It should be policy for important non-Author non-Artist credits to be put in the description (pending the credit rework).

[SUPER7X]

The most common important* non-Author non-Artist credit is Character Designer, but there's also Composer and Supervisor and surely others. This is a post about how we should currently handle those credits. How should we?

*By “important”, I mean worthy of being on the cover. I think if a person contributed enough to be put the cover of a work, they're important enough for MangaDex to properly credit them, now. This qualifier is being used specificly to exclude Assistants and other possible credits, tho those should/could certainly be given after the credit rework (as is done on AniList and maybe Anime-Planet), but that's not my concern right now.

After my report asking for “Ascendance of a Bookworm” character designer Shiina You to be credited as Character Designer in the description of “Ascendance of a Bookworm” Part 3 was rejected, I posted about it in the Discord, and this sparked a discussion about how non-author non-artists should be credited currently, in this interim before we get a credit rework that allows them to be properly credited natively (which we all agree we want), as that has not been previously clearly established. There were 3 and later 4 proposed methods. Here they and their justifications are in short:

1. Properly credit them in the description, for maximal accuracy and proper credit right now. (My position.)

2. Inaccurately credit them as Artist or Author (depending upon which they're “closer” to), for maximal searchability right now. (kouyo's position, among others.)

3. Don't credit them at all, for accuracy and to keep descriptions clean. (This is the most common current state, I think, actually.)

4. Properly credit them in the description and inaccurately credit them as Artist or Author, for reduced confusion and for searchability. (This was the compromise between 1 and 2 that I thought of after prompting.)

To me, 1 > 4 > 3 >>> 2.

First of all, I want to reiterate that I think 3, where we have no proper credit or searchability, is certainly the most common state now. But I don't think that inaccurately crediting people is the solution to that. The character designer, the composer, they are not the artist. The artist is the artist. When someone looks at the Artist credit, they're not thinking “Who was in any way adjacent to the production of the visual component of this manga?”. No! They're thinking “Who drew this?”. That's why I think it's so vital to maintain that credit accuracy and not inaccurately credit people as Artists (or Authors) just for the sake of searchability. 2 is really bad to me and certainly worse than the status quo.

Given that, why do I think 4 is better than 3? Well, partially because the proper description credit really would reduce the confusion caused by the inaccurate credit, but also because looking forward, which is most helpful to have once we do get that credit rework? Going from a state of accurate credits in the description (1 or 4) to a state of proper native credits is certainly significantly easier than going from a state of no credits (3) or inaccurate credits (2) to the latter. For that reason, I find 4 preferable to 3.

Anyway, my point of making this post is to get an answer as to what the Official™ MangaDex Guideline is, but also to convince ye that that guideline should be Method 1 because it is the only one that fully preserves accuracy. I hope that I have.

 

[RogueKitsune]

1. Properly credit them in the description for maximal accuracy and proper credit right now. (My position.)

2. Inaccurately credit them as Artist or Author (depending upon which they're “closer” to) for maximal searchability right now. (kouyo's position, among others.)

3. Don't credit them at all for accuracy and to keep descriptions clean. (This is the most common current state, I think, actually.)

4. Properly credit them in the description and inaccurately credit them as Artist or Author for reduced confusion and for searchability. (This was the compromise between 1 and 2 that I thought of after prompting.)

To me, 1 > 4 > 3 > 2.

1 and 4 are the worst options in my opinion for a few reasons,

• adding information that does not belong in the description/synopsis field, which is already enough of an issue.
• cleaning up the added information once the additional roles are supported would need to be done
• it would be something that you in theory would need to add to the description of every language if you want things done correctly, which really isn't feasible
• (Only applies to 1) no way to search for the individual or view associated information or works

2 would be the better option if MD wants to go ahead and start allowing this information to be collected. Would it be technically wrong? Yes. However, because the site does not support the proper classifications or role its a good compromise over just not adding the information at all. This method would also allow information to be corrected relatively quickly as all the associated titles would already be linked to the individual.

3 would also be acceptable as, like S7X pointed out, not providing credit seems to be the default for most sites (either because of policy or they do not support listing that kind of data as of yet). Examples: MU and MAL don't credit chara designers. A-P only recently added the ability to credit some additional roles.

 

[SUPER7X]

1 and 4 are the worst options in my opinion for a few reasons,

• adding information that does not belong in the description/synopsis field, which is already enough of an issue.

Begging the question.

• cleaning up the added information once the additional roles are supported would need to be done

Yes, and not only is cleaning easier than starting from nothing (or something inaccurate), it alerts you that there's something to do (which is deeply obscured by Method 2)!

• it would be something that you in theory would need to add to the description of every language if you want things done correctly, which really isn't feasible

No, this just isn't true.

• (Only applies to 1) no way to search for the individual or view associated information or works

Yes, 2 and 4 win on searchability, I concede that, but viewing? No that's just not true. You simply link the works on the author page's end too. It's simple.

