Talk:Sailor Starlights

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject iconAnime and manga Redirect‑class
WikiProject iconThis redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime, manga, and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
RedirectThis redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.


Now that the article has grown in length, Is it about time to Split them up? Lego3400: The Sage of Time 20:29, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

It's tempting, but how would we deal with all the redundant information? --Masamage 02:02, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
The Page on Sailor Senshi perhaps? Or split it up among the three of them.Lego3400: The Sage of Time 21:36, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
I don't know. It just doesn't seem that each one can sustain an entire article by themselves. -SaturnYoshi THE VOICES 02:51, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
No, it's not time. Danny Lilithborne 02:53, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
The article may have grown in legnth, but most of that seems to stem from the addition of list items. The article hasn't even triggered the non-binding size warning. Lists also tend to puff up an article's legnth, while adding little relevent information the article's actual content. Something else to note: one of the major criticims usually given about anime and manga articles on Wikipedia is that they're usually nothing but lists and trivia items. --Kunzite 04:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
The average reference size for an article of any length for the inners is at *least* 20 (I haven't gotten through the Outers, but it looks like it'll still average 20). Even for the ones that didn't show up that frequently, it can easily reach 20 references. Thus, for this article to be split. Each person within the article must be able to have about 20 references each. That means about 60 references. Why am I counting references? Because that will measure the amount of information actually in the article. Stats usually take up only 2-5... meaning that a proper article will have 15 on top of that being specific as to who, what and what's stated about the character. This article doesn't have enough for each to split it along those lines yet even if we put in references. We need to agree what more needs to be added to make each stand on its own. --Hitsuji Kinno 21:00, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Wrong information in musical section?

From the section on the Myu: "In their songs, the Starlights refer to themselves as "Soldiers of Space," implying that they are not tied to a single star or planet but travel to bring justice with Kakyuu serving as their main leader. Whether this applies to their versions in the manga or anime is unknown."

Isn't this incorrect? In the anime and manga they're from/tied to Kinmoku. Maybe I misunderstood what they're saying? Also, is there a citation for this? It seems a little speculative. Yumecosmos 20:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Except for the statement that they call themselves that, it's entirely speculation. Excellent catch; you have my blessings on removing it. :) --Masamage 22:52, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
They caled them selves Soldiers of the Stars right before Sailor Wars Supreme in Sailor Stars Kaitbeban.Yayamaya 20:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Another thing is that it says that the Amazon Trio fills the Starlights role in protecting Moon, they didn't untill the VERY end, for about two minutes, the rest of Shin Densetsu Kourin they were villans and fighting Moon. The only thing that The Amazon trio and Starlights have in comon in the Musicals is that Hikari Ono played someone in both of them(Sailor Star Maker and Hawks Eye)Yayamaya 20:02, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Hm, okay. That sounds great; please feel welcome to fix factual errors about the musical. I'm very nearly clueless. ^_^ --Masamage 04:02, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

A little reformatting

I'm going to move the following things out of the individual profiles: items, attacks, transformations, and music. These ought to go into one section total. As is, we have the same two items being stated three times. This'll improve readability. Xuanwu 08:58, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! --Masamage 09:01, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Formatting issues

1. There is a picture of Seiya and Usagi in his section, but then no subsequent pictures in the other sections, making the article look a little disbalanced. I would suggest the following: The picture where the threelights is is removed, we find an appropriate picture for Taiki and Yaten as well. (I know the temptation people have to overtake the other two with Seiya...) remove the Seiya and Usagi picture in addition--this is not an S/U shipper page and that picture might give that impression. (The article should be about Seiya, not about Seiya and Usagi and how the fandom loves them and speculates they should be together.) I think this would be fair. The article needs to be kept in balance, just like the manga, anime, musicals, dub, PGSM etc in the other articles need to stay balanced. We can't favor one character over another or one relationship over another. Thus, isn't it fair to do it this way?

