Talk:Umamusume: Pretty Derby

0 views

Air dates are off?

[edit]

The episodes are airing every Monday midnight in Japan, that means Monday 10 am in Washington, Jan 4, Jan 11 etc.

I am not sure whether Wiki uses the Japanese time, and midnight counts as next day. 157.181.151.144 (talk) 22:00, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The current air dates presented on the page are correct for both seasons, episodes of season 1 started airing every sunday at 3:00 p.m. UTC, which is every monday at 12:00 a.m. JST as can be seen on the official website of the anime. Episodes of season 2 are currently airing every monday at 3:00 p.m. UTC, which is every tuesday at 12:00 a.m. JST as can also be seen on the official website of the anime. At 11:59 p.m. or 23h59, it is still monday but at 12:00 a.m., 00h00 or 24h00 it is now tuesday and Wikipedia uses the local time zones of where the products/events are selling/occuring, so JST in that case. 2A04:CEC0:118F:CE50:C79C:F952:E2B6:B388 (talk) 22:58, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Shouldn't it be "Umamusume" without the space?

[edit]

According to Cygames, that's how they are marketing the game/anime. Kinda important because it affects google search results 68.197.55.127 (talk) 19:57, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It should. But all Western databases list it as separate, from ANN to MAL. Scineram (talk) 09:33, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply] I think it's better we should follow Cygames' nomenclature as that is what the copyright holder is calling it, and WP:BLAR the current article in favor of Umamusume Pretty Derby, in spite of what MAL and ANN lists it as. --Jnglmpera (talk) 06:38, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply] Although MAL and ANN list it as Uma Musume, and it's more widely known as such, I believe it would be best to follow the official nomenclature. Crunchyroll, the distributor for it on the west, also lists it as Umamusume, and further reinforced by the release of the party game. 84.203.132.192 (talk) 08:50, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Timelines

[edit]

Should we somehow indicate that lore and the history of the franchise were formally restarted after the release of the PAWORKS anime? I don't know if it was described in any sources, but the current plot directly contradicts the plot and style of the first trailers and manga (especially in terms of the amount of fanservice). Solaire the knight (talk) 06:14, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The order of the characters

[edit]

As a suggestion, I believe the characters should be listed in the order in the portal website, which is consistent and objective. The current order focus too much on the anime (and some manga), and is not general enough, especially lacking of the information of the video game. Uma Musume after all is a multimedia franchise. I will re-arrange the characters if no one disagrees. Thanks. NinetyNineDragon (talk) 17:01, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think simply listing them by alphabetic order is better. Officially there isn't any rhyme or rhythm as to what order the characters are listed on the official website (supposedly it's in the order of the character ID number but there isn't anything confirming that). --Jnglmpera (talk) 06:38, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply] I think listing them by alphabetic order does not make sense. First, intuitively Special Week should come first in the list, instead of Admire Vega. Second, I do not know any other examples of putting characters in alphabetic order. Third, the order in the portal website IS official, regardless of what it represents. NinetyNineDragon (talk) 16:55, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply] @Jnglmpera: Two weeks have passed, and I wonder whether you still oppose listing the characters by the order in the portal website. Rearranging the order is not minor edit and I would like to reach a consensus before doing that. Thank you. NinetyNineDragon (talk) 16:47, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply] @NinetyNineDragon: I think the best option is to follow how ja:ウマ娘_プリティーダービー#ウマ娘 lists the characters, which is more or less in line with your suggestion... To quote the section's header: "記載順序はゲーム内のデフォルト設定に基づく（公式サイトのCHARACTERでも確認できる）。" which translates to "the order of listing is based on the in-game default settings (which can be checked on the official website's character page)," --Jnglmpera (talk) 05:38, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply] Although it is so much closer to my suggestion, I think if we follow "記載順序はゲーム内のデフォルト設定に基づく", it will focus too much on the game, which contradicts with one of the reasons why I suggest the change (the current order focus too much on the anime). Additionally, in the section's header, it is also mentioned "公式サイトのCHARACTERでも確認できる", which is equivalent to my suggestion: the characters listed in the order shown in the portal website. NinetyNineDragon (talk) 15:49, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply] @Jnglmpera: Another two weeks have passed, and may I have your comments? Thank you. NinetyNineDragon (talk) 15:18, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply] Speaking from experience, the　Japanese fanbase seems to more or less follow the order that I said before (which is why the JP wiki has the characters listed in that order), since that's how the characters are listed on the website, and apparently the characters are sorted that way in the game (which most of the fanbase plays). Unfortunately that's all that I can say. --Jnglmpera (talk) 13:27, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Character list may not be necessary