2 would be the better option if MD wants to go ahead and start allowing this information to be collected.

No.

3 would also be acceptable as, like S7X pointed out, not providing credit seems to be the default for most sites

No, my point was that it is essentially the default for MangaDex. I don't particularly care how other sites handle it.

 

[Teasday]

I'm... not seeing a reason not to include a character designer as an artist. That's not inaccurate, they are an artist who contributed to the work. If they're listed in the main credits of the chapter or book, I don't know why we wouldn't credit them here. Nothing about that field says it must only be THE artist who draws the manga proper, plus it helps that we already have the author entity system in place.

At worst it may be slightly confusing to figure out which one's the comic artist, but that's pretty damn likely to be something that can fairly easily be discerned even just from the scanlations or doing some other common sense legwork. If absolutely necessary for some reason, maybe put it in the description, idk, but I'd prefer to avoid that.

 

[RogueKitsune]

No, this just isn't true.

That's right only English matters. Non-english speakers wouldn't want to know this information /s.
Joking aside, wouldn't it only be fair to add the information to descriptions in other languages if they exist?

Yes, and not only is cleaning easier than starting from nothing (or something inaccurate), it alerts you that there's something to do (which is deeply obscured by Method 2)!

Cleaning is easier from nothing because there is nothing to clean (see option 3). The problem here is that you now have added this information to the description of 100+ titles (number pulled from my ass), and now you have to track those titles and fix them. And yes with option 2 you would need to also do some tracking, but would only be about the equivalent amount of work in the worst case.

No

Yes.

No, my point was that it is essentially the default for MangaDex. I don't particularly care how other sites handle it.

Ok. But it does point too the fact that this information is not widely in demand. And when you flexed brought up that you got JNC to remove a character designer from being credited as an artist it told me that the industry doesn't seem to really care.

 

[SUPER7X]

I'm... not seeing a reason not to include a character designer as an artist. That's not inaccurate, they are an artist who contributed to the work.

No, it is inaccurate. They aren't the artist of the manga. They didn't draw it. Just because they're occupationally an artist, doesn't mean they're the artist of this specific work. It's just not true.

At worst it may be slightly confusing to figure out which one's the comic artist, but that's pretty damn likely to be something that can fairly easily be discerned even just from the scanlations or doing some other common sense legwork.

No, I think it's more than just slightly confusing, and it isn't always easy to discern the truth, especially for people who can't read Japanese. Like yes, we can just look at the Japanese covers to get the correct idea, but at that point, why even credit them? Why change the status quo (3) if you're having people look at the volume cover for the proper credit anyway? And additionally, even if you can discern the truth, it's a repeated waste of time when you could just label them correctly to begin with.

That's right only English matters. Non-english speakers wouldn't want to know this information /s.
Joking aside, wouldn't it only be fair to add the information to descriptions in other languages if they exist?

Non-English speakers should be free to add this info to non-English descriptions in this interim period if they so wish.

Cleaning is easier from nothing because there is nothing to clean (see option 3).

You've misunderstood what I said. I'm saying that once the credit rework is implemented, implementing additional credits natively is significantly easier from a Method 1 or Method 4 state than doing so from a Method 3 or Method 2 state, where you don't have the correct credit immediately available (and in the latter even have an incorrect credit that you might not know is incorrect!).

The problem here is that you now have added this information to the description of 100+ titles (number pulled from my ass),

This is not a problem.

and now you have to track those titles and fix them.

Yes, and it's an incredibly easy fix. Much easier than adding the correct credit from nothing (3) or trying to correct a credit that isn't obviously incorrect (2).

And yes with option 2 you would need to also do some tracking, but would only be about the equivalent amount of work in the worst case.

No, this is just not true. It would be much, much worse.

Ok. But it does point too the fact that this information is not widely in demand.

I don't know why you think demand matters. I'm not asking for anything to be done. This requires zero dev work.

And when you flexed brought up that you got JNC to remove a character designer from being credited as an artist it told me that the industry doesn't seem to really care.

You can't determine whether they care about proper credits or not from one instance. That's ridiculous. But what you can say is that they agree with me that crediting the character designer as something they're not is wrong.

 

[Teasday]

No, it is inaccurate. They aren't the artist of the manga. They didn't draw it. Just because they're occupationally an artist, doesn't mean they're the artist of this specific work. It's just not true.

Dude, I'm just going to copypaste what I said earlier because your response is ignoring the point:

That's not inaccurate, they are an artist who contributed to the work. If they're listed in the main credits of the chapter or book, I don't know why we wouldn't credit them here.

I don't care if they're "THE artist", as long as they're AN artist who contributed to the work and are clearly credited in the work, it seems inaccurate not to credit them here. We don't need to start adding every single assistant that's mentioned in volume extras, but as long as they have a name on the book's cover alongside THE artist, I don't see why we wouldn't add it.

