This is thetalk page for discussing improvements to thePrincess Mononoke article. This isnot a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide toanimation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you canedit the article attached to this page, help out with theopen tasks, or contribute to thediscussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofanime,manga, and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anime and mangaWikipedia:WikiProject Anime and mangaTemplate:WikiProject Anime and mangaanime and manga
This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofJapan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like toparticipate, please visit theproject page, where you can join the project, participate inrelevant discussions, and seelists of open tasks.JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related
Leyland, Matthew (June 2006). "Princess Mononoke".Sight and Sound.16 (6). British Film Institute:90–91.ISSN0037-4806.
Pedroletti, Brice (June 9, 2000). "L'animation d'auteur veut s'imposer au pays de Pikachu".Le Film Français (in French) (2382). Mondadori France:15–17.ISSN0397-8702.
Per the hidden comment at the top of§ Plot summary, here's a talk page section in case anyone would like to discuss the changes I've made. I've included a fair bit more detail, about as much as could fit in thethe 700-word limit. I've removed obscure Japanese terms likekanrei andjizamurai which don't add much to a reader's understanding of the story and are not brought up in the article again. In general, I've tried to approach the rewrite by working backwards from the newly improved Themes and Style sections, as the encyclopedic purpose of the plot summary is to contextualize the more detailed analyses later in the prose. I welcome any questions or feedback about my work (about this section or elsewhere), so please let me know if you have any!—TechnoSquirrel69(sigh)23:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As one of the major contributors, I would like to thank you for your efforts on improving this article (including the plot summary). I've been meaning to bring it up to GA for quite a few years.Lord Sjones23 (talk -contributions)00:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also, for the plot description in the lead, I think we can try one of the following:
"Set during Japan'sMuromachi period, the film follows Ashitaka, anEmishi prince who journeys west to cure his cursed arm and becomes embroiled in the conflict between Irontown and the forest of the gods, as well as the feud between Lady Eboshi and a human girl raised by wolves, San."
"Set during Japan'sMuromachi period, the film follows Ashitaka, anEmishi prince who journeys west to cure his cursed arm and becomes embroiled in the conflict between Irontown and the forest of the gods, as well as the feud between Lady Eboshi and San, a human girl raised by wolves."
"Set in theMuromachi period of Japanese history, the film follows Ashitaka, a youngEmishi prince who journeys west to cure his cursed arm and becomes embroiled in the conflict between Irontown and the forest of the gods, as well as the feud between Lady Eboshi and a human girl raised by wolves, San."
"Set in theMuromachi period of Japanese history, the film follows Ashitaka, a youngEmishi prince who journeys west to cure his cursed arm and becomes embroiled in the conflict between Irontown and the forest of the gods, as well as the feud between Lady Eboshi and San, a human girl raised by wolves."
I like the third option best... but I also can't see the difference between it and the current phrasing. :P Like I mentioned earlier, I think "Japan's Muromachi period" reads awkwardly as time periods relate to a country's history, not the country itself. (I've never heard "England's Victorian era", for example.) I also prefer the phrase "a human girl raised by wolves" before San's name to make it clear who the phrase is referring to.—TechnoSquirrel69(sigh)00:14, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
About the header in the article, should we consider using either "Plot" or "Plot summary"? For the part where Eboshi and Jigo attack the boar clan (Eboshi and Jigo lure the boar clan and annihilate them in battle..."), should we simplify the last part into "slay them" or "attack them"?Lord Sjones23 (talk -contributions)09:55, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think I said this in an edit summary before, but I usually prefer "plot summary" as it tells the reader that the section is an incomplete and boiled-down version of the work's story. There's nothing horrible about the simple "plot", but lacking a compelling reason to change it,MOS:VAR advises leaving styling choices like this as is. I think the use of "annihilate" is appropriate in this context, as the film shows the entire clan killed in the battle.—TechnoSquirrel69(sigh)17:14, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As we generally avoid euphemisms perWP:EUPHEMISM, is "annihilate" considered one?
