Talk:List of GetBackers characters

Regarding the merge, that I haven't gotten to yet...

I'd like to aplogize that I haven't worked on this page for several months. I really should have addressed this sooner. There seems to be some opposition Slidell-tigers (talk · contribs) about this merge, we recently started a conversation on my talkpage and I'm going to copy the contents here so this can be a public discussion:

You commented on the pages needing to be merged.If the pages were merged then the artical would be too long.

Then people won't beable to find what they're looking for because you have to take out some information.

Then there won't be any point in having information on any of the characters.Slidell-tigers (talk)

Actually, most the content of those individual character pages is plot sumary. Per WP:PLOT a short plot summary is appropriate, however all wikipedia subjects must be covered from a real world perspective, the articles cannot be dominated by in-universe detail. Also they do not satisfy Wikipedia's notability requirements that require independent pages to have a demonstration of the topic's notability through significant coverage in reliable independent sources. Because of this, policy requires these non-notable topics be merged to a larger more notable topic. So for both these reasons the content cannot stay as it is. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 03:59, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I would just like to reiterate that Wikipedia is not a place for plot summaries. This is a widespread problem, many of our anime articles have accumulated extensive plot descriptions on character articles. These articles should have never been branched out to begin with, because they fail WP:N, the guiding principle which decides whether or not a topic can sustain its own article. As I said before, order to have a character article, the character must have received significant coverage in reliable independent sources, this must be demonstrated by verifiable references. The reason most these anime articles have individual characters placed on a character list, is because it is the general consensus that a list of characters is a valid subtopic of a main article about a series; thus satisfying WP:N because it is part of the larger topic.

So because these individual characters don't meet Wikipedia guidelines for having individual pages, I'm going to merge them. This is not a matter of ease of use (if the merge is performed correctly, this page should be just as easy to use), this is a matter of following policy. If you would like to contest the merge, I would need to see evidence that the character meets the requirements of WP:N. That's all. --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 06:00, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Merge complete, some 10 months after it was proposed. These character articles were mostly Plot Summary, so nothing major should be missing. However, if you want to check my work, go ahead and look at the redirect's page history. Feel free to ask me if you have any questions! --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 11:24, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Picture

I'm looking for a good group screenshot or promo picture that would show as many characters as possible, to go on the top of the article. Anyone have any suggestions? --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 09:16, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Toshiki Uryuu, Teshimine.

Can't find them on the list. One is Kadzuki's 2ed bodyguard as of volume 18 & the other was Gingi's serrogate father or something.

Also, the spelling for Kadzuki's name uses the Du/Dzu rather than the Zu, so Kazuki is incorrect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.118.100 (talk) 12:13, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

LLM-generated content

Per Special:Diff/1316405356, this article currently contains LLM-generated updates that introduced many instances of LLM-style editorialization/"puffery". Examples

• Ban Midou A strategic thinker, he balances ruthless efficiency with loyalty to allies.
• Hevn: As a central figure in the retrieval community, Hevn balances professional connections with personal bonds, serving as both a coordinator and emotional support for fellow specialists.
• Natsumi Mizuki: The anime highlights her cheerful personality and occasional comedic traits, such as her makeshift detective outfit, while also showcasing her emotional maturity during tense situations.
• Maria Noches: A skilled flamenco dancer, she shares hinted romantic chemistry with Lucifer before his death.
• Haruki Emishi: This compassionate act contrasted sharply with Shido's fearsome reputation as the Beastmaster.
• Sakura Kakei: Sakura's steadfast dedication persists throughout their shared endeavors in the fortress. (I admit this one made me laugh)
• Ren Radou: Throughout her journey, Ren struggles with questions of identity and purpose tied to her artificial nature.
• Brain Trust: Kagami's research enabled this parallel existence, fundamentally recontextualizing the nature of known events in the series.
• Lucifer: Lucifer's tragic motivation and wasted potential underscore his complex nature as a fallen disciple rather than a purely villainous figure.
• Gabriel: His character arc highlights the vulnerable youth Lucifer preys upon and the redemptive power of compassion.
• Three Knights/Drei Ritter: This encounter demonstrates the guards' formidable combat abilities while highlighting Paul's strategic growth beyond mere physical prowess.
• Kyoji Kagami: A master strategist with polite but ruthless demeanor, he wields mirror-based illusions and diamond-sharp fragments that inflict internal damage.
• Masaki Kuruso: He is a powerful light-based fighter with concealed motives.
• Cursed Knights: Their palpable fear of the Voodoo King suggests lingering uncertainty about their current allegiances.

