Talk:Voice acting in Japan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 September 2020 and 14 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Baekhoneko.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:32, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rename to "Voice acting in Japan" or some such[edit]

This article must be renamed to a title in English, such as "Voice acting in Japan".
I have read the archived discussion for the previous merge proposal with "voice actor" (which, note, is not what is being proposing here). Apart from that "poll" appearing to be roughly a tie (or even in favor of the merge), the arguments for keeping "seyu" that were given there are pretty weak:

  • "Seiyuu is part of the otaku subculture and not a simple voice actor", "completely different dimension", etc.: The special qualities of a seiyū are at best very subtle, and in any case he still falls squarely within the definition of a "voice actor". Indeed there seems to be no difference whatsoever between the terms "seyū" and "Japanese voice actor".
  • "Seiyuu has particular 'ranks's": Same as above. Every profession has country-specific peculiarities, but that is no reason to use foreign names for foreign professionals. The fact that the profession of voice actor in Japan has its peculairities does not change the fact that they are still voice actors.
  • "The article is explaining what the word seyū means": Wikipedia is not a dictionary, much less a Japanese-English dictionary. Its articles are not about words, they are about concepts, and a basic rule of the *English* wikipedia is that each article should be named with a descriptive *English* title when possible. The article's contents is about a concept that is precisely described by the term "Japanese voice actor" (or perhaps "Voice acting in Japan", you choose) so the article should have that name.
  • "Seyuu only exist in Japan while movie stars are used in the US": As responded in the archive, there are plenty of professional voice-only actors in the US and other countries that provide voices to cartoon characters and dub foreign films into the local language.
  • "In Japan voices are strongly associated with characters": in any country, the audience would be upset if charaters changed their voices from one episode to the next. Thus, when foreign serials or cartoons are dubbed, each character must be associated to a specific voice actor for the whole series.
  • "Everybody calls them seiyū": Perhaps "most *anime fans*", but certainly not "most Wikipedia readers". (I got here by clicking "random article", wich gave a page that said "Rie Ishizuka is a seyuu". I happen to know a little bit of Japanese, but even so I had no idea of what seyuu meant; I had to click the link and read a couple of paragraphs before I realized that it meant simply "Japanese voice actor". Darn...) The point is that articles on anime topics do not "belong" to anime fans and must *not* be written for them. Every Wikipedia article belongs to all readers (especially those who do not know aything about its topic) and should be written to be as understandable to those readers as much as possible.

Another reason for the renaming is that seiyū has a macron and must be put in italics, which is an extra annoyance for most readers and editors of the English wikipedia — who probably have an English-only keyboard.
Ironically, I see that the leading Japanese seyuu magazine, mostly written in Japanese, is not called 声優, but "Voice Animage" — That is right, in English!
Once again, please note that the proposal is not to merge with anything, just to fix the name to comply with the most basic Wikipedia rules. Obviously there would be redirects from "seiyū", "seyuu" and "seyu" to this article, whatever its name. All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 05:23, 13 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • I added this article for deletion. Maybe it'll force someone's hand. If the anime fans who created this page want to keep it, then they are going to have to rename it. But if they don't choose to yield, then it will be deleted, just because it doesn't adhere to Wikipedia's rules. - Nick15 (talk) 06:56, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • You're right, I guess I didn't completely get the concept of AfD. Thought I did, but obviously there were things I missed when I read through the AfD page. If it doesn't get deleted, fine, I don't mind, I accept the consequences of my actions. But it doesn't mean I'm completely finished with this article yet. - Nick15 (talk) 17:24, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I also noticed in the Archive when someone wrote "a seiyu is a voice actor but a voice actor is not a seiyu"; that's not true. A seiyu is just the Japanese word for "voice actor". If a Japanese magazine wanted to talk about the voice actors of The Simpsons, they would be referring to them as "seiyu" not "voice actors" (the specifically English term). Even a Japanese voice acting website (http://jp.jade-voice.com/actor/) uses the English word "voice actor" and not the Romanization of seiyu. - Nick15 (talk) 07:00, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For the article to be renamed a move must take place, because this is disputed a consensus poll would be best to avoid edit warring. Personally I would be against the move based on the reasoning I have seen. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:08, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Again I am strongly against deletion (and the use of deletion threats to force editorial changes). But the article must be renamed because Wikipedia's rules take precedence over the choices of any special interest group — not just for anime but for any WikiProject. We are all guests in Wikipedia's house, and guests should respect the rules of the house. All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 18:23, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Except that WE - as in, you, Jorge Stolfi, and I and the rest of us, made those rules via WP:CONSENSUS. And if the consensus is that the article remain where it is, well... as for myself, I don't care one way or the other. I just object to the idea that it MUST be done, or else. 159.182.1.4 (talk) 18:31, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I did not say "or else", quite the opposite. The "consensus" must consider all readers, not just the editors of this article; and, in the best Japanese spirit, we "must" do so by moral obbligation, not because of threats. All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 21:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Except for the introduction, the topic of the article appears to be voice acting in japan, so it probably would be best to move it. Seiyu can redirect to the article. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 11:03, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support change to Voice acting in Japan. The subject is relevant for Wikipedia but the article name isn't accurate. --KrebMarkt 12:20, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comment:As the Afd closed quick with a Speedy keep, i didn't have the opportunity to give my argumentation why the subject is relevant and can't be covered by the Voice acting so i'm dropping it here :p