Also, some editors including myself use a script tool to check the plot summary word count for TV episodes and films (User:Alex_21/script-plotlength.js); it can be installed in the user's monobook if so needed. In this particular instance, it goes straight into mentioning the summary word count for an episodeWP:TVPLOT instead ofWP:FILMPLOT; that is partially why I sometimes use online word counter sites to check this summary's word count. Maybe we can ask otherWP:FILM editors on this?Lord Sjones23 (talk -contributions)19:51, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would not considerannihilate to be a euphemism in this context; it conveys the message directly enough. Thanks for sharing that script, though I don't think we're in need of trimming the word count any further to comply with the MOS (currently at 679 words).—TechnoSquirrel69(sigh)00:59, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Reasonable concerns. As a side note, back in 2012, I found myself in somelivelydiscussions on how we should handle the plot summary during my potential GA push (one of my later plans is to get this article up to FA status so we can feature it as a TFA on July 12, 2027).
For the scene where the Nightwalker dies, the plot description reads "light of the sunrise" (or "sunrise's light" per my recent edit), which would be accurate perthese definitions: sunrise is either "the apparent rising of the sun above the horizon" or "the time when the upper limb of the sun appears above the horizon as a result of the diurnal rotation of the earth". So, I think either of the above plot descriptions might work.
Ok, so I would have put this in the article but given it's quite a substantial rewrite, I thought I would let you pick over it here. I have attempted to cut back on some things that didn't seem very necessary, and clarify some of the more interesting themes like them being consumed by hatred, etc. I've also just introduced Nago at the start rather than doing reveals later because it was just taking up space. Same with mentioning the opening battle where he learns he's got super strength, the strength seemed more important than the battle.
InMuromachi era Japan, the lastEmishi prince, Ashitaka, kills a gigantic boar demon to protect his village, but his arm is afflicted by its curse. The boar, once the god Nago, was corrupted by its hatred for humans. Learning that the curse will eventually kill him, Ashitaka chooses exile and journeys west, seeking a cure by uncovering the source of Nago's hatred.
On his journey, Ashitaka discovers that the curse grants him supernatural strength. He encounters a monk named Jigo, who advises him to seek answers in the nearby mountains from the Forest Spirit—a deer-like god of life and death that transforms into the giantNightwalker at sunset. Guided by tinykodama, Ashitaka ventures into the forest of the gods, where he catches a glimpse of the Forest Spirit.
He arrives at Irontown, a settlement that has deforested the surrounding area to mine iron ore for powerful firearms, giving its inhabitants an advantage over the giant beasts guarding the forest. The town's revered leader, Lady Eboshi, admits to shooting Nago, instilling the hatred that corrupted him. She also reveals her plan to kill the Forest Spirit, hoping to end the beasts' resistance and enable Irontown to prosper. Though Ashitaka's cursed arm tries to attack Eboshi, he resists its influence. Eboshi is collaborating with Jigo, who stands to be richly rewarded for delivering the Forest Spirit's head—believed to grant immortality—to theEmperor.
Irontown is attacked by the wolves, led by Moro and her adopted human daughter, San. San duels with Eboshi, but Ashitaka subdues them both and suffers a grievous wound in the process. Empowered by the curse, he carries San to the forest before collapsing. San threatens to kill him for sparing Eboshi but is taken aback when he compliments her beauty. She brings Ashitaka to the Forest Spirit, who heals his wounds, though the curse remains. As San nurses him back to health, they grow closer, but she struggles with her deep distrust of humans.
The next day, the remnants of Nago's boar clan, led by the blind god Okkoto, declare their intention to attack Irontown, preferring to die in battle rather than grow weaker and become prey for humans. Ashitaka vainly pleads with them to resist the hatred that corrupted Nago and now afflicts him. He asks Moro to let San leave with him, but she refuses and banishes him from the forest.
The boars assault Irontown but are annihilated by its weaponry. Moro, San, and the mortally wounded Okkoto retreat to the forest, unknowingly followed by Eboshi and Jigo, who uses the blood of Okkoto's fallen boars to deceive him into leading them to the Forest Spirit. San tries to stop Okkoto, but his pain transforms him into a demon, engulfing her in the process. With Moro's remaining strength, she and Ashitaka free San. The Forest Spirit arrives, granting peaceful deaths to Okkoto and Moro. As it transitions into the Nightwalker, Eboshi beheads it. The Forest Spirit's body then transforms into a dark, chaotic fluid that expands in search of its head, killing everything it touches—including the forest—and briefly reanimates Moro's head, which bites off Eboshi's arm.
