User talk:Ryu Kaze/Archive4

This is an archive. To leave messages, go to User talk:Ryu Kaze.

Final Fantasy IV

Hi! Love your work, by the by. I was wondering, would you like to help get Final Fantasy IV to FA status? Judgesurreal777 17:05, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I gave you another barnstar.

For your help with FFVI. Thanks a million. Sir Crazyswordsman 19:51, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

Congratulations on FF6 reaching FA. It deserves it -- thanks for your great work on an ever-fascinating bit of popular culture. -- (Lee)Bailey ^(talk) 23:16, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WOW!!! 2 more stars for you!!! Great job on getting FFVI and FFVII as Featured Articles! Woohooo!! Renmiri 02:22, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ryu.

Thanks! Sir Crazyswordsman 23:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you dear Ryu!

Go for it, Ryu! :)

Thank you for the beautiful birthday wishes, my dear Ryu! :) It is a great pleasure to meet someone as nice as you, and rest assured we'll talk a lot more in the future! You have such a beautiful page, and your comments reveal a thoughtful and sensible spirit. It is wonderful that our paths have crossed, and I hope this is but the beginning of a friendship. By the way, I kept some cake for you - now, don't be shy, and swallow it before someone else spots it! ;) Hugs, Phaedriel ♥ The Wiki Soundtrack!♪ - 23:55, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FFX-2

The story section needs to be reorganized so that it follows the events of the story in order of revealing, not chronological order. It's part of the whole "out of universe" guideline being put into effect. — Deckill e r 04:12, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the FFX-2 is already close; between your awesome revamps and my recent copyedit, I just think all we need to work on is the story summary. — Deckill e r 04:42, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, looks good; think we should do a peer review before FAC? — Deckill e r 16:14, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK; your turn to do the initial nomination :) — Deckill e r 16:18, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And to think that 6 months ago FFX-2 even had a sentence saying the game had lesbianism... Talk about improving an article!!!! Renmiri 03:14, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was so outraged that I registered and started being a wiki editor! Perhaps we should leave some bloopers like this to recruit more FF Fanatics ;-) Just kiddin! Renmiri 03:14, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RecepCritic section

Reception/criticism sections are always a pain to work on, but I tried o.O — Deckill e r 02:39, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

X-2 for FA ?

How can I help ? Renmiri 03:10, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, check out my 1,000 years ago Spira! [1] Renmiri 03:10, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair Use

Looks like Chrono Trigger was glanced over this time. Ah well; it would have been fun to have it beat FF6 and add a new chapter in that old rivalry. We'll get it in a few days. But my question today is, how many fair use images are we allowed to use in these articles? I added some to Chrono Cross in the style of Chrono Trigger's. I'm also in the process of doing a hard-copy edit (amazing how the fat melts away) and will probably call the usual suspects in to glance it over before submitting it to FA. The hard-copy is really getting the job done; Cross's nomination should be much less painful than Trigger's. --Zeality 14:56, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Editing the hard copy of the article is completed, so here is the invitation to glance Chrono Cross over if you have the time. The prose should be good shape. --Zeality 19:22, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Still FFX DVD issues

Just in case... I "airbrushed" the suspicious green M out of any picture that had it. It is still a game screen shot. Hope we can put this matter to rest. Renmiri 15:31, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On other topic, I gave you the wrong link. I wanted to show you this page

See...

I told them "in order to" was redundant :-) — Deckill e r 17:14, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I'm no Tony; he's a professional copyeditor, I'm an 18 year old wikipedia editor (and starting to become a copyeditor, but there's still much to learn) ^_^ 17:51, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

ff8

I started playing FF8 again last night (probably 7th playthrough, but first in at least two years). Man, I love this game. I always have a very cool junctioning strategy; I always bring Squall to the training center to draw from the grats. I then go out into the balamb overworld and fight the fastalocians for AP - but first, I make sure I have full stocks of blizzard, cure, fire, and the others! Then I get the spider web for quistis'....okay, okay, I'm an FF8 perfectionist, but FF8 has BY FAR THE BEST BATTLE SYSTEM IN THE HISTORY OF RPG. There's just so much to do with the junction system, and the story is amazing...okay, rant over :) I'm only 15 minutes into the new playthrough, haven't even gotten to the training center to battle yet! I'll get into it more tonight after work :) — Deckill e r 18:58, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, by the way, cool tip: once you get L-Mag-RF, sell the Occult Fans from the Balamb Garden library and buy tents and refine them for curaga :). — Deckill e r 19:00, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's always fun when you can kill Seifer's disk one appearence in one hit :) — Deckill e r 19:00, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Coolest "challenge" is the "no level up". It's actually quite easy, since when the player cards the enemies, he or she gains AP, but no EXP. — Deckill e r 19:05, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

Great job on Final Fantasy VI and VIII, man! Jeez, they'll probably have to raise the bar on these featured articles with folks like you around! ~ Hibana 21:37, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shadow article

"Minimal backstory to Shadow of the Colossus is revealed to the player at the beginning of the game, and only slightly more is known even after the credits roll, as no specific information is offered concerning the identities of the game's characters and their relationships with one another."

I recommend rewording to:

"During the game, minimal backstory is revealed to the player, as little information is offered concerning the backstories of the characters and their relationships."

or

"During the game, the player receives little information concerning the backstories of the characters and their relationships."