NicheSports (talk) 14:45, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

I initially was only going to document this and leave the tag but after seeing the extent of the issues I reverted the update. Please discuss on the talk page before adding it back? NicheSports (talk) 14:46, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

@NicheSports Okay. I'll do a complete revision, but is it really necessary to revert ALL my edits? Including the image and citations I included in the article? In addition, several of the sentences you included here had already been removed/modified before you added the template and reverted all my edits. Like the "A strategic thinker, he balances ruthless efficiency with loyalty to allies." I overlooked several of these instances, and I regret that. Xexerss (talk) 20:47, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

I mean almost everything was rolled up in one massive diff, so there was no way to split it up NicheSports (talk) 21:06, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

@NicheSports I made some corrections in my sandbox: User:Xexerss/sandbox Could you please check the content? Please let me know if there are any other instances where the wording needs to be corrected. Feel free to edit there as well, if you wish. Xexerss (talk) 21:55, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

I deleted/corrected these instances you listed here and others in my sandbox. I would like to apply the changes, but I would prefer to get your feedback first rather than boldly adding them back. Xexerss (talk) 01:12, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

hi @Xexerss, thank you for taking our feedback into account. I feel bad but my honest opinion on this is that I still prefer the version prior to the LLM-involved changes. Even after the items above have been addressed, there are still many instances of awkward phrasing like: "allowing feats like crushing steel or collapsing buildings, later transcending his capabilities", "His existence remains unrecorded in Babylon City's archives, disrupting their prophecies.", "she handles sensitive cases with strict confidentiality while demonstrating technical expertise from her previous scientific background", "His stigma-sealed memories of Babylon City become central in later events", "The anime adaptation depicts him confessing his failure to break the curse, with Ban inheriting his lighter and adopting smoking afterward"... and many more. I think the awkwardness here results from the LLM trying to synthesize/consolidate the original very detailed text - while doing so it keeps combining mostly unrelated clauses/concepts into a single sentence.

I just don't think using LLMs leads to good results here even after removing the outright puffery (thank you for that). I spend most of my time doing LLM patrol and cleanup and I've only seen one case where an editor is using these tools in a successful way. And that is a very particular case (focused on lichenology, where the LLM is summarizing tangible facts about lichen species without having to interpret subjective matters). NicheSports (talk) 02:09, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm only one editor so I can't impose anything, this is just one perspective. And of course I support your other changes - adding pictures, citations, etc. NicheSports (talk) 02:10, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

@NicheSports: Do you think it would be possible to apply the changes and request copyedits at WP:GOCER? I can't request them to check my sandbox for that. I understand your opposition to the use of LLM and its issues with wording, but I find it hard to believe that this is worse than the current version of the article. It was written by one or more people, but it's poorly done and ignores many of the site's guidelines. Xexerss (talk) 02:19, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

I think it would be better to request copyedits based on the pre-LLM version. Totally hear you about it being too detailed and violating guidelines. But I still think it is better, with greater information value, than the LLM version. Maybe go to WP:GOCER and ask them which version they'd prefer to work off of? Could be an interesting data point. NicheSports (talk) 02:29, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

I submitted a request. I will be more cautious about using LLM in the future, but I think it's a shame that most of my edits have to be reverted and leave the article in this deplorable state. I would call them "superfluous details" rather than descriptions with "greater information value", more appropriate for sites such as Fandom than Wikipedia, but nevermind, I'll just wait and see if anyone else decides to edit the article. Xexerss (talk) 03:27, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Removed unsourced material

Hey all, there was large unsourced information, with tags that were placed in 2009 (roughly 14 years ago). I removed it. If you wish to add it back, please only do so if you have reliable sources with you. You can view the pre removal version here: List of GetBackers characters: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia. Wikieditor662 (talk) 04:39, 23 November 2025 (UTC)