Though reluctant to help the humans, San joins Ashitaka in pursuing Jigo to recover the Forest Spirit's head. Ashitaka evacuates Irontown before the Nightwalker's destructive body can consume it, and together, he and San retrieve the head from Jigo, returning it to the Nightwalker. As the sun rises, the Nightwalker collapses and dissolves into the wind. In its place, the devastated land and town are renewed with abundant flora, and Ashitaka's curse is lifted.
A repentant Eboshi vows to rebuild Irontown with greater care and compassion. Ashitaka and San acknowledge their deep connection. While Ashitaka chooses to help with Irontown's reconstruction and San, unable to forgive humanity, decides to stay in the forest, they promise to meet as often as they can.
Thanks,Darkwarriorblake! There are some inaccuracies in this version, but I think it's headed in the right direction in terms of where you've condensed events down. I'll make some changes when I have a moment this weekend and ping you again if you want to move it into the article.—TechnoSquirrel69(sigh)20:39, 24 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What do we think of this one? I've blended in sentences from the old version to fill in a few gaps or inaccuracies, but I think the flow and the balance of plot elements is better, as I mentioned earlier. Word count is 616.Darkwarriorblake, courtesy ping, and feel free to move this into the article if you'd like.
InMuromachi-era Japan, the lastEmishi prince, Ashitaka, kills a gigantic demon to protect his village, but his arm is afflicted by its curse. The demon, once the boar god Nago, was corrupted by an iron ball embedded in its body. Learning that the curse will eventually kill him, Ashitaka is exiled to the west, seeking a cure by uncovering the source of Nago's hatred.
On his journey, Ashitaka discovers that the curse grants him supernatural strength. He encounters a monk named Jigo, who advises him to seek answers in the nearby mountains from the Forest Spirit – a deer-like god of life and death that transforms into the giantNightwalker at sunset. Guided by tinykodama, Ashitaka passes through the forest of the gods, where he catches a glimpse of the Forest Spirit. Nearby, a group of men led by Lady Eboshi repel an attack by a pack of wolves led by the goddess Moro and her adopted human daughter, San.
Ashitaka arrives at Irontown, a settlement that has deforested the surrounding area to mine iron, leading to conflicts with the nearby lord Asano and the animal gods of the forest. However, the town shelters former prostitutes and people with leprosy, who work to manufacture firearms. Eboshi, the town's leader, admits to shooting Nago, instilling the hatred that corrupted him. She also reveals her plan to kill the Forest Spirit, hoping to eradicate the gods and enable Irontown to prosper. Though Ashitaka's cursed arm tries to attack Eboshi, he resists its influence. Eboshi is collaborating with Jigo, who stands to be richly rewarded for delivering the Forest Spirit's head – believed to grant immortality – to theEmperor.
The wolves attack; San infiltrates Irontown and duels Eboshi. Ashitaka subdues them both, but is shot by a townsperson. Strengthened by the curse, he takes San out of the town before collapsing. San threatens to kill him for sparing Eboshi, but is taken aback when he compliments her beauty. She brings Ashitaka to the Forest Spirit, who heals his wound but leaves the curse. The next day, a boar clan, led by the blind god Okkoto, declare their intention to attack Irontown, preferring to die in battle rather than allow their kind to diminish. Ashitaka recovers and implores Moro to let San escape with him, but the gods banish him from the forest.
The boars assault Irontown's forces but are annihilated by their weaponry. San and the mortally wounded Okkoto retreat to the forest, unknowingly followed by Eboshi and Jigo, who use the blood of the fallen boars to deceive Okkoto into leading them to the Forest Spirit. San tries to stop him, but his pain transforms him into a demon, engulfing her. With Moro's remaining strength, she and Ashitaka free San. The Forest Spirit grants peaceful deaths to Okkoto and Moro. As it transforms into the Nightwalker, Eboshi beheads it. Its body explodes into a dark, chaotic fluid that expands in search of its head, killing everything it touches – including the forest – and briefly reanimates Moro's head, which bites off Eboshi's arm.
Though reluctant to help the humans, San joins Ashitaka in pursuing Jigo to recover the Forest Spirit's head. Ashitaka evacuates Irontown as the Nightwalker's body floods it, and together, he and San retrieve the head from Jigo, returning it to the Nightwalker. As the sun rises, the Nightwalker dies and dissolves into the wind. In its place, the devastated land is renewed with abundant flora, and Ashitaka's curse is lifted. A repentant Eboshi resolves to build a better town. While Ashitaka chooses to help with Irontown's reconstruction, San, unable to forgive humanity, decides to stay in the forest. They promise to meet as often as they can.