  1. Multiple magazines exclusively dedicated to the subject
  2. Prizes dedicated for best performance in voice acting
  3. Strong tradition of making Drama CDs like this example
  4. Japanese voice actor playing the hosts in many Internet Web Radio Show often in conjunction to anime broadcast like here
  5. Japanese voice actor double-up often with singer career with album making it into the Japanese Oricon charts even one making #1 in albums category.
  6. In the same vein, Japanese voice actor singing as their anime alter ego making Image songs. One even made it #1 in the charts. --KrebMarkt 12:20, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
These are good arguments against deletion or merging, but none of this justifies using the japanese name when an English name exists. --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 16:55, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Cough! Did you read what is above my comment. I happens to support the renaming. ;)
That's the argumentation, i could not post in the Afd due to its early closure.

Comment: Reading through this page's archive, I came across an interesting implication -- we have an article on anime (not even getting into the fact there's a WikiProject). What is anime? Why it's animation. That's it. In Japan, The Simpsons is anime. So is Tom and Jerry. Yet, we have an article about it. Why? Because reliable sources feel it nessesary to classify it as its own unique entity (beyond the fact that popular culture does this too). So what's wrong with doing the same for a specific facet of it? Basically bv the same standard (and yes I know about WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS one could argue that the anime article should be renamed to "Animation in Japan". ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 15:30, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

