On Sun, 20 Jul 2008, Stephen Bain wrote:
- If you have a source for that paragraph, it would be a great
addition to the body text of the article.
You read the paragraph, but you obviously didn't read the message. As I said, it's a popular culture source, and our sourcing rules, being academically biased, make it unreasonably hard to source most of those. I wasn't claiming that that was a source by Wikipedia standards, only by real world standards.
Of course, there is a source that's good by Wikipedia standards: we've long accepted that a source for information about a work is the work itself. Furthermore, we've accepted that a foreign language source is a source, and the translation of it doesn't need to be separately sourced. Therefore, I can look at the original Japanese version of Inuyasha and read the name off, and that's a legitimate source. The statement about Viz's intentions would have to be left out, but the statement that the sword's name isn't spelled that way in Japanese needs no more sources than that.
You're also ignoring that taking out that paragraph doesn't affect the issue of the article's title. Titles, and in general decisions made about an article, don't need sources. The classic example is a Google test; we can use one to decide how to name an article (though it's not very wise here!), what to include, and how much weight to give sections--yet a Google test is, as a source, completely unacceptable.
Finally, you're ignoring the common sense issue. All this is irrelevant; giving an article a name that's a mistake, when the mistake and the correct name are both well known and Wikipedia is likely to influence real life usage, is stupid.