This is mostly good, I will say I don't see the purpose of mentioning Lord Asano, while he creates some issues in the narrative he's ultimately unimportant and you can never mention him without creating issue, it's the conflict with the animals that is the main element. It would be different if Asano killed all the women because of Eboshi's focus, but she ultimately trusts them to beat his men and it's the Nightstalker that does the town in. Other than that, it looks fine.Darkwarriorblake (talk)09:35, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While I've made some small copyedits here and there, I also think the plot looks good at the moment. Of course, we can always ask for some additional local editor feedback as needed.Lord Sjones23 (talk -contributions)13:34, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. Since you've cut out the siege of Irontown later on, I agree there's no longer any purpose mentioning Asano; I've removed it. I've also switched the dashes back over to en dashes (–) for consistency with the rest of the article.—TechnoSquirrel69(sigh)14:38, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, en dash is typically for ranges, such as numbers, typically replacing "to", em dash is for how it is used in this plot section, for asides or other extra information, it's similar to a comma but more explicit, and there shouldn't be spaces around them.Darkwarriorblake (talk)19:01, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Considering how the original credits split its cast list (Ashitaka and San, then Eboshi and Jigo, then most of the others), I think it would be fine to limit the infobox cast list to the top four
It might bebeneficial to do the same in the lead, but that's up to you
I would also prefer if this list was shorter, but I'm simply copying over the list of actors starred on the poster, which I believe is common practice and is also suggested bythe template documentation. I'm going to call this onenot done.—TS
You're right; I somehow completely missed the names in the poster.☔
the film's marketing, then the largest promotional campaign in Japan →the marketing, then the largest film advertisement campaign in Japan
Not done, seeing as the campaign involved things other than advertisements like preview screenings.—TS
clock Understandable, but I don't think this is supported within the article, which describes it asthe largest film advertisement campaign in Japan at the time.☔
Hmm, I'm unsure from the rough translation I have of the source whether Kanō means the entire campaign was the largest or just the advertisements. To err on the side of caution, though, I'll indeed take your suggestion.—TS
but underperformed gives the impression that the underperformance is somehow linked to the translation; consider rephrasing
Done. Rephrased and used a semicolon instead of a conjunction, which I suppose is good enough. Feel free to suggest any alternative phrasing you think might be more elegant.—TS
Consider rephrasing the captions as sentences—e.g.,Claire Danes(pictured in 2015) voiced San.—though I can see these are consistent with the other captions below too, so fine either way
Some sources (e.g.) claim that John DiMaggio also portrayed Nago in English, but this isn't in the credits so it's up to you if you want to include it
Some also claim thatPat Fraley playedUshikai, but unfortunately I can't find any sources verifying this
Though I didn't spot the Nago one, I recall looking around for sources that might fill in the unknowns on the list a while ago and didn't find anything useful.—TS
Very few of the ideas from the 1980 concept appear in the final film—the reference seems to suggest that key elements were retained, even if the basic plot itself is very different; consider rephrasing to reflect this
returned to the film and began working on the storyboards in April 1995 →returned to the film in April 1995 and began working on the storyboards in May or something similar, perMcCarthy
In May 1995 →In May—though I think this needs referencing specifically
Went with "that month", since May is now being mentioned in the sentence before it.Kanō, thankfully, came to the rescue with the production timeline.—TS
The island's isolation and relative lack of development—could you please highlight the specific passage in the reference/s to support this? Not doubting it, just spot-checking
Couldn't figure it out either, so I've rephrased and switched the source to McCarthy. I'm not sure what's going on with this sub-section, but I suspect the source-text integrity drifted a bit when I removed references toDani Cavallaro a little bit ago, and these slipped by me. This is why it helps to have someone who knows what he's doing assess my work! :)—TS
with the animation and the final boards →with the animation, and the final boards
Done. I believe both are grammatical, but it seems to read better with the comma. (Case in point...)—TS
the background illustrations and to animating background characters →the background illustrations and to background characters' animations orto illustrating backgrounds and animating background characters
the daytime shots would be handled by one director while another covered the nighttime →one handled the daytime shots while another covered the nighttime
with less than a month from the release date →less than a month from the release date orwith less than a month until the release date
Alternatively, consider flipping the sentence—The final shots were completed in June 1997, less than a month before the release date.