[edit]

Even in the Japanese version, there is an argument that a list of characters is unnecessary for reasons such as the amount of text, difficulty in reading, and suitability as a dictionary.ジョンドウ (talk) 15:47, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it is not an issue as there are plenty of lists of anime and manga characters in Wikipedia. NinetyNineDragon (talk) 15:19, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply] I don't believe so. When people look up fictional works on Wikipedia (or any other sites such as TVTropes or any Fandom page) they also look up what kind of characters appear in said work, so if anything a character listing should be a prerequisite. --Jnglmpera (talk) 05:38, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spoilers for Season 2 incomplete

[edit]

The description for Season 2 only ends in Episode 3, other episodes are left uncomplete + season 3 and road to the top has no description whatsoever. Mfc6166 (talk) 15:33, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 21 July 2024

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. I've also created a redirect per Jnglmpera suggestion. (non-admin closure) Waqar💬 14:41, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uma Musume Pretty Derby → Umamusume Pretty DerbyUmamusume Pretty Derby – The official title of the project by Cygames (the owners of the IP) has been Umamusume: Pretty Derby since at least 2021 when the mobile game released, see this press note, and has been more obvious with the releases on the west, including (attaching official websites) Umamusume Party Dash and the mobile game. This could be disputed due to western anime databases (mainly ANN and MAL) listing it as Uma Musume, but it should follow the official one (Crunchyroll, the distributor for the anime, also calls it this way) Kanade2611 (talk) 18:05, 20 July 2024 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). Kanade2611 (talk) 21:30, 21 July 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 15:30, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per WP:OFFICIALNAME. Uma Musume appears to be the WP:COMMONTITLE per Trends [1] AVNOJ1989 (talk) 20:28, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] Rename or create at the very least create a redirect. Per my comment and related discussion at Talk:Uma_Musume_Pretty_Derby#Shouldn't_it_be_"Umamusume"_without_the_space?. --Jnglmpera (talk) 14:49, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] Note: WikiProject Anime and manga, WikiProject Video games, and WikiProject Horse racing have been notified of this discussion. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 15:31, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] Oppose. Wikipedia titles do not correspond to the official name, but the common name in English sources, which in this case is definitely "Uma Musume". — Goszei (talk) 06:24, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Criticism and lawsuit

[edit]

Konami filed lawsuit against Cygames due to patent infringement. According to Konami representants, Cygames used patented mechanics in Uma Musume and seeks for 4 billion yen in damages, see here. Also, there is criticism about the come. A South Korean politican criticized the game for "sexual objectification of minors" (see) and there some feminist critics saying the game would degrade women as animals. There should be a section about criticism in this article. --Goroth (talk) 04:16, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While I'm not opposed to expanding the reception section, I'm not sure of this suggestion. For one, I am completely against creating a dedicated section for criticism/controversies per WP:CONTROVERSYSECTION. Regarding the lawsuit, that may be worth mentioning, though an update would be nice since that article is a year and a half old now. Finally, politician's comments/actions are usually not mentioned in articles unless it actually lead to a ban or censorship somehow; for instance, Kaguya-sama: Love Is War doesn't mention how it was parodied by Brazilian politician Kim Kataguiri and Attack on Titan doesn't mention the video posted by American politician Paul Gosar, among other examples. Link20XX (talk) 06:19, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is "The best of these horse girls" meant to be singular or plural?

