Talk:Journal with Witch

Plot?

shouldn't there be a summary/synopsis of the plot somewhere? 47.185.253.174 (talk) 02:02, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

LGBTQ

In the manga, Emiri is clearly portrayed as a lesbian with a same-sex lover, so I've categorized her accordingly. However, I don't know if the anime will have time to reach that point. Anime social media pages even expand on this further, but of course I won't be venturing into the territory of original research. Solaire the knight (talk) 18:19, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Before adding categories, at least the characters should be described well so that it can be understood why the article was added to that category in the first place. Perhaps those who are very familiar with the work can understand it at first glance, but it should not be assumed that all Wikipedia readers are familiar with it and will immediately know why it was included there. Xexerss (talk) 19:11, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Even if it's an important character trait and one of the main themes of her character arc? It's not something interpretative or complex; at one point in the story, the plot openly introduces her same-sex partner, and the Japanese wiki entry has three or four LGBT categories, despite it only being mentioned once as "she has a same-sex lover." Or are you suggesting that I formally mention that she is a lesbian just to put a category on it? In any case, as far as I remember, the community warns against correcting information due to the subjective "perception of readers." Solaire the knight (talk) 19:53, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I was referring mainly to the latter. Just make sure there is something in the article that justifies its inclusion in the category. Xexerss (talk) 11:20, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

I haven't seen any of the anime yet, but in the manga Emiri is a lesbian, but I don't think I would call her an "open lesbian". By the end of the manga she is out to Asa and probably Makio, but no one else, I believe.Brianyoumans (talk) 21:53, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Are there any scenes that directly suggest that she's hiding this from the other characters? Solaire the knight (talk) 23:08, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

In Chapter 36, Emiri says to her girlfriend "I haven't told my parents, or friends... or even my best friend about this." In Chapter 37, when Emiri actually tells Asa, Asa asks her if anyone else knows and she replies that she talked to Makio first, implying that only Makio knew before Asa. It's clear from their discussion in Chapter 37 that Asa and their friends at school previously had no idea Emiri was gay.Brianyoumans (talk) 02:00, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm not sure why this manga was posted on Dynasty Scans, considering it's not an LGBT work as a whole, but fine, you can change it to something like "she's in a same-sex relationship with such-and-such character, but only Asa and Makio know about it." Just remove the link; Wikipedia doesn't allow links to pirated content. I'll confirm you provided the source. Solaire the knight (talk) 02:13, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

I made a stab at that. Mostly I just objected to the "open" part, as the manga makes a big deal about how uncomfortable Emiri felt with disclosing her lesbianism.Brianyoumans (talk) 02:38, 1 February 2026 (UTC)

Themes section

@Solaire the knight Hi, I wanted to start a discussion about this section, since you added a cleanup tag. As far as I understand things, WP:UNDUE says that articles "should not give minority views or aspects as much of or as detailed a description as more widely held views or widely supported aspects". I'm not sure how the section counts as that at present, since it's not presenting fringe opinions, nor is there a majority opinion to be fairly accounted for. Although the reviews are based on early episodes, that doesn't inherently make their observations less valid. Multiple reviewers are discussing how the story conveys certain themes, and regardless of how the story progresses later on, they're qualified to give an opinion on especially thematic or important aspects of it.

If it's needed, I can go through Japanese-language sources and add some additional reviews talking about the same thing. Anyway, thanks for your contributions to the article, I'm open to any work needed to improve it. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 05:43, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

I've already explained my actions on your discussion page. The problem is that you've essentially created a big analytical section based on just a couple of reviews of the first episode and its preview on ANN. While from the outside, it looks like a meaningful analysis of the entire show. This means you'll either have to significantly rewrite this section after each new episode, or it'll be like many other seasonal anime articles where sections will remain for months with just reviews/previews of the first episode after the show ends. I don't think you're going to insist that the show won't evolve and will remain in the status quo, which is why we can build an entire section just on early reviews of the first episode alone. I also doubt Japanese sources will be helpful, as they'll be reviewing the first episode just as well. Unless you're planning on reviewing the manga itself. Solaire the knight (talk) 05:51, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

I plan to add several Japanese-language reviews about the manga (there around 5 reviews so far, and I would not be surprised if it's more than that, considering the manga's cultural impact), so hopefully that would improve coverage. I think that as long as the content is encyclopedic and accurate, and I make sure to update it throughout the season (which I plan on doing), there shouldn't be any reason it doesn't meet Wikipedia quality standards. As briefly covered below, there are certain reasons why thematic analysis of a show's premise and initial approach to storytelling make sense.