Done. I think I phrased it that way because I was afraid oftoo closely paraphrasing from the source, but in retrospect the copyright violation concern is really not that potent over just one sentence.—TS
and in a 1997 interview with members of the computer graphics team at Studio Ghibli, they felt →and by 1997, members of Studio Ghibli's computer graphics team felt
Partly done; "were" → "was", but leaving unhyphenated since "well known" is not acting as an adjective in this context.—TS
came as a surprise to audiences →came as a surprise to many or similar, as I'm not sure "audiences" is specifically supported by the reference
Done; removed the "to audiences" and attributed the statement to Denison to avoid saying somethingweaselly or otherwise suspect inWikipedia's voice.—TS
the opening sequence with the demon god →the demon god in the opening sequence
Three broad categories—the punctuation of this sentence doesn't make it entirely clear what these three categories are; consider using semicolons between them
the film does not present these positions as complete opposites, as many Western works that touch on these themes do →Unlike many Western works with similar themes, the film does not present these positions as complete opposites
Miyazaki's decisions to have female characters work on iron and people with leprosy manufacture weapons →Miyazaki's depictions of female characters working on iron and people with leprosy manufacturing weapons
I'm envious of how you've written this section—it reads so effortlessly
Thanks, it's very encouraging to hear that you think that! § Themes was definitely the most challenging one to structure and bring together, and it still somehow doesn't feel quite finished to me. Maybe one day I'll split this into its own article and use the room to wax eloquent to my heart's content. (Though you'd be forgiven for thinking that's already happened!)—TS
Question: By the way, do you have any suggestions for illustrations in this section? It would probably be best to break this section up a little, but all of the obvious choices to me (portraits of the scholars mentioned, or a picture of the sanatorium) don't seem to have any available free images.—TechnoSquirrel69(sigh)18:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I'd forgotten about the image of the sanatorium gate, which I'd passed over a while ago because it doesn't show very much. Lacking a better option, though, I've put it in. I'd still appreciate suggestions if you have any ideas.—TechnoSquirrel69(sigh)16:58, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'll have another look—will let you know if I come up with anything.☔
If you're still considering images of scholars, here are some photographs that might work. Still waiting onVRT for some, so we may lose one or two, but hopefully it's a good start.☔
Oh, excellent — thank you so much for working to get many of these images uploaded! I was referring more to the Japanese scholars who influenced Miyazaki, but there's also something very nice about giving a spotlight to the people whose work this article is built on. Added—TS
I looked into those scholars too, but their (freely licensed) photographs are even more difficult to track down... Glad I could help!☔
Eh, the perfect past reads better in my head as it correctly implies thatPorco Rosso was beforePrincess Mononoke, while the simple past does not. I do see that the duplicate word could be confusing for others, so I don't mind changing it if you think it would be prudent, but let's call itnot done for now.—TS
I think the simple past reads simpler, but either options works so I'm fine with it.☔
the scale of the marketing campaign →the marketing campaign's scale
The release date and recording year in the infobox need referencing (this should work for the former)
The release date is given and cited in the table, but I've removed the recording year, which seems to be a holdover from a previous version of the article that was a little lighter on references.—TS
many of Miyazaki's previous films—technically it's all but one, somost might be more appropriate
Done, though I wonder how much I'm riding the line oforiginal research with this phrase, since McCarthy technically only implies it.—TS
clockNapier 2018 p. 71 mentions their collaboration a little more explicitly, and I'm sure it wouldn't be too difficult to track down others that do the same.☔
Cool, I'll leave your suggested phrasing in then.—TS
You could add the Napier ref to be safe if you prefer, but I'll leave it to you.☔
The last sentence is fascinating but gives little—are there any other details about this?