2. The episode support listing looks wrong. It's linking words rather than doing proper referencing. This seriously needs to be fixed because it's not in compliance with the manual of style and not consistent with other SM articles. (i.e. I don't think Seiya should be made all that more special in citations =P)

3. We need to decide what needs to be added to the pages to make them more individual later down the road to automatically earn them a B-rating. It should comply a little to the Ami page in length and shape.

4. The stats need serious clean up. Physical traits should not be listed. Unless you are blind, what's the point of listing it when the picture is right there? In addition some representations of character's physical traits, Sailor suits, etc change over the course of the series and it's self-defeating to list them one way when they are seen in other fashions. And if we are really listing it for blind people, what's the point of saying she had brown hair? The traits should conform to the listed order in the Ami's stats. If a stat cannot be supported by the manga or anime, or other form directly, it has to be deleted. All stats need referencing. >.<;;

5. All references should be footnotes with the footnote coming after the period without a space in between.

6. We need more citations in general... there are a lot of unsupported statements.--Hitsuji Kinno 21:18, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree on changing the Seiya picture. But I disagree that we should remove the physical descriptions. Some people have browsers that don't support images, or have images turned off. (Or maybe you could put the description inside the alt tag? I don't know if that's considered bad practice, or if alt tags are even possible on Wikipedia.) Yumecosmos 20:02, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
I revise that opinion, since Masamage said it was for blind people too. Given that many browsers, etc don't support pictures, I think it would be best to REVISE the descriptions to make them more solid and concrete rather than rough and totally vague descriptions, like the one with the white/silver hair. But do a real break down, so that people who in fact can't see, can actually guess what they look like! But I still support the image splitting, etc. --Hitsuji Kinno 05:39, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. I'm always in favor of better prose. X) --Masamage 04:26, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Here is a set of pictures to switch the three lights image out with... granted that someone can do the censoring of the words it should be a good option (just crop or paint it out.). This will balance the article to make it look like it's about all three of them, not just Seiya... and then it will get rid of the top image clutter problem we have too. Also it should be more intuitive for those who can see the images. --Hitsuji Kinno 05:39, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
I like it! Yeah, just crop a square out of the middle and those would be awesome. Great pick, Star Maker's bizarre makeup aside. X) --Masamage 06:27, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
I agree, although it does seem like the animators went out of their way to make their Senshi forms look like drag queens, rather than actual females... -SaturnYoshi THE VOICES 15:52, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
I put up the edited images. they are exactly 400x400. I had to do just a bit of painting to get it to work and look decent. The first person to make the edits, please delete these links as it will drain my server... If we agree these are fine, then put them up, delete the second and third image to replace those with these, leave the lead image. (// (// (// --Hitsuji Kinno 10:24, 27 November 2006 (UTC)


The English manga has "Lights" as the Starlights' family name (Seiya Lights, Taiki Lights and Yaten Lights). I went ahead and created a re-direct to the Starlights page with those three names. -SaturnYoshi THE VOICES 23:50, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Nicely done. Is that mentioned in the article yet? It definitely should be (goofy though it is XD). --Masamage 21:27, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Name Order

I noticed that the article seems to state pretty definitely that Kou is their first name. I don't think it should say this so certainly, since that's pretty much a fan debate (unless there is some proof I don't know about). Also, at the beginning their names are given as Kou Yaten, Kou Taiki, and Kou Seiya. Since we don't know the "true" order, I think it would be better to just write the names as they are given in canon. Putting Kou first takes a definite side with the people who say Kou is their first name. Should I change it? Yumecosmos 23:01, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree. No need to make definite statements when nobody really knows. --Masamage 00:09, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Actually there is proof. Do you need the manga scans? I have them. It's repeated over and over again across volumes. I think I can get someone to post the image of their names from the Materials Collection and Anime books too. There is no dispute, just fan confusion. --Hitsuji Kinno 05:33, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
No, I've seen the scans. The dispute is over whether the Three Lights use Japanese name order or Western. It's not an uncommon thing for J-pop stars to do, especially ones as otherwise weird as these. --Masamage 18:57, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Other celebrities over the years have shown up in the course of the SM universe's manga and most of them seem to follow the Japanese name format, or am I wrong? In addition while Takeuchi-sensei signs her name Naoko Takeuchi, her kanji always are spelled in Japanese order--most celebrities also do this. --Hitsuji Kinno 17:59, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