First, yes, pointing to examples in Wikipedia is not convincing: there are many, many articles with grammatical errors, but it does not follow that errors are OK. And yes, someone could argue that "anime" should be renamed "Japanese animation".
But "Anime" at last has the excuse of having been widely used in English for 25-30 years perhaps; so most English speakers, even those who hate anime, know the word and have a rough idea of what it means. It is essentially an English word now, like "pasta" and "croissant". Not so for seyū, a Japanese term which is probably unknown even to 99% of the non-Japanese readers who love anime, and to 99.99% of those who don't.
Moreover "anime" in English means a particular *style* of animation, that was developed in Japan but can be produced anyhere in the world. While in Japan the Simpsons and Daffy Duck cartoons are called anime, I doubt that anyone would call them that in the US or other countries. Now, there seems to be no appropriate "classical English" title for an article on that particular style of animation: "Japanese animation" would be incorrect, and "Japanese-style animation" would be too vague. Again, this is not the case of seyū. Its accurate translation (at least as it seems to be used in Wikipedia) is "Japanese voice actor", but the topic of the article may be better described as "Voice acting in Japan". All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 16:55, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Keep in mind to, "anime" used to be known as "Japanimation". If the word "anime" (which, yes, is a Japanese word), didn't come to replace "Japanimation" as the word that means/references "Japanese animation", then the Anime article would be known as "Japanimation". The word anime used today is not because people intentionally used the Japanese word OVER "Japanimation", but because "Japanimation" is NOW known as "Anime". If in 20 years English-speaking people started using "seiyu" over "Japanese voice actor", then that'd be a different story. However, right NOW "seiyu" is NOT a word used by many English-speakers, simply because "Japanese voice acting" is NOT a different, unique field to English-speakers. ... In other words, although "anime" in Japanese means "animation", "anime" in English means "Japanese animation".... because I'd say at this point, "anime" is an English word like "sushi", "ninja" and "tsunami" are. However, "seiyu" is no where close to being an English word. - 71.141.118.209 (talk) 03:09, 17 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What I do not understand is why people are saying the article Must be changed to an english name, wikipedia has plenty of Japanese terminology, I see no reason why this word should be changed as voice acting in Japan appears too broad. Voice acting in Japan, and Japanese voice actors can easily redirect here as well. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:18, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree, I've seen no real attempt to justify this other then "there is an english term" (which is a vague one). I also agree that renaming it would be too broad, people who dub tv and movies for japanese audiences are not always the people doing native language recording for anime or promoting it with alternative merchandise such as drama cds, and such. Dandy Sephy (talk) 00:31, 17 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Find another article of a Japanese concept that is known specifically for its Japanese name, DESPITE the fact that it is known in English by an English term. Let me give you some COUNTER-examples: Cinema of Japan (versus 日本映画, Nihon eiga), Districts of Japan (versus 郡, gun), Villages of Japan (versus 村, mura), Music of Japan (versus 音楽, ongaku), Nichiren Buddhism (versus 日蓮系諸宗派: Nichiren-kei sho shūha), Japan Standard Time (versus 日本標準時 Nihon Hyōjunji or 中央標準時 Chūō Hyōjunji), Koreans in Japan (versus 韓國系日本人, Kankokukei Nihonjin).... this goes on forever. As you can tell, these articles are named by their ENGLISH terms, versus their Japanese terms, considering that the English term exists.... unless it's a name or when an English term does not exist, like Nichiren Buddhism. But unfortunately for "Seiyu", an English term exist: "Voice acting in Japan". The ball's in your court. - 71.141.118.209 (talk) 03:17, 17 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Gaijin doesn't count, BTW, since the article is about the history of the word itself, and not about the actual Foreigners in Japan. THAT can be found here: Demography of Japan#Foreign residents - 71.141.118.209 (talk) 03:39, 17 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Also:
people who dub tv and movies for japanese audiences are not always the people doing native language recording for anime or promoting it with alternative merchandise such as drama cds, and such. - You obviously don't pay much attention to Actor communities and whatnot. Voice actors in every country has a rather large community just like Japan, and they do heavy promotion of their work and voice acting capabilities. Ever read "Animation Magazine"? Almost every issue they're interviewing a voice actor or so. There is nothing about the Japanese voice actor industry that is any different than any other country, and just because you can't see it, it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. - 71.141.118.209 (talk) 03:31, 17 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Then point me to English voice actors who have singles and albums which ranked in the charts?
Name me 4-5 English publications dedicated to Voice acting
Indicate me an English label/producer making Drama CDs (not audio book). Do those Drama CDs happen to make in the Charts?
I was pointing on what make Japanese voice acting worth a separate article compared to Voice acting in general. Can you prove me have that voice actors all around the world do: Sing single/albums which charts, have publications dedicated to them, make drama CDs, make "image song" CDs, play the hosts in Internet Radio Show? If could prove such things, i would support a merge.
However I would say that you don't have the arguments to prove that and instead you remain exclusively focused and narrow minded to English world voice acting which display a certain cultural bias. --KrebMarkt 07:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
*sits in the corner silently*. Dandy Sephy (talk) 04:23, 17 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
KrebMarkt laughs out off bitterness. Things are like that here for years. --KrebMarkt 07:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Theres actually an article on mania.com that makes a point of separating the two, but as the problem is more to do with the title of the article, I don't really have any comebacks at this time. Theres plenty of sources highlighting the large differences in voice acting (be it as a career path, the difference in recording style, etc) between the US/Japan to prove they are not the same, a merge discussion is pointless. Dandy Sephy (talk) 07:41, 17 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Folks, the discussion is getting off topic again. The point is not "does voice acting in Japan deserve its own separate article": it does. The issue is only how that article should be titled. All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 21:19, 17 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Attempted Deletion[edit]

OK so I noticed that the attempt to delete this article has been blocked, though mostly because I didn't go through the right channels or do the right things concerning AfD policy, which I accept. No argument from me here.