Unfortunately not, as McCarthy does not elaborate, and I've come across no other scholarly sources that discuss the soundtrack in detail that aren't already here. As a musician, it's a bummer to be so brief in this section, but it is what it is. I'll probably go looking for more to add at some point, but Ireally needed to get this GAN review done before accidentally spending another year on this article, lol.—TS
clock Seems unfortunately common from that particular source.This oneseems to have a tidbit worth including, but sadly I think we're limited to what we've got.☔
I've actually read another chapter in that collection on Joe Hisaishi's work, but it unfortunately skips right over this film. Looking through the book again, though, I'm not sure what there is to include. The chapter you mentioned seems to have only this sentence – "Miyazaki'sMononoke-hime has been called ajidaigeki, however it is as much an eco-fantasy as a period work", complete with a citation to Napier – which is nothing that isn't covered in the article already.Ctrl+F-ing for the film's title also doesn't reveal much elsewhere.—TechnoSquirrel69(sigh)00:02, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is the bit I was referencing:
The soundtrack composed by Joe Hisaishi, the main collaborative composer with Hayao Miyazaki since the 1980s, is characteristically orchestral, lush with full strings and occasionally heavy brass motifs that signal the epic qualities of this narrative ... The main theme revels in sonic contrasts evocative of the character's jarring visual qualities: a pretty, young girl whose face is smeared with blood and war-paint. Beginning with a shimmering synth keyboard notes, the magic of the forest is abruptly interrupted with three harsh cluster chords that resolve into San's quasi-pentatonic, melodic motive.
The last sentence piqued my interest the most. It may not fit, but I figured it was worth mentioning anyway.☔
Ah, I see I should haveCtrl+F-ed forMononoke-hime and notPrincess Mononoke! I've put in a few details from around that paragraph.—TS
I'm not sure the second table entry requires italicisation, as it's the name of a single (perMOS:POPMUSIC)
I assume the first two paragraphs correspond to the Japanese and international response—I typically prefer to split by thematic element perWP:CRS but I think this approach is logical
I generally do as well, but in this case many of the sources talked about the receptions in each region quite separately, so I followed in their footsteps.—TS
I'm not too familiar with the reviews, but are there more responses to the film itself—the art style, animation, script, performances, music?
There almost certainly is; 1065 reviews, not counting the Japanese ones, really are something. This section is another candidate for splitting into its own article if anyone has the mind to look into it. Like I said earlier, though, I have to draw the line somewhere or you may never see my head poke out of this rabbit hole again. To be reasonably confident the section gives appropriateweight to all of its arguments, I limited the reviews I quoted to those that fit into the major themes identified by Kanō, Pett, and Yoshioka.—TS
clock Seems like a good call. Do you think there's enough information in these reviews to perhaps justify one more paragraph? Is there general consensus among reviewers about different elements of the films (acting, music, sound design, etc.—whether positive or negative) that might be worth summarising and including?☔
Thanks for the push on this; I've added a few more arguments that Pett quotes in her chapter. Neither Yoshioka nor Kanō appear to have anything else. Again, I'm hesistant to start compiling arguments from reviews myself due to the inevitable risk of placing improper weight on one theme or the other, which is why I'm leaning on the scholars so much. Relatedly, though, there's probably enough in Pett's chapter to flesh out an "Audience response" subsection, but that's a bit beyond the time and energy I have to put into writing at the moment — maybe a task for future me. Either way, I think the section meets the GA standard; it's notcomprehensive, but it isbroad.—TechnoSquirrel69(sigh)00:02, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your work on this. I agree it may be worth considering a little more expansion if you plan on going for FA, but the quality absolutely surpasses GA standards, so I'm happy.☔
Time Out should probably be italicised as it's being treated as an outlet in this instance (perMOS:WEBITALICS)
Huh, the footnote at that guideline seems to dislike my use of the|publisher= parameter to unitalicize names in citation templates. I've fixedTime Out for now, and I might get back to the rest of them (and all my other articles) when I have a little less on my plate. Thanks for calling it out!—TS
clockTime Out should also be italicised in the article's title, and you could also add the author/s (either all seven, or simplyDavid Jenkins, who wroteMononoke's blurb).☔
Time Out andTotal Film's rankings could probably be combined, especially as the film ranked the same on both lists (thoughTotal Film's was actually the top 75, not 50)
Here are two more lists to consider:Empire andPaste
Thanks, done. This paragraph is probably the one I've touched the least in my rewrite, so I appreciate the help with getting it into shape.—TS
Accolades
Princess Mononoke was submitted by Japan to be nominated for Best Foreign Language Film at the 70th Academy Awards but was ultimately unsuccessful. →Japan submitted Princess Mononoke for Best Foreign Language Film at the 70th Academy Awards but it was not nominated.