In this case there is no dispute because their first names are Kou and no matter how not uncommon it is for J-pop stars, there is definitive proof in the original manga text. On page 77 of the original print of the tankoubon manga #16, there is a panel that shows school test results and it very clearly says "Mizuno, Ami" and "Taiki, Kou". No matter how J-pop stars refer to themselves, when it comes to things like that, all the names will be listed the same with the family name first and that makes Taiki his last name.Novadestin (talk) 09:18, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh, interesting. Thanks for bringing that to our attention! --Masamage 15:08, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Good call. So basically their names are sort of like The Ramones except for the differing names are their supposed surnames..? G90025 (talk) 18:21, 11 November 2011 (UTC)


Can someone do the switch for me? I put the images up on my server... but I need someone to check them over, say they are OK, and upload them to the proper places with the proper copyright. Somehow I don't feel right doing it myself. --Hitsuji Kinno 05:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I think those are good. I can save and upload them as soon as I'm on my own computer again. -SaturnYoshi THE VOICES 08:25, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I also like them, and am on my computer, so I'll go ahead and toss them up. Nice work! --Masamage 18:57, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I did it, and I marked them as CD covers. Not sure if that's right; I know I've seen the source of the images, but I couldn't find it. Also, I noticed that they were larger resolution than they would be if I was holding the CD case in my hand, so for Fair Use I shrank them down to 60%. Shouldn't influence how they appear in the article. --Masamage 19:30, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
This site ( lists them as laser disc scans. The originals can be found at the bottom of that page in the Sailor Stars section. -SaturnYoshi THE VOICES 00:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
That's the ticket! Thank you. :D (So how do we classify that? DVD cover?) --Masamage 01:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
I would think so... -SaturnYoshi THE VOICES 01:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
The Laserdisc article leads me to believe they're pretty different, so I'm hesitant. There doesn't seem to be a copyright-template for those, but I'll look around some more... --Masamage 07:47, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Yarrr. I found {{Video disc cover}}, but it suggests that Fair Use actually doesn't cover these images unless used to depict the LD itself. :T Were they perhaps taken from somewhere else? Can they be given as "character art" on the basis that they are obviously meant to illustrate specific characters more than the series itself? --Masamage 07:52, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

(Reseting Indent) I thought they also appeared on a trading card like that... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lego3400 (talkcontribs).

Note I took out the links. I'll be taking down the images now. Since they are up there is no reason to keep them up on my website space, is there? I also think the page looks a lot better balanced now too. Good work! I would try for character art tag. --Hitsuji Kinno 20:50, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Image: Three Rights Do we need it? By that, I wonder if it adds anything to the article. In addition if it is going to be there it should be the three of them, not just Seiya... Again keep the balance to this article. Is it OK to delete it off of this page? --Hitsuji Kinno 05:23, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

If my memory serves, I think that's one of the ones some random person added who had never edited the article before or after. Nope, I'm totally wrong! It was Xuanwu, and it was before my time. :P That'll teach me to check my facts. Anyway, I do think you have a point. It's cute, but more decoration than illustration. --Masamage 05:59, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
That image is in the Engrish article also, I believe. JuJube 06:14, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Now that one was me. X) Seemed a little more apropos, though if that article ever gets up to snuff it'll probably go. --Masamage 07:35, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Info Box

2 things. In general, i love it, i'm surpised we hadn't thought of it sooner but one thing troubles me. The afilations Box. 1st. Kakyuu is not a group so they can't be part of her. 2nd. While they are senshi. They are not members of the Sailor Team. What we have in there now seems more like Allies than affilations. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lego3400 (talkcontribs) 16:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC).

