DarkFather said:
You want to use Wikipedia as gospel, or do you want the truth? What is your response to my actual post?

But anime is certainly not a style, otherwise Dragon Ball and Cowboy Bebop would have similar aesthetics, and they don't in the least.

Gaffer. What are you talking about.

Look at the noses of Faye and Edward. Look at their expressions.

Cowboy Bebop and Dragonball Z differ slightly in their styles, but they follow the same general style. I mean, it's not even matter of opinion.

I wasn't using Wikipedia as gospel. I was using it to support my statement. I quoted exactly one sentence from the article. And as far as I can see, there isn't an inaccuracy in the article. Meanwhile, this is the first time I've ever heard of anime as being referred to a particular style of animation, and you haven't presented any evidence to back up that claim.

And, really? Noses? We're going to argue animation styles based on noses? You've gotta give me something here. I conceded to you in at least a couple of different ways based on the different established definitions of the word anime. I'm pretty sure I responded directly to your post. Now it's your turn, DF. I will concede one more thing to you again. It's possible that DB and CB follow the same general style. Maybe you're seeing something I don't. But that's subjective, so, yes, it very much is a matter of opinion. You could be broader and say that all hand-drawn animation uses the same general style in order to craft people and scenery.

Don't know what else to say, really. That is what anime is. And based on those parameters, I've conceded how Avatar might (and one of those concessions was a stretch) be considered to fall under the definitions of anime, and it certainly does emulate some of the stylistic conventions common to Japanese animation, but since anime is defined in this country as the animated output originating from and intended for a specific country (Japan), Avatar does not fall into that category.