychogenic amnesia (hence the list of different types on the Wikipedia article). See the first sentence on Wikipedia's amnesia article -- "amnesia is a deficit in memory caused by brain damage, disease, or psychological trauma." The word "amnesia" by itself can indicate memory loss without a neurological cause, because "amnesia" is just "memory loss" - a symptom that can be ascribed a cause which is neurogenic or psychogenic in nature. To describe Casca as an "amnesiac" or to say that she "has amnesia" does not suggest that she has brain damage/injury, only that she has lost her memories - the nature of the cause of the memory loss is not specified.

      To say "technically, Casca is not suffering from amnesia" or "dissociative amnesia is not amnesia" is incorrect, and only makes sense if "amnesia" always refers to "memory loss with a neurological cause", which it doesn't. Why do you say that neurological amnesia is "true amnesia"? I have never heard of neurological amnesia being the "true" amnesia to which the word "amnesia" by itself always refers to unless stated otherwise.

        Loading editor
    • Unfortunately, your last paragraph remains incorrect, and unfamiliarity with the proper terminology and how conditions are actually described does not excuse the perpetuation of those errors. One might think to prevent an important clarification conveyed with the proper terminology that requires merely one additional word requires concerns that do not include providing accurate information.

      One might think that but I could not possibly comment further nor shall I.

        Loading editor
    • This reply has been removed
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • http://berserk.wikia.com/wiki/Slan?action=history

    I would have preferred to have discussed it with him and others prior to final edits; however, my suggestion that it be discussed in the commentary for the page was removed by him. 

      Loading editor
    • View all 12 replies
    • Come on guys, don't be that way. There is no need to be this salty about something so trivial! Let's just decide something here, edit the page and pretend nothing happened! It's as simple as that, no need to be angry about anything at all.

        Loading editor
    • I am, of course, under no obligation to acknowledge, let alone respond to, a liar exposed and justly embarrassed by his temper-tantrum trying now to blame others for his own puerile actions.

      An unkind man would suspect that he prayed his "insolence of office" would bury his sins.

      Yet I am Kind.

      I will leave it to someone else to retrieve his toys, place them back in the pram, and provide the sippy cup.

      I will confess that had I noticed the "Follow" button had been automatically engaged, my final words on the matter would have provided a far better--Jenny say, "Qua?"--dramatic exuent, so to write.  

      I certainly would not have been disturb'd by such further tedious nonsense from this individual.

      I have rectified that oversight. 

      "And that is all I have to say."

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Sorry, "Your Mom" jokes makes my Inner Eight-Year-Old snicker.

    Here: http://berserk.wikia.com/wiki/Serpico%27s_Mother

    Our Happy New Editor created a character page. Neat! Methinks she is a "Minor Character."

    I am not sure how to "move" that to that section.

    I mean . . . if it was easy to do . . . it would be YOUR M[Stop that!--Ed.]

      Loading editor
    • View all 15 replies
    • Regarding that, if you can only describe the character's significance in a paragraph or two without resorting to tedious plot summary, that is a Minor Character. I would also add if the character only appears in one arch or less.

      This can change: the "Whore with the Heart of Gold" Luca may seem like a Minor Character; though she is significant in the Conviction Arc, but has since returned.

      Look, people are never going to agree, but I think this is one that provided a Power That Be makes a decision and is consistent, it will all work out. If a Minor Character seems more important, then he gets moved to his own page.

        Loading editor
    • Sounds like a good rule of thumb to me. Going by that, the Minor Characters page is going to be much, much lengthier than it is as of now, as a good number of characters who currently have their own page can be summarized in one or two paragraphs (and things like an infobox, "Personality" and "Appearance" are hardly necessary for a number of characters).