That it was unsuccessful needs a reference—here's one that would work
Consider clarifying that the Japan Record Awards for Best Album Production was also won by three others, and the Takasaki Film Festival award for Best Director by one other
He retired in 1998 →He resigned in 1998 or similar, as I don't believe it was intended as a full retirement
Done. Napier states "Miyazaki had actually quit on January 14, 1998" on the page cited, which I suppose could be taken either way, but I trust that you have a bit more insight on the man's life, having written his article.—TS
He briefly quit Studio Ghibli, but it's unclear if it was intended as a retirement from professional work or simply from the studio. (In any case, it's been 27 years and the man's still working, so I doubt his retirement would have lasted long regardless of Kondō's unfortunate death.)☔
A recent FAC resulted in reference titles being changed totitle case perMOS:TITLECAPS—not something I'm concerned about (or agree with) but something to keep in mind if you ever consider seeking the golden star
Ooh, thanks for the heads up. That isn't something I agree with either, but that's a bridge we can cross when we come to. (In this article's case, that bridge would be only one of many, many more hurdles on the journey to the bronze star...)—TS
When references lack an author, I generally prefer to alphabetise by the title perAPA, but I've not seen any guidelines so alphabetising by publisher seems logical
Anime News Network should probably be italicised perMOS:WEBITALICS
Total Film: addJosh Winning as an author andMay 13, 2014 as the publication date, remove|ref={{harvid|Total Film}}, change its{{sfn}} from{{sfn|''Total Film''}} →{{tl|sfn|Kinnear|Winning|2014}}, and alphabetise. The URL is also dead, and should probably be linked directly tohere
File:Mononoke hime cgi.png is a non-free film screenshot with an appropriate fair use rationale, and is used appropriately in the article to demonstrate the film's important use of computer graphics
What a fantastic article, as expected—possibly even even more enjoyable to read thanCastle in the Sky, which is saying something; you've outdone yourself. There's very little that requires major attention here—most comments are minor personal suggestions and, as always, are open to discussion and disagreement. I'll put this on hold for now, but there's very little work required before this article earns its well-deserved green plus. Great work!–Rhain☔(he/him)14:15, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for the excellent review, as always. Just noting that I'm most of the way through addressing the comments, but I need to wrap it up for the evening. Expect my responses in a few hours!—TechnoSquirrel69(sigh)07:02, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the update! Take all the time you need; as I mentioned, I may be delayed in responding anyway. Looking forward to seeing your work and comments!–Rhain☔(he/him)09:20, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your patience, and for your great work and responses! I've left a few replies above (clock). I agree—definitely close to the finish line.–Rhain☔(he/him)04:38, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your work and responses! I've lefttwomore comments above, but they're only for consideration and will absolutely not hold up the review any longer. I'm very happy with the work that you've done, and I hope you are too. Here's your reward:. Congratulations!–Rhain☔(he/him)02:00, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have been thinking: should we consider adding details about the casting for the article in the development section? I can also help with finding some of the Japanese sources for this section as well as different sections of the article as necessary.Lord Sjones23 (talk -contributions)10:27, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, that sounds great to me if you know of any sources that cover that aspect in more detail.Kanō 2006 has a few details here and there, but nothing I'd consider substantial enough for its own subsection yet.Carter 2018 also has discussion about the casting choices made for the English dub.—TechnoSquirrel69(sigh)16:07, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Some of those links are in Japanese (which I am proficient at, along with other users who can help such as Nihonjoe and Knowledgekid87). I'll try translating them when I have the time. Also, maybe we can useThe Art of Princess Mononoke to expand upon the other sections of this article.Lord Sjones23 (talk -contributions)11:47, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
These are all links to the home pages of the publications; do you have any specific articles in mind? On the art book, I've tried to be judicious about adding detail from it as it is aprimary source. I think it might be better to start looking at scholarly sources that cover these aspects to avoid the trap of inadvertently adding fancruft to this section. Outside of the sources already in the article, I can only think ofThe Anime Machine for another English-language source that may have more to say about the animation. There are also lots of Japanese books and magazine special issues listed atthis Nausicaa.net page which are sure to have much more.—TechnoSquirrel69(sigh)17:36, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the publication links, I added the home pages so that users can search for articles on Ghibli films (including this one) via said pages' search bars, whether it's in Japanese or English. Also, those publications have digital archives.Lord Sjones23 (talk -contributions)22:50, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below.Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such asthis nomination's talk page,the article's talk page orWikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page.No further edits should be made to this page.