[edit]

Right now, the article reads "The best of these horse girls goes to train at Tokyo's Tracen Academy". Since "goes" is the singular form, it reads as if this is referring to a single horse girl. Should it instead use the plural form "go", as in "The best of these horse girls go to train at Tokyo's Tracen Academy"? Seitz (talk) 20:48, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anime physical media record

[edit]

With all due respect, the Uma Musume anime's physical sales record is infamous in the anime fandom due to Cygames artificially inflating sales of the discs by including unique codes for the game in the release. I'm not sure if I can easily find this information, but it was a hot topic at the time, as Uma Musume wasn't the only IP doing this. Solaire the knight (talk) 00:09, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While it is true that Uma Musume included codes, it is disingenuous to imply that this discredits the sales record. As you noted, other anime have included codes but none of them reached anywhere close to the sales numbers that Uma Musume did. 128.92.52.242 (talk) 17:34, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply] I'm not saying this discredits sales in general (although this does raise a lot of questions about the record). I say this because it's often ignored when discussing the unusually high sales of adaptations of popular media franchises, even though it was very well known and widely discussed at the time. In the case of Uma Musume, the popularity of the franchise itself and a really good adaptation also played a big role, so the unique codes are especially burst things. Solaire the knight (talk) 07:29, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification: Mention worldwide release year in lead section?

[edit]

I was looking around to find out why the game only just now grew in popularity and it turns out it wasn't released worldwide until June 2025? The lead section currently only mentions the game being delayed to 2021, which is misleading because a reader would assume that meant it released worldwide in 2021 (when in fact the 2021 release was only in Japan).

Would it be worth mentioning the fact that the worldwide release wasn't until 2025? 2A02:C7C:6D8A:6800:89BC:E96B:F7C0:3409 (talk) 16:40, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. I'm surprised it's not there already. Marcus Markup (talk) 17:22, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply] I just added mention of the world-wide release to the first para of the lead. Marcus Markup (talk) 17:34, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KenL2001 repeatedly adding false information regarding composers for spin-offs

[edit]

Despite repeatedly correcting it, this guy keeps adding erroneous credits. If you're reading this, KenL2001, please stop. Kris1616 (talk) 22:31, 24 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 6 August 2025

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. WP:SNOW move, doesn't seem like it's contentious. That said, please message me if you oppose the move. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jeffrey34555 (talk) 22:43, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Uma Musume Pretty Derby → Umamusume: Pretty Derby – Official English name was revealed Ahri Boy (talk) 00:36, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. RPC7778 (talk) 13:55, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See https://www.pcgamer.com/games/sim/umamusume-f2p-tips/ Ahri Boy (talk) 00:36, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support per WP:NCVG section Games, item 2. Umamusume: Pretty Derby is the official English formatting after Cygames released the Global version, and subsequent entries in the franchise since the Global release have followed suit.

There's just one question though: what about the entries released before the Global launch? Do those entries' titles follow the formatting of the Global release retroactively when the entries didn't have an official English title? I propose the following for all English titles based on a discussion over at My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic:

'Uma Musume' -> 'Umamusume'

Use a colon as needed, eg 'Umamusume: Cinderella Gray'. Romaji should use the separated version with no colon. Lzer (talk) 06:16, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support: There's a successful global launch of Umamusume as a new franchise title from Cygames! This is the BEST Japanese franchise ever!

Support. KuyaMoHirowo • he/him (DM me on Discord at kuyamohirowo (DMs are open!)) :3 00:58, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposal to split the article

[edit]