Thanks! But I think we're okay here. "Affiliated" means "allied with," not "a part of." says "being in close formal or informal association." --Masamage 17:38, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
But the way we use in all the other boxes is diffent.. Just to be safe, I'm Changeing theirs to allies (The general box can stay the same) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lego3400 (talkcontribs) 19:41, 16 January 2007 (UTC).
I don't see it. The other ones use "affiliated with" to mean "associated with" too, not "part of," because that's not what it means. Besides which, the Starlights aren't really affiliated with all Sailor Senshi, any more than the Team itself is. Also, they aren't always in an alliance with the Sailor Team. They are always in affiliation, however. Those semantics are specific enough that I think it's okay to leave it the way it is. --Masamage 19:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

First Appearance Box

First appearance
Form Manga Anime
Seiya -- --
Sailor Star Fighter ? ?
Yaten -- --
Sailor Star Healer ? ?
Taiki ? --
Sailor Star Maker ? ?

Fill it in and plop it in! Lego3400: The Sage of Time 16:40, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Not necessary. All three of them appear in both forms in Act 43 and Episode 173. Two data fields does not a table make. --Masamage 18:48, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Music section

Since they're a band, do you think these guys' music section should stick around? Maybe converted to prose? --Masamage 18:42, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Name meanings

Why were the translations removed? No reason was given. --Masamage 16:04, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

They were added without sources, and I thought they were part of the "Truth Woodfield" thing that happened to all of the Senshi's pages a while back. -Malkinann 02:25, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Nah, it was a separate thing. I don't think there are any puns in the Starlights' names, so they could be made a part of the name field like that if we wanted. I'm not sure whether a source is needed, but I sort of doubt it if it's just simple translation...? --Masamage 02:30, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Well, given that Emily Ravenwood managed an essay on them it might be good. She raises some interesting points, like the Kou surname could be a pun on the feminine suffix -ko. -Malkinann 02:54, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Tee hee. She cites me, under my maiden name, in one of her essays. But yeah, I'm down with using that as a ref if you are. There are a few inaccuracies in some parts of her website, but altogether it is pretty high-quality. --Masamage 03:03, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Issues raised in 194

Kakyuu says, "Do you use that appearance on Earth?" (referring tho the male appearance) Seiya replies, "Oh.. to find the only lady here, this was more convenient." (blushes) Right after that Seiya gets a soft look in his eyes. A planet with three moons shows up (might be worth screencapping to illustrate their home planet.) And the song was meant for her, and Seiya the Kakyuu assumes wrote it. The scene continues by overlaying Usagi over Kakyuu, and focusing on Seiya and Kakyuu alone. This may show confusion that Seiya feels towards Usagi, confusing her with Kakyuu. All that time they spent time alone is often downplayed by shippers, but in a balanced page should be mentioned rather than downplayed. I addition the little chat about appearances on earth is worth noting, even if it's not direct. (Because Japanese is indirect speech to begin with which I can back up with an article or two or a video if you choose... Culture and Communication.) I do not wish to flame shippers--frankly, I don't care, but I thought it was worth mentioning for the fair and balanced rule of wikipedia and neutrality rule.

Note, Kakyuu only calls Seiya Fighter. --Hitsuji Kinno 04:53, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. Seyia says "This is goodbye to Seyia" near the end of the Anime. The name appears to be a Pseudonym. The others' names probably are too. --Lego3400: The Sage of Time 23:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Episode 195 where Seiya also states that he's fine with being in a one-sided love and he fell for Odango in a surprise. He also says this quote, "I wanted to tell you my feelings because Seiya's time is short." -- Hitsuji Kinno (talkcontribs) 22:59, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

It's been several weeks. If there are no objections this information will be included in the Seiya section of the article this coming Friday or Saturday. --Hitsuji Kinno 13:34, 1 May 2007 (UTC)