Overall: Recently upgraded to GA status, no major problems with the article, and QPQ is met. I made a minor edit to the hook to separate "didn't" into "did not". However, I have this proposed hook that might be better. "... thatHayao Miyazaki is estimated to have drawn or retouched nearly 80,000 ofPrincess Mononoke's 144,000cels?"Jon698 (talk)14:24, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jon698: Thanks for the review and the adjustment! That hook is also fine with me, so let's call thatALT2 (sourced toDenison 2018, pp. 8–9), though my preference would still be toward ALTs 0 and 1. You've marked this as needing further work, are there any other comments you have for this nomination?—TechnoSquirrel69(sigh)17:12, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To address the changes to the lead's reception summary and the hidden comment's brief addition, unless we have a source or group of sources summarizing the critical reception for us (similar to what Rotten Tomatoes does for most feature films), then we cannot include a summary statement that we have created ourselves as perWP:SYNTH andWP:FILMLEAD. This is what led to themost recent discussion to get it inserted intoWP:MOSFILM back in 2023.
At the moment, the only source supporting a general summary of the critical response is Metacritic, which reads "generally favorable" (the site currently has 27 positive reviews and 2 average reviews).
Sjones23, there are multiple sourced statements in§ Critical response that support the claim in the lead.Kanō 2006 states "Critics across the United States unanimously praised the film." (p. 216) andPett 2018 states "... a number of highly positive evaluations of the film. [...] it was widely considered to be a critical success", which I've summarized in that section as "the film received widespread praise from critics in the United States." A few other sources say similar things. Kanō also states "The film was generally well-received in Japan" (p. 217), and there are other direct quotes from him in that section that go into more detail. I think that's more than enough sourcing to justify the phrasing used in the lead — "It received a broadly positive critical response in both Japan and the United States" — which I honestly felt I was underselling in the name ofneutrality when I wrote it.—TechnoSquirrel69(sigh)17:39, 22 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The question of including more reviews came upduring the GAN review, and I would stand by my argument, at least for the moment, that we should refrain from adding more reviews to preserve some semblance ofdue weight given to each aspect covered in the section. There are an enormous number of reviews that I wouldn't be able to sift through to find the most common comments, so I'm relying on scholars to provide guidance on which aspects are the most important. It's also important to remember that the readily available sources for this section will almost invariably be English-language reviews that have been archived online at some point, so the trap of Western or Anglophone bias is all too easy to fall into. There's an almost equally massive repository of reviews from Japanese critics that are a lot harder to include as they are offline, behind significant paywalls, or simply unusable without human translation.—TechnoSquirrel69(sigh)02:18, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Since some of us editors know quite a bit of Japanese like myself (I studied the language for at least one year),User:Nihonjoe andUser:Knowledgekid87, I could personally try looking into those. I've also asked on WikiProjects (includingWP:JAPAN) for additional input on this.
not done.—TS
Done. I think I phrased it that way because I was afraid oftoo closely paraphrasing from the source, but in retrospect the copyright violation concern is really not that potent over just one sentence.—TS
Question: By the way, do you have any suggestions for illustrations in this section? It would probably be best to break this section up a little, but all of the obvious choices to me (portraits of the scholars mentioned, or a picture of the sanatorium) don't seem to have any available free images.—TechnoSquirrel69(sigh)18:59, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Added—TS.jpg)
_(further_cropped).jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
clockNapier 2018 p. 71 mentions their collaboration a little more explicitly, and I'm sure it wouldn't be too difficult to track down others that do the same.☔
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
. Congratulations!–Rhain☔(he/him)02:00, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Recently upgraded to GA status, no major problems with the article, and QPQ is met. I made a minor edit to the hook to separate "didn't" into "did not". However, I have this proposed hook that might be better. "... thatHayao Miyazaki is estimated to have drawn or retouched nearly 80,000 ofPrincess Mononoke's 144,000cels?"Jon698 (talk)14:24, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg){kind=link}