I understand that this is a very successful and popular franchise, whose fans constantly hype it up. But maybe we could separate the sections dedicated to cultural influence, popularity, and ratings into separate pages? Because at the moment these sections are expanding very quickly without any control, risking to cross the line between neutral description and outright conflict of interest, to say the least. Not to mention that critics' and viewers' reactions to anime should be in the criticism/reception section, not the "cultural impact" section, otherwise that section will just duplicate the ones mentioned. So, following how we separated the Oshi no Ko awards and nominations into a separate article, why not follow the same logic as well? We already separated the character article into a separate article due to its excessiveness. Solaire the knight (talk) 18:31, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's borderline. I'm not sure what went on with Oshi no Ko so I can't use it as a reference, but starting a new article dedicated to "cultural influence, popularity, and ratings" would not completely eliminate the need for such coverage in this, the main article... we should still maintain enough context regarding those issues so as to not require someone to go to sub-articles just for basic, high-level information. For details, though, certainly, but high-level overviews would need to remain, which might not lead to the savings in space you anticipate. . Marcus Markup (talk) 18:43, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply] I do feel there is a bit of over-sensationalism in the article at this point, not to mention the sources, but I'm not suggesting deleting or rewriting anything. Just creating separate articles, leaving only the general and most important information in the original sections. After all, this has already been done in a number of other articles about very large and popular media franchises. As for Oshi no Ko, its still in plans, but it seems supported by this discussion. Solaire the knight (talk) 18:57, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply] I concur. Eye-balling the article, my reaction includes lack of content pertaining to the game itself. While Wikipedia is certainly not a guide, information specifically pertaining to the game can be collected into its own article. KyuuA4 (Talk:キュウ) 09:58, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply] It appears that the situation has not changed since this thread was created and the article continues to be written as a press release. Solaire the knight (talk) 14:16, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply] I do believe there should be more focus on the game as it stands, and there have been some efforts to expand the gameplay section. I was initially hoping the situation with this page can be somewhat resolved in a manner similar to how Blue Archive was laid out, but the information added for the other media besides the game is getting very staggering. With regards to discussions about the anime, would it be possible to convert the episodes page as a TV series page for a start? JT0219 (talk) 14:36, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply] If there are enough sources for a separate general article about the series, as in the case of Bandori titles, then why not? My main complaint is that in its current form, we don't have so much an encyclopedic article about the franchise, but rather an endlessly expandable set of facts about it in all its manifestations. I mean, we can already separate out a section on popularity and cultural influence into a separate article, since in its current form it takes up too much space and over time turns more and more into a press release for a new audience. Especially after such edits. Solaire the knight (talk) 14:54, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply] Ah, that would make more sense on that part, and it can be possible to be done if KenL2001, who is the user chiefly handling the reception section, is open to that change. Have there been any past precedents for similar articles? JT0219 (talk) 14:59, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply] I've created a draft article dedicated to the reception section in the meantime, will further edit it to be more neutral later. Hopefully, users handling that section, especially KenL2001, can see this and be able to accordingly follow. JT0219 (talk) 07:05, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply] I apologize for the lack of response; I've had some personal issues. Well, at first glance, it looks good. I'll drop my complaints about the article if it's properly organized and the new articles don't become as much of a data dump as the character descriptions are right now. Solaire the knight (talk) 07:43, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply] It's hard for me to really ascertain which information is worth discussing and which is, well, best left for personal trivia notes, as I more specialize in episode plotlines, which is why I do hope the users handling that can fix it up. JT0219 (talk) 07:52, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply] In my opinion, the most obvious idea is to take the synopses from reviews of already released seasons or their official synopses/characters bios. For example, the first season already describes Special Week's motivation for becoming a runner in the synopsis. Solaire the knight (talk) 08:34, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply] The draft looks like a nice improvement to me, you've got rid of some of the fluff that was mostly trivia. One thought I had would be that it'd be nice to see a "Reactions from the Horse Racing Community" section considering the main point of the series, but that's a topic for another day perhaps. I'd be happy to see this move take place. Related to your points about whether this page is still WP:FAN or not, I think the main areas of concern I have would be the "Plot" and "Anime Adaption" sections - the Plot section either focuses on info I'd say veers between being a bit trivial or lacking for a fresher reader (and, if I had to guess, very LLM written? It's a very stilted read and those bullet point formatting is suspect), whilst the Anime Adaption section reads like a press release for the songs' singers. Admittedly, I was surprised just now to see the "List of Uma characters" page surviving a deletion nomination, so I may not be the best judge here. RandomEditsForWhenIRemember (talk) 18:37, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply] Oh I initially did the bulleted list since I thought it would be alright placing the general plotline of each season of the main series under one, but I am open to alternatives. JT0219 (talk) 21:07, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply] @JT0219 Ah my bad - I've had to deal with a few LLM cases recently so I probably shouldn't have jumped the gun when I saw bullet points (it'd stood out since it was the only part of the article with them), so apologies for that. I think in my eyes, it'd be nice to see each of the other sections in the plot part around the same length as each bullet point you did. At the moment some of them are barely a sentence long and so it looks a bit odd to give them subheaders. If there was a bit more context for each part it'd help give more context to people unfamiliar with the series and are looking to learn more (or even look at the horses that inspired the stories' events). I'm not entirely familiar with all the series' media but I'm sure a bit more context could be given for Star Blossom and the Stage Play. RandomEditsForWhenIRemember (talk) 21:23, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply] I would like to apologize that I did not update in time, but the draft page was declined. However, the user overseeing my request did compromise in saying that the better option would be to edit the section and focus more on making the whole thing feel more encyclopedic and less like a fan blog. I think we can use my draft page as a guide to better improve the subsection, while also requesting @KenL2001 and other users to refine it more. JT0219 (talk) 14:54, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply] If this can be accomplished without splitting the article, I'm fine with it. However, the boundaries between the fan blog and the encyclopedic material need to be defined from the outset to avoid future disputes or edit wars. Solaire the knight (talk) 16:00, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply] Changes are looking quite good so far @JT0219, nice job. RandomEditsForWhenIRemember (talk) 18:59, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply] Split. It talks about so many things all at once and very little about the game. Flushedwtf (talk) 01:47, 18 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] Split: between "Umamusume: Pretty Derby (game)" and "Umamusume: Pretty Derby (anime)" (KyuuA4 idea), because does talk mostly about the anime and not the game. Farcazo (talk) 20:00, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] I've already split all of the relevant anime information into its own standalone page. Hopefully both articles can look cleaner and polished following this. JT0219 (talk) 07:45, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Change of header image