With that being said, I definitely understand your concerns, and appreciate your prompt review of the article. If another editor comes in and agrees that the section is too soon to be added at present, then I'm open to moving it to my sandbox and then redoing it after the season ends. I'll refrain from pinging anyone, but an opinion from anyone watching this page would be appreciated. Best, Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 05:57, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Just because you're writing from authoritative sources doesn't mean your text complies with all the rules. As I wrote above, the issue isn't that you're writing unauthoritative information, but that you're rushing through large sections before the sources even have enough material to describe them. I could understand if it was an older niche show and you had to intentionally expand on the limited information available, but this is a actual seasonal show. These are just reviews of the first episode of a show that's at least 12 episodes long. Writing such a large section based on that is clearly premature and limited. Just imagine trying to write a similar section about Toradora or Madoka based solely on reviews of the first episode. It would be predictably limited and would ignore much of the story and character development. Not to mention the twists. You'd obviously have to rewrite it multiple times. That's why we usually dedicate a separate section to initial reviews and previews. Solaire the knight (talk) 05:58, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

@Solaire the knight Apologies for the ping (as well as taking so long), but I just wanted to note that I updated the Themes section with five Japanese-language reviews (all of which cover a substantial portion of the story). For now, I moved the majority of the English-language reviews to my draftspace, apart from a few which either address the premise of the story or the storytelling style of the anime itself.

I left the cleanup tag on the article for now, since I prefer to not remove tags without first making sure that any concerns have been addressed. I'd appreciate if you could take a look. Best, Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 03:23, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

Yes, thank you, I looked at the section. You didn't remove the template, so I removed it myself, since you fulfilled your promise. Thank you for your sincerity and collaboration. Solaire the knight (talk) 03:54, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

(in reply to a comment at a different page)

Regarding WP:UNDUE, I'd definitely appreciate clarification there, since it's possible I might not be understanding the policy correctly. As for the rest, I believe the coverage is appropriate in proportion to how the sources are talking about it. There are several aspects of the story, such as Japan's foster care system, Asa's initial reaction to grief, and the show's general approach to storytelling which are largely reliant on the early scenes. I don't see a particular need to wait for the show to be finished to put in sources that focus largely on the themes of the show's beginning, or its defining moments. I am sure, of course, that it will be expanded as the season moves forward, but I don't think it needs to be rewritten each time. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 05:52, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

All you have to do is take your time and just wait until the reviewers have a full understanding of at least most of the show and how it's unfolding. Also, please try to reply to comments where they were left. This spreads the discussion across different pages and makes it difficult to follow. Solaire the knight (talk) 06:00, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

I think the analysis isn't reliant on aspects that would retroactively be interpreted differently, but at the same time, I recognize I'm a bit biased since I wrote that section, and I also don't want to dismiss your concerns out of hand by repeating what I already said. @Xexerss, apologies for the ping, but I noticed you had edited this article earlier, do you have any opinions on this? Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 06:12, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

I don't know if there is an established criteria regarding the number of episodes a series must have before dedicating a section to themes and analysis. I don't know if there's a single way to approach it either. I just remember doing this kind of section in the Berserk (manga) article. Perhaps it would be good to have several sources discussing a particular aspect in order to gain a more generalized view of that aspect, rather than detailing the particular view of a certain critic. I don't know if I'm explaining myself clearly, but this is just my opinion. Xexerss (talk) 13:41, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

There are no "official" criteria, and as I've already said, I won't have any issues if a user adds sources with a general analysis of the original manga. The problem is, writing a large analytical section about anime based solely on reviews and previews of the first episode—two or three at that—is clearly hasty, in my opinion. This is a serious work with interesting themes and deep development, so as I showed with Toradora and Madoka, this approach clearly seems limited. Solaire the knight (talk) 14:16, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Xexerss, I appreciate the input, that definitely makes sense. Anyway, I'm going through Japanese-language sources right now and there should be more than enough for thematic analysis, so hopefully it'll be a moot point in a few days once I finish translating, checking, and writing. Thanks Solaire for checking in and convincing me to do that. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 03:38, 22 January 2026 (UTC)