However, it's still obvious to me that there is still some resistance to the reason for this article. Maybe it doesn't deserve deletion, but the posts below--and the people who wrote it--still have questions about it. So what can be done? A move request? Some other kind of vote? Anyone got some kind of suggestion? I mean, just because *I* made some bad moves regarding the deletion process doesn't mean that this article fits Wikipedia's guidelines. Drawing attention to me away from the article is only an Ad hominem fallacy. Take me out of the picture and the problems with this article (unsourced and doesn't fit Wikipedia's guidelines for Japanese articles) still exist.

So... anyone got any ideas? At least counters to EVERY single point against this article, as listed below? - Nick15 (talk) 17:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Or another question, is there some way to get an unbiased person (or people) involved in this matter? Because I fear anime fans who want to keep this article for reasons outside of Wikipedia guidelines will band together to vote to keep this article as is, and there are more anime fans than there are nonanime fans (at least in this corner of Wikipedia). - Nick15 (talk) 17:51, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wikipedia:Requests for comment is probably what you're looking for, but you should make sure you've exhausted the possibilities of discussion here before proceeding, since it often has a large backlog (I haven't read this talk page so I have no comment on whether that's the case). I'm going to take your comments here as meaning that you have no objection to my closing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seiyū. Olaf Davis (talk) 18:00, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you Olaf, I do appreciate your help on this. I kinda figured that my AfD attempt would fall apart, BUT the whole point was to rattle the cage a bit and get the people here to push me back on the right track. I tend to do that in life a lot and it has always steered me right. - Nick15 (talk) 18:19, 15 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 01:20, 6 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Seiyū → Voice acting in Japan — Per WP:ENGLISH, the above discussion, and the discussion from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seiyū. —armagebedar (talk) 00:57, 29 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Oppose per reasons stated above. Japanese Voice acting is just too broad. There are is also alot that links to the word Seiyu. (Seiyu Awards), (Seiyu Magazines), ect... - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 19:01, 29 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment Is this requested move going to be any different than the above discussion? Seems as if there's already no consensus anyway. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 19:07, 29 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support - WP:UE, WP:JARGON, and WP:SPADE. The article is about voice acting in Japan, and the attendant phenomenon. Specifically, acting, not actors - historically they were not restricted to voice-over work. The surrounding interest is not a feature of voice acting, but rather the seeming tendency in Japan to idolize anything. 81.111.114.131 (talk) 13:29, 30 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support provided this isn't just an incremental step in trying to delete the article or merge it into Voice acting. ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 21:24, 30 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Comment if it were merged into the other article, it would unbalance the other article, because this article is roughly the same size... 70.29.210.242 (talk) 04:54, 1 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

List of female seyuu is too long[edit]

The lead section says: "Popular seiyū, especially female ones such as Kikuko Inoue, Megumi Hayashibara, Aya Hirano, Aya Hisakawa, Nana Mizuki, Paku Romi and Kugimiya Rie, often have devoted international fanclubs." This list is a bit too long for a simple "such as". Would someone pick two or three representative ones? All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 02:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would suggest that Inoue, Hayashibara, Hirano and either Park or Kugimiya (I lean towards Kugimiya) would make a good list. That gives you two older and two more recent ones, all of which are well known. If four is too many I would drop Hirano as the others have a broader range of roles. Hirano is mostly well known for one particular role rather then a range of works, compared to the others at least.Dandy Sephy (talk) 11:02, 6 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Can't believe that Nana Mizuki was ommitted from any reference here...when she's the most successful and popular female voice actress. She's considered the Queen of Seiyuu-Singers for a reason. 174.125.94.197 (talk) 00:31, 19 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Seyuu who switched careers[edit]

The lead section says, "Some Japanese voice actors have capitalized on their fame to became singers, and many others became live movie or television actors." This claim deserves either a reference, or at least one example from each category (wikilinked to the respective articles). All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 02:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Actors and seyuu section[edit]

The "Actors and seyuu" section should be merged into the "History" section. (I cannot figure out the dates of the events so I cannot do it myself.) All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 02:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Removing "seiyu" from other articles?[edit]