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Any idea where images like Skull Knight's, Griffith's and Casca's infobox images (among others) originate? That old Chronicles site hosted a lot of them as "posters", but I doubt they're the original source (found some original scans of character portraits not bearing that obnoxious "Chronicles" logo). On their pages, those infobox images stand out as outliers due to not following the new "sourced" naming convention. It's no biggy if they remain simply <succinct description>.png/jpg, but if possible, they'll be renamed something like <specific context>-<1-3 word description>-<medium>.png for the sake of filenaming consistency.

    On a side note: no idea why Sannse felt compelled to delete that image before. If another Wikia staffer feels the need to do that again, I won't reupload it, but I suspect she was just passing through and wanted to do...something while here. Tons of images of him nude on the wiki (i.e. nearly all featuring him); why she singled that one out is beyond me (his legs are just as open in his infobox image too).

      Loading editor
    • Skull Knight's image has never been made available in an official physical capacity as a full image, I believe. It was only used as an illustration for the Konami Trading Card Game (2005), and is not featured in any artbook. The raw image specifically comes from the now defunct Trading Card Game website. The only thing I can tell you about the old website it was literally called "Berserk Tcg Offical Site" - there is a screenshot of it here - the images were in the "Original Illustration Gallery".

      Casca and Griffith's infobox images were both also originally released as card illustrations, and were available cleanly on the TCG website. Since then, the clean versions of them have clearly been made physically available in some capacity, but I honestly can't tell you where. They aren't in the artbooks that I know of/own.

      The Band of the Falcon infobox header is from the Berserk Illustration File. The Guts' travelling party infobox header is from the Berserk Official Guide Book.

      Here are all the insert posters sourced from volume 22 onwards. Most exist on the wikia (some of them are unfortunately jpgs because I didn't know what I was doing when I started editing :/). Here are all the images released with the card game which were first available on its site, including Farnese's, Serpico's, Puck's, Isidro's, and Rosine's infobox headers among others. Rosine's image has no physical release. Farnese, Serpico, Isidro and Puck had their infobox images in the Official Guidebook, but i'm not certain that those are their first physical release - the same situation as Casca and Griffith's headers.

      These images are all card game illustrations that saw their first physical release in the Berserk Official Guidebook: Schierke, Casca, Guts.

      Not sure if you're concerned with the physical release - but the "first release", which would be the site, albeit digitally.

        Loading editor
    • Thank you! Would you have any issues with a naming convention such as
      OI-Reincarnated Griffith-TCG.png for files originating from the "[O]riginal [I]llustration Gallery" (even ones refurbished/improved in later publications)?

      That's how this image was handled: though cropped from the Berserk Illustrations File, it ultimately originates from e0D.

        Loading editor
    • Yes, that would be fine!

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • To avoid editing-re-editing--or even the dreaded reëditing--kindly put a "final edit for now" when you are done cleaning/moving/adding. I more than understand it can take time to go through the "big" articles/character profiles!

    To be serious, one of the issues I had in editing was "how much detail" to put in and take out. In fact, I was surprised the incident where Guts gets driven by "His Darkness" which ruins Addled Casca's trust was never mentioned in her article. So I will figure if you leave in/add details, they should remain, and I will avoid adding/expanding.

    --J.D.

      Loading editor
    • Sorry for the late reply! I was sleeping!

      The issue with editing conflicts isn't your fault at all - I have a deep-seated hatred for the way wikia expects you to resolve them (i.e copy-paste all your edits back in paragraph by paragraph; it's really tedious, and I didn't even know you could do it when I first started editing, which was a bit traumatic).

      "How much detail" there should be in the personality sections is something I struggle with too. I try to adhere to the general rule that if an event is thoroughly explained in the history section, it shouldn't be thoroughly explained in the personality section too. "Smaller" events that may not appear in the history section but reveal an aspect of a character's personality should be briefly outlined, though. This isn't an official "rule" of the wikia - just the way I tend to write things. The incident with Guts is outlined in the history section under the Millennium Falcon Arc, so you can be vaguer/more succinct with it, if you want, in her personality section. Right now, I'm thinking about how to get everything to "flow" better, without the personality section becoming too big...