[edit]

I changed the header image to a banner image from the game's Steam page to better represent the game aspect and moved the original anime image to the episodes list, although I need feedback regarding this and if there can be a better alternative for the header image. JT0219 (talk) 14:14, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

split the anime and Cinderella Gray into a separate page....

[edit]

Given how massive this franchise is, is it possible if we could split the anime and Cinderella gray into separate pages so that we can get counterparts to the ウマ娘 プリティーダービー (テレビアニメ) and ウマ娘 シンデレラグレイ pages on the Japanese Wikipedia. VenezuelanSpongeBobFan2004 (talk) 18:08, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

[edit]

It appears that somebody has vandalized the page to talk about a fan program ~2025-32343-13 (talk) 13:37, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An update to improving the article

[edit]

Hello Solaire the knight, KyuuA4, RandomEditsForWhenIRemember, and Marcus Markup. You were the four original users that discussed the initial fancruft of the reception and cultural influence section of the main Umamusume article alongside myself, so I pinged you all to update on that.

I've retooled most of the info I felt seemed too encyclopedic and too detailed to be shortened yet noteworthy as possible without going way beyond the subject article, and I'm currently in the process of possibly rearranging some of the info presented. It is hard to be doing this alone without KenL2001 and the others who added the info in the first place helping out, but it is what it is. What else can be improved upon for the section, besides expounding some points worth talking about like the actual game reception and international reception? Thank you! JT0219 (talk) 04:25, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lately, I've been trying to dig deeper into this category, and I've increasingly come to the feeling that its weakest point is the character list, as a number of users systematically fill it with fandom-like information without any sources, despite the templates that have been hanging in the article for a long time. Honestly, I don't know what to do about this. The page is too important to be marked for deletion, and I doubt we can undo edits like this. Solaire the knight (talk) 13:16, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] I will admit, it is a bit frustrating that the users filling them out are not doing an effort to at least modify them in accordance with the fancruft warning templates. How can it be made clear to them to make those changes? JT0219 (talk) 13:36, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] I've considered either trying to explain the situation directly to users or opening a larger discussion on the game or anime wiki project pages to develop guidelines for handling such lists. Uma Musume isn't the only "victim" of this; in the past, the Bandori character page contained strange edits where users added superficial information about which characters were tallest/shortest, etc. In turn, anime character pages often suffer from attempts to fully describe the biography of each individual character. Solaire the knight (talk) 13:42, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] To be honest I wouldn't be opposed to the list of characters being either deleted or started from scratch. At the moment it's just a very dense set of unsourced information that could have come from anywhere and just reads like a trivia list. Why are characters like Meikun Tsukasa, a background character at best, included? What use is this list to someone unfamiliar with the series, and what could they gain from this that a trip to the Uma wikia wouldn't provide instead? Still, it is definitely looking less fancruft/natter-filled than last time I checked a few months back, so well done there @JT0219 and Solaire. Anyway, as for this page, I think it's certainly in a better state than it was! I've had another read through recently, here's my thoughts: I think the big thing still missing is a "Origins and development" section that explains the history of the game and what CyGames were trying to do with the series. E.g. something like what you'd see on the Good Article-rated franchise pages like Chrono (series), Fire Emblem, Megami Tensei etc. (This could also be a good area to expand on the series doing well enough to let CyGames begin sponsoring actual race events, which is a very unique aspect of the series). Additionally, the reception section could possibly do with a bit more analysis on the main game's reviews, since that's the keystone of the series. The page makes clear the game is immensely popular and makes bank, but how was it received critically? I know there's an awards