Like yes, we can just look at the Japanese covers to get the correct idea, but at that point, why even credit them?

C'mon man

 

[SUPER7X]

Dude, I'm just going to copypaste what I said earlier because your response is ignoring the point:

I don't care if they're "THE artist", as long as they're AN artist who contributed to the work and are clearly credited in the work, it seems inaccurate not to credit them here.

No, your response is ignoring my point. They did not contribute to the work's art. It is objectively inaccurate to credit them as an artist. If you think that inaccuracy is fine in service of searchability, that's one thing, but it's ridiculous to deny that it's inaccurate.

 

[Justice88]

Uh oh, melty!

 

[Manko-sensei]

Someone seems to be seriously looking to piss off the mods/admins to get a ban... and doesn't even care to be logical, much less empathetic. That amount of detail I hope you're looking for in good faith it's more common in anime and that's why Anilist differentiates them (character designer) and places them in an important position among the staff. About considering them artists, they literally come up with the characters that the mangaka is going to use for the panels, how is that not a contribution to the art? And some series in here (adaptations or not) have multiple artists tagged and nobody has started a war because of that. So adding an explanation in the guidelines to say that character designers can be added as artists should be plenty, always optional and up to whoever wants to expend that time adding them. And I'm saying optional because I know about scanlators that wouldn't want to spend that amount time justifying small details when they simply want to scanlate works.

 

[Teasday]

They did not contribute to the work's art. It is objectively inaccurate to credit them as an artist.

If they're credited, in the book, as someone who created art that the work is based on, how the fuck did they not contribute to the work's art

You're literally acting like you know better than the actual authors and publishers of the work

"Objectively" my ass. You keep using that word, and I don't think it means what you think it means.

 

[SUPER7X]

If they're credited, in the book, as someone who created art that the work is based on, how the fuck did they not contribute to the work's art

Because they're the character designer, not the artist. They did not draw any part of the manga. The fact that, in most cases, they drew the light novel is irrelevant. We're dealing with credits for the manga, not the light novel.

 

[Teasday]

Because they're the character designer, not the artist. They did not draw any part of the manga.

Good news, then, because that is not a requirement for being credited as an artist. You've got a problem with it, take it up with the publisher.

We're dealing with credits for the manga, not the light novel.

Yes, we are. And if the manga itself credits an artist, then give me one good reason for us not to.

 

[SUPER7X]

Good news, then, because that is not a requirement for being credited as an artist. You've got a problem with it, take it up with the publisher.

They aren't credited as an artist. What are you talking about?

Yes, we are. And if the manga itself credits an artist, then give me one good reason for us not to.

The manga does not credit them as an artist!

 

[RogueKitsune]

The manga does not credit them as an artist!

Then why do you want them added or credited anywhere? From what you have said they should not be added as an artist nor should any mention be added to the description (information not directly relevant to the title should not be added to the description)

 

[SUPER7X]

Then why do you want them added or credited anywhere? From what you have said they should not be added as an artist nor should any mention be added to the description (information not directly relevant to the title should not be added to the description)

I want them credited as the character designers that they are, as it says on the covers.

 

[Teasday]

They aren't credited as an artist. What are you talking about?

The manga does not credit them as an artist!

Since my first response here I've been specifically talking about manga that do. "If they're listed in the main credits of the chapter or book, I don't know why we wouldn't credit them here," and that given the current functionalities of this website the best way to credit them is to use the author fields. I don't care about one specific case here if we're deciding on site-wide rules on what to credit and how.

If they're not credited, then we probably don't need to credit them either. We don't add assistants to the artist fields or descriptions, and they have a much larger immediate impact on the actual art of the manga than a character designer would.

Edit:

I want them credited as the character designers that they are, as it says on the covers.

Wait, if their name is on the fucking cover then yes that's exactly what I'm talking about.

If they
1. are an artist, i.e. someone who produces some manner of visual arts, and
2. are credited on the cover as having contributed something art-related,
then we should credit them as an artist. Simple as.

 

[erova]

Ok, I get your point, but currently it's not something feasible, in a future it would be nice to implement this type of roles, but taking into account mangadex's rate updating new features, it won't happen in a near future.

You have to look at it from this POV, adding all that info in the description, implies going back to fix it retroactively, which ideally I would rather avoid, for data consistency over accuracy issues. As much as I would personally like to collect information such as Editor, Assistants and Cover Designer, a quicker solution is to add them as artists and in case hypothetically more roles can be added to the staff, simply change it, instead theoretically going into the description or each language description to cut, paste and clean up that data.

 

[Shirobane]

Two practical problems with listing character designers as artists are that
a) people who can’t read the covers won’t know which of them actually drew the manga
b) if original character designer is ever added as a separate field it will be a lot of work going through and separating them out (populating a blank field is also a lot of work, but is at least less messy, and functionally no different to any other “oh hey, blank field, let’s fill that in while I’m here” job like missing store and tracker links)