It's been proposed that this article be merged with Princess Kakyuu into a new article called Kinmoku. Please discuss at Talk:Princess Kakyuu. --Masamage 18:43, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

...I haven't copied Kakyuu's talk page contents over here because, frankly, now that I've done it, I think this merge looks terrible. I think we ought to revert everything right away. --Masamage 00:31, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Me too. So what if Kakyuu's page remains small? The Kinmoku page looks too big and too messy. Merging the Sailor Animamates together worked because they were all small and the different continuities didn't clash too much. -Malkinann 00:49, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
It's driving me nuts, so I'm going to revert. Everyone else, check out how it looked and we can discuss what needs help. I think I'm with Malkinann; Kakyuu having a short article is better than this mishmash. --Masamage 01:27, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Three Rights image

Shall we just let that one go? We talked about it recently and nobody seemed to care about it much. Now that it's not on Engrish anymore, it's not really doing anything. --Masamage 06:29, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Someone's put a short fair use rationale on it, which is a sweet thought, but the image still doesn't illustrate much... Perhaps someone-not-me could invite them to join WP:SM, (cos they might get confused if I invited them), and I'll put the image up for fair use review? -Malkinann 09:27, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
That person was me, so sorry if I disrupted anything, but if you want to remove it do so.--Hanaichi 09:49, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
You're fine, help is always appreciated. ^_^ Malkinann, I'd prefer that if we don't want it, we just orphan the thing and let it go down like that. --Masamage 17:41, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, you're fine - sometimes I put up {{no rationale}} so that images get deleted, and sometimes I put it up so that people can fix things up and they won't get deleted...  ;) I can't believe I forgot about the orphan clause... I'm not too fussed on this image myself. -Malkinann 23:24, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
It's disposable. The Three Lights and Engrish are still illustrated by other images on Wikipedia. -- Denelson83 00:40, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
With no one coming forward in support of it now, and no one back when we originally agreed to get rid of it, I'm going to go ahead and orphan the thing. I'll leave a message at WP:SM; if anyone cares, they have seven days to jump in and save it. --Masamage 20:15, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

The image has been deleted. -Malkinann 00:30, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


I've seen the ENTIRE stars series, and I'm 90% postive, that they don't wear any make up. However, the images we have show that. Should we mention it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

That doesn't really matter much. It's only the lipstick that shows in the pictures and it's only on Fighter and Maker's. Makeup isn't really that important. ;) Karuseikaarie (talk) 04:14, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Starlights: San Hikari

I edited the reference. This is actually a theory and probably doesn't belong on Wikipedia as it's original research. But since this tidbit has survived, I've edited the citation to where it needs to properly go. I had posited the theory that the San Hikari were tied to the Starlights long ago and websites such as Starlight Pops and others liked the theory and have cited me on it since then. But I'd prefer if this theory is going to remain as trivia or part of the article on Wikipedia that I continue to be credited for it, or else it should be removed. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mnemosynehime (talkcontribs) 22:59, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

At present, the citation is not to a Sailor Moon website at all but rather to an academic website that discusses the San Hikari themselves. Both references should therefore be included. --Masamage 02:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

==5th season==The German Dub showed all episodes except 89.

Merge proposal

I come with this proposal to merge some of the contents of this page into the List of Sailor Moon characters. This is mainly because of Wikipedia:Notability. The article does not contain any section regarding reception and impact in popular culture. Even series creator Naoko Takeuchi has expressed that the Starlights are not even main characters in the manga. Not all contents would be merged into the list of characters, but only the Profiles and Development sections. The rest is cruft and in-universe information. With this merge, the list of charaters will not be more than 100 KB long. Thoughts? --LoЯd ۞pεth 22:03, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

More than 5 days have passed and there have been no objections and no improvement of the article. I will perform the merger as proposed, and fix the redirects. --LoЯd ۞pεth 18:49, 6 October 2015 (UTC)