section, but since there's nothing balancing it out it does come off as a bit one-sided. Don't get me wrong, I'm not looking for a criticism section, but I think touching upon on how critics reviewed the game (or even the original anime!) might be worth including. Also, when reading through it all again for this writeup, I felt the page is getting a little muddled as the page has evolved. The lede focus on the whole franchise, then the first section laser-focuses on the mobile app's gameplay, then in the next section we go back to the whole franchise again (Though this too reads a bit muddled since the first line is now unclear at first glance if we're talking about "Pretty Derby" the game or "Pretty Derby" the franchise). I've definitely seen worse, Tetris can't make its mind up about its scope, but moving the gameplay section somewhere would probably be a good idea; maybe as part of "Media"'s Video game section and rename "Plot" to "Premise"? As one more thought, I worry this page is becoming quite list-y. For some examples:
  • The Live events section tells me nothing as someone who doesn't know what goes on at these, e.g. What even are these? What is the difference between a "Wish" tour and a "Gaze" tour bar date?
  • Is the average reader for this page going to be inclined to care about tables upon tables of manga release dates and ISBNs? While useful for the wikia I don't think these add anything that can't be summed up as "X volumes have been released."
  • Does every opening song in the anime need to be listed alongside their singers? Admittedly unsure of how other anime pages handle this but currently "Anime adaptations" is more about these than the actual anime.
  • In general, I wonder if merging the plot and media could help a bit? For example, Sprinters' Story's two sections are a sentence each and look a bit tagged on at the moment, but combined would make sense to include somwhere.
RandomEditsForWhenIRemember (talk) 22:46, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] I'll try to the best of my abilities to answer some of your pointers: Indeed, the character page may be looking a bit better with much of the fancruft being greatly reduced, but from the viewpoint of a casual reader, it does still look like a mess. I feel that alongside fully overhauling the page by restarting it from scratch, some characters that only play a minor part in the media they're in should be removed, as one can easily search them through fandom wikis and the like. A development section is, indeed, a good place to also add information about, given how extensive the franchise has become since being announced back in 2016. If the Japanese wiki article has some references to its development stages, we can start from there. Much rearranging and adding more info will need to be done like in the actual franchise reception, as well as probably keeping more info fancruft to a minimum. Additionally on that latter note, your question of "Does every opening song in the anime need to be listed alongside their singers?" seems to be done on a majority of anime pages, however maybe detailing who sang the listed songs can be mentioned in the dedicated episodes page, as many similar anime episode pages also list the opening and ending songs there too. We can edit it in a style similar to BanG Dream!'s anime section and its episodes page. JT0219 (talk) 02:04, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] Sounds good to me JT, the list getting reduced to just the major characters is exactly what I'd hope to see. The episodes page you linked also looks like a good page to emulate for the Uma eps. RandomEditsForWhenIRemember (talk) 18:44, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] The main thing is to determine which sources are considered sufficient and which are not. Because I don't want a repeat of the Fire Emblem character situation, where character repection are based on fandom articles like "10 Coolest FE Ships." Solaire the knight (talk) 20:44, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] I would suggest sticking to the sites listed in WP:GAMESOURCES and WP:A&M/ORS, and pointing to the Unreliable sources section in each if people start raising issues on the talk page. Wikia/fandom sources should always be removed by pretty much any standard on wiki. RandomEditsForWhenIRemember (talk) 21:01, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply] I didn't mean literally fandom resources, but rather that obviously fandom materials can be too specific. For example, at one time, Bandori's character pages told which of them was the shortest and which was the tallest. Solaire the knight (talk) 22:55, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is sourced from Wikipedia. Content is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.