        Loading editor
    • No problem! Look forward to checking it out. As you say, no sense in making "Personality" another "History" section. Funny, I seemed to miss the Guts incident. So much for skimming. I was surprised since it is a "big thing" in their relationship which clearly bothers Guts and Addled Casca obviously.

      --J.D.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • We use more mainstream (DH) translations for several topics that have superior translations as alternatives. What are your thoughts on changing those to more precise translations (e.g. "Band of the Hawk" → "Band of the Falcon", "White Hawk" → "White Falcon", "Behelit" → "Beherit", "Iith" → "Ys", some others I'm missing)?

    If everyone's cool with it, I could get my bot flagged and use it to make the above changes (as well as finally correct renamed links + other tedious tasks that are better to (semi-)automate than do by hand).

      Loading editor
    • View all 6 replies
    • ✔ Done

        Loading editor
    • Update

      A Fandom staffer granted User:BerserkerBot a bot flag and sysop rights. Changes implemented so far include:

      • Another reference update – Seeing as how the name parameter was rather tedious, {{qref}} has been streamlined even further to function like this: {{qref|e306}}
      • Renames – Subjects that have been renamed include:
        • "Behelit" → "Beherit" – a term with etymological-backing and one used in some Berserk material anyway.
        • "Dragonslayer" → "Dragon Slayer" – the space has always been there; the unspaced "Dragonslayer" is one of DH's minor mistakes.
        • "Raksas" → "Rakshas" – "Rakshas" has historical-backing and is simply more fitting because of it.
        • "Hawk" → "Falcon" – due to Miura's explanation regarding the matter and for the sake of consistency, with terms like "Falconia" and "Millennium Falcon" (except pages including any occurrence of "Berserk and the Band of the Hawk", which is an official chosen title; will work on this later (and remove those tacked on BBotH sections on articles)).
      • Excessive possessives – All (at least I'm pretty sure) excessive possessives (e.g. "Guts's", "Mozgus's", etc.) have been simplified.
      • Category:Episode Covers has replaced Category:Chapter Covers.
      • {{Terms}} has replaced {{Concepts}}.
      • {{wp}} has replaced {{w}}. "wp" better conveys a link to Wikipedia.
      • "Trivia" → "Notes" – to hopefully ward off asinine trivia additions and encourage canon/official tidbits.
      • "Site Navigation" → "Appendices" – for the succinctness of footer section titles like "Notes" and "References".

      More updates to come. You may come across a broken file here or there that I missed, but for the most part, file renames and article redirects have been dealt with as well.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • If he wants to have a "fiancé" then I think we should respect his choices rather that perpetuate the bis-masculine hegemony.

    Besides, Farny looks better in slacks.




    What?

      Loading editor
    • I think it speaks to my complete lack of knowledge of anything clothing related that I didn't know what slacks were before I looked them up.

      To be fair, it is not Roderick's gender identity that is up for question, but that of his betrothed. It's Farny's decision what she should be, as a strong, independent woman who don't need no Roderick!

        Loading editor
    • You looked up Farny's slacks?

      Now far be it for me to question another's interests.





      Did you take any pictures? I am asking for a friend.

      For science.

      Though, true that Farny is a strong and independent woman, unless, of course, she chooses to be a strong, independent man, or even a strong, independent will not be confined by your Dead Western Male Role Models, and if we doubt it, she will set us on fire!

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
  • Hello. I just edited Farnese page the Highlights to be specific. I added that she searched for Guts for two years on the assumption that he was the Hawk of Darkness and that she left her previous way of life and in order to learn from him how the world work after the event of the Incarnation Ceremony. Also, I added that she started to learn magic from Schierke and that she agreed to be Roderick fiance to provide a ship for her friends.

    I thought to ask if these are alright to be placed as Highlights.

      Loading editor
    • Hello!

      I think those are all alright. I've just added references to them and changed the wording slightly. 

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.