I've noticed that many articles still link to this article using the term "seiyu", and many other articles use the word "seiyu" instead of voice actor. Would it be appropriate to go through each article and rewrite them to remove all instances of "seiyu" (UNLESS the word "seiyu" is specifically appropriate, such as when used like "the Japanese word for 'voice actor' is 'seiyu")? What's the policy here? - 66.92.0.61 (talk) 07:11, 2 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, I think it would be appropriate, as we have the perfectly good and widely understood term "voice actor" in English. --DAJF (talk) 08:26, 2 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I wonder if it would be a good idea to fix every other page that links to "seiyu"? - 85.234.144.145 (talk) 01:48, 9 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Non Notability[edit]

This article is completely unsourced bar a few unreadable fan sources, and has been for years. This article is filled with original research, and very little is verifiable.

'In Japan there are around one hundred and thirty voice-acting schools.' So? There are acting and voice acting schools across the globe.

'Some fans may watch a show merely to hear a particular seiyū' And? There are people all over the globe who watch certain movies and TV shows in order to see or hear their favourite actor/voice actor. There is no way to tell if this is verifiable, even though it is cited, as it is impossible to tell if this info is accurate. And since it appears to be a fan magazine, it probably doesn't count as being an accurate, verifiable source.

'Conversely, the Japanese term seiyū is commonly used among English-speaking anime and game fans for Japanese voice actors.' Any proof of this? The statement screams original research. This unverifable claim sums up this page in a nutshell: it was created for waps. Articles on Wikipedia should not be written for the fans.

Wikipedia is not the place to make things seem more important than they are. Anyone who actually reads these talk pages should know that this is the case.

For more evidence and examples of this article's problems, see:

And for Wikipedia's actual guidelines, see:

195.194.150.129 (talk) 11:56, 30 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There area several Japanese language magazines dedicated to this subject area and area already mentioned in the article. Although they are currently not used as sources in the article, that doesn't mean that the subject is not notable. —Farix (t | c) 16:03, 30 April 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It seems to me that you believe one of two things: Voice acting in Japan may be notable but the references do not show its notability well enough, or the subject is definitely not notable. In the first case, why don't you be bold and add more references yourself. In the second case, why don't you be bold and nominate this article for deletion? Sorafune +1 03:26, 1 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If I had access to the magazine and knew Japanese, I probably would add sources. —Farix (t | c) 11:21, 1 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There are no reliable sources. I have been looking. Every time I try to add the notability template, in order to try and get people to collaborate and actually work on the problem, it gets removed without consensus or even discussion. If I were to nominate this for deletion, the fans of the subject would rally round and say either 'it's important to weaboos' or 'there are a handful of magazines', as has happened in the past. This article cannot be verified, and the people who claim to say that this subject is notable have made no attempts to add these 'sources' that prove their claims. The article was created as a fork of the main voice acting article, in order to make it seem like voice acting in Japan is more important than anywhere else on Earth, which is not the case. Being bold is great when there aren't legions of fan boys/girls who state that the article is necessary and yet make no attempt to actually fix the problems. Having a quick read through the talk pages shows all of the problems that this article has, and that people have purposefully failed to address. 195.194.150.129 (talk) 10:57, 4 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok, we don't have enough good sources. So that's why we have the additional sources for verification tag. We don't need a notability tag. Sorafune +1 21:08, 4 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Are you seriously contending that Voice Animage, Seiyū Grand Prix, Animec, and Newtype are not reliable sources or do not cover Japanese voice acting? These are all magazines mentioned in the article as covering the subject. The real issue with the article isn't notability, but sourcing. And for that, we need someone who can read Japanese and has access to the back-issues of these magazines. —Farix (t | c) 20:38, 4 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Absolutely, notability is not an issue, but there's room to improve on sourcing and general improvements to the page in general. The list of links to prove the IP's case smacks of having a dislike of the article rather then simple concerns as the article doesn't actually fail the list of guidelines being given (using shorthand for derogatory term isn't helping their case). There is no traction in claiming the subject is unnotable, especially given the number of English language sources that do exist.Dandy Sephy (talk) 01:46, 5 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Voice acting in Japan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:43, 9 December 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Voice_acting_in_Japan&oldid=1193598774"