More fitting for 'in popular culture' or was that page removed?
User talk:The King of the Monsters
From Wikizilla, the kaiju encyclopedia
Jump to navigationJump to search
I also want to know why this was removed
I saw pics and it looks like Daimajin.
We need more information than just "Daimajin appeared in Urusei Yatsura," as it features unlicensed cameos from numerous kaiju. And if it is a clear reference to Daimajin it does not belong on the Daimajin page itself but the popular culture page. We have been trying to remove unlicensed cameos from trivia sections and the outdated "sightings" sections on monster pages.
The edit was vague and the grammar was unacceptable for the site so I simply removed it pending more information.
Well, Lum creates a robotic teacher, names it Daimajin. I just don't know if it's good enough for popular culture, since that seems more dominated by Godzilla stuff.
Should also point out, it's not a 1 second cameo of a background reference. Daimajin's in both the manga and the anime, and is present through out the chapter/episode, named and all. Dunno if that counts for anything.
Why exactly was Gigan Miles removed from the base Gigan Page i just dont feel they are distinct enough from Base Gigan honestly,
Also why is the history of Miles still there?
Gigan Miles and Gigan Rex will be individual pages, the history section will be condensed and direct readers to their individual pages once they are complete.
Im just not sure if the Gigan Miles are very Distinct from normal Gigan honestly so it kinda just seems a bit uneeded.
They share basically the same abilities and the only main difference is they are multiple of them.
We're applying similar logic as with the Godziban characters. The Miles are a Gigan but they're not the Gigan. Having a distinct name seals it.
I just want to tell you that Astonshing Beyond Belief said that it's dorsal plates. So please don't change it.
"Plates" and "fins" are both used officially, either one is fine and they are basically synonymous. What ABB and I are trying to eliminate is the old outdated "scutes" template.
Don't you want the titles for the entire story line so you can put them in later? And what's wrong with "awakened"?
Will you please stop confronting me over every single time I revert your edits? It is exhausting enough having to comb through every single edit you make, only to have to deal with you angrily posting on my wall afterward. If you must do so it is easier to just keep it contained to one thread than to make several consecutive individual ones. Your edits often consist of arbitrary or unverified changes that you apply to dozens of pages at once, and it is often easier to revert them entirely than to systematically go through and adjust everything. Editing my and other users' sandboxes is also not very helpful, as they are under construction and the final format of the page is not yet determined.
I have continued to ask you to take these factors into consideration, and you continue to behave the same way. Please, I am asking you to just slow down the edits and ease up on the attitude. This is getting very old and exhausting.
No, no, no, you've got it all wrong; I'm trying to help me on your sandbox. You let me put on Konga's DVDs, so how is this any different from that?
And everyone knows that Gappa was released in UK theaters as Gappa, the Triphibian Monster. Why remove that one? Even Donald F. Glut mentions this fact in his book The Dinosaur scrapbook (I don't remember which page it was mentioned on. though).
We need a citation for Gappa being released in the UK, as I cannot find any mention of it or even a poster.
Some edits to sandboxes are fine, but ones that don't really add information and just alter the formatting when it isn't even fully decided are not very helpful and I remove them until later.
Well, I got it off of IMDb, and I don't think they'd make a mistake on that one. Let me see if I can find a poster for that one, though. I actually remember seeing it in black and white in a paperback monster movie book (I'd know it if I saw it, but I can't remember the title of it off the top of my head) and I know the tagline on the top of it said "Even Mightier than "KING KONG"!" Does anyone out there know the book I'm talking about here? That would sure help.
The "Monsters from an Unknown Culture" article series mentions a 1969 UK theatrical release for Gappa, although it doesn't say/show anything about a title change.
The BBFC record uses only "Gappa" as its title.
IIRC, "Gappa" is also the on-screen title of at least one UK pre-cert tape. (It's just the title from Nikkatsu's export version.) But I can't guarantee my memory of that is correct, and that doesn't necessarily mean the VHS was derived from the UK cinema release.
My recommendation is to use "Gappa" as the UK title here. "The Triphibian Monster" is little more than an additional subtitle in the advertisements for the export version, and I wouldn't be surprised if it was the same in this instance.
I just found the poster I mentioned on IMDb first time out! It's the last photo in the Photos section of their article on the film. I'd know it anywhere! In fact, ABB, the same poster is in the article you linked me to. btw, could you please link me up to Parts 1 and 2 of that article, if you don't mind? Maybe also switch all four parts to my talk page? I wouldn't want to impose on this one.
It's actually a five-part series, all on the same site; just click the Home button and scroll down.
Okay, H-Man, I've put in Gappa as the UK title in the article "Gappa (film)". Hope this helps.
1: I'm pretty sure that's the 55 Anguirus on Monster of Monsters considering how he looks and his carapace appearance.
2.Same for the Showa Rodan games I added, considereing that most of those games were released before 1993.
Are you guys sure that's not 62 Kong? Considering his appearance barely identical?
I got those edits from Toho Kingdom. Please put them back.
Those are just the names TK uses for those creatures, as far as I can tell they are not official.
Then you might want to do the same thing in the "List of minor Toho monsters" thread, too, if you wish to do so. I'll leave that one up to you.
I asked Toho Kingdom about this. So far, no answer, but I'll keep you posted.
Personally, I don't think they made the Monster Waves' names up. I mean, they've got everything there is to know about this game, right down to the smallest detail. I think this should be taken into consideration here, if nothing else.
TK's page for the waves mentions them being given names in the game's files. They note that, "the hornet is the only enemy among the monster waves that doesn't have "giant" as part of their name. This could be a mistake, but it's how the name appears in the game files."
They also have trivia about the Giant Eagles sharing their name with the one from All Monsters Attack. If it was just a name they made up, I don't see why they'd have trivia about it being the same as something else. I assume all the names they're using are from the game files.
Fan sites and wikis have had cases of people just making information up: Remember the story of Jordan Minor, the kid who made up information about the '90s cartoon Street Sharks? I don't think what TK likely did is malicious, but it's worth keeping in mind that fans on sites like this do often come up with nicknames that are spread around, often mistake as "official" by others.
TK making the names up isn't even misinformation, that's just what they chose to call the creatures. They never said that those are the official names, that's just what they call them. It's as "official" as the descriptive names we use for them on the site. There's no reason for us to copy their names or vice-versa.
Isn't Megalon supposed to be a cyborg monster, just like Gigan is?
No, he is an organic creature. Anatomy photos and informational books show that his drills, while made of metal, are not cybernetic enhancements, but naturally-evolved body parts.
Thanks, I didn't know that.
I think "back on track" is meant here; I've never heard it said "back on task". Or should it say "back to his task"?
"Back on task" is a common phrase that refers to returning to one's task after a distraction. There's no reason to change it.
Thanks, honestly never heard of that phrase.
Why are some of the years of release I put on many films here being removed?
Because it is pretty Unnecessary to list release years next every mention of various films.
Years are only included with movie titles in page titles, filmographies, and in instances where there is another film with the same title and it is necessary to disambiguate.