— Deckill e r 17:25, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS, might still need "with one another", not quite sure. — Deckill e r 17:27, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking, either it can lose the many geopgrahical features, or just include the geographical features (and not the list of every geographical feature in existence). — Deckill e r 17:40, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps "In addition to man-made structures, the region consists of diverse geographical features."? — Deckill e r 17:43, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Not even list any, since "diverse geographical features" would imply that it would cover everything from deserts to fields — perhaps say "every geographical feature except vocanoes and ice fields"? — Deckill e r 17:45, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- I removed the many, since Tony always blazes us for using many. — Deckill e r 17:53, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shadow article (2)

How badly do you want Edge's review? -- Steel 17:48, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see what I can do. No promises. -- Steel 17:52, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To be frank, I've never seen what the big deal with Edge is. Why you would want to import it is beyond me, surely they have half decent US magazines? At any rate, I'm still looking into getting hold of issue 157. -- Steel 12:33, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We don't have anything quite like EGM here, which I guess is a good thing. You know, I could be in posession of an issue of Edge in 10 minutes if I wanted to. *Sighs contentedly* -- Steel 12:59, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Response.

I said it's expected because SE had previously stated that it will be released in 2006. However, there is evidence AGAINST this, which is why I mentioned that people expect it to come in 2006 but there is reason to believe it won't be out by then. - A Link to the Past (talk) 22:33, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Outdated? It came out in late July. It confirmed many dates, including Children of Mana's, Final Fantasy V Advance, Elite Beat Agents, Yoshi's Island 2, Kirby: Squeak Squad and others. This is not an old list, this is brand new and up-to-date (at least, this is the newest one we have seen).

[http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=111571&highlight=Elite+Beat+Agents+Final+Fantasy+Island] Here is the link to it. The fact that they specifically mentioned it just recently and didn't even hint at FFVI being released anytime soon in a list of major handheld releases from Nintendo is an indication that it may not be coming in 2006. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:10, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that we haven't seen ANYTHING on FFVI Advance other than the fact that it'll have improvements since it was announced says something. Nintendo claimed that Zelda PH wasn't at Comic-Con because they wanted to focus on 2006 games, and said that Zelda PH might not make 2006. The fact that they didn't even mention it in this report which mentions most, if not all of their October-December games is an indication that it might not make it for 2006. I mean, we got a boxart and a date for FFV, and nothing for FFVI. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:59, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm assuming that my site which is around 100,000 doesn't count? :p - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:25, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[2] - A Link to the Past (talk) 01:01, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I came in sometime in January 2006, and eventually asked if I could review some games. Eventually, they made me a part of the primary staff and gave me a position where i could edit the website to add content, reviews and news. - A Link to the Past (talk) 01:01, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why people hate Final Fantasy VIII

Final Fantasy VIII receives the most VOCAL dislike (not necessarily the most) in the series for the following reason(s):

It wasn't another "OMG TEH KOOL FF7" — it showed a much deepeer, mature, literature-style story with romance
Its battle system made people go "OMG too much stuff 2 do not enough leveling! Iwanna level not make spells! teh omg!" — some found it to be tedious, which is why they try to make their arguement better by staying "teh story sucks" and "teh music sucks"
No annoying music — most immature gamers prefer immature music (FF7, Kingdom Hearts, etc.)

Oh, I could go on. People have similar issues with FFX and Xenosaga, as well. Who do mature and innovative stories/games always get flak? It has to be because gamers are still immature, for the most part! — Deckill e r 00:45, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I actually LOVE the draw system because it yields rewards equal to effort. Leveling up can be cheated in numerous ways; in FF8, you have to work for your meat and find strategies, systems, and other ways. The weapon/item/card refinement is a great example of how amazing this system can be. In FF8, developing your characters it satisfying; whereas when simply leveling up, it just comes as the story goes; not much effort is put into it. — Deckill e r 00:51, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah; it's so flexible. With the no level up system, you can actually have an easier time in some areas if you put some effort in. And I do the same thing; I like to get my disk one junctions finished right before Timber (or during Timber if I don't wanna buy lots of tents). Disk Two sees a few adjustments; Disk Three is when I usually get my Ultima, Meteor, Flare, etc. But it's been so long since I last played, so I've been trying to remember the concepts for this playthrough ^_^.

- Oh, and I think it's safe to say that the entire Dollet Mission is the best segment in the Final Fantasy series? :-) — Deckill e r 00:55, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, did you see the FF8 history? Some anon/signed in user deciding to log out is mocking me :-). But indeed; I also wish Ultimecia's motives were disclosed further, but in some ways, the mystery actually strengthens the plot, since the plot is about SQUALL and HIS EXPERIENCES, not outside POVs. — Deckill e r 01:08, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's also more complex than a astrophysics lecture. — Deckill e r 01:26, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It also overanalyses the fact that defeating Ultimecia is just an RPG standard, and that "fate" is more like "plot devices" :-) But since fate itself is a plot device, I can understand where it's coming from. — Deckill e r 01:30, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Despite these microissues, I agree with the gist, and it's what I was thinking of, as well. — Deckill e r 01:34, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Basically, it was all just a new plot innovation for the writers; they weren't interested in solving things such as these "time static theories" and all; they just wanted to create some interesting twists and ideas. — Deckill e r 01:40, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Then again, Time Travel is one of the most complex enigmas out there. — Deckill e r 01:43, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Update

According to (I think) Famitsu, FFVI Advance is slated for a Winter 2006 release in Japan. Dunno about 2006 for America; that's probably why it wasn't listed. [3]

Edge.

What information do you need to reference magazines in articles? -- Steel 13:36, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That shouldn't be too hard. This is looking promising. -- Steel 13:44, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have the review. -- Steel 16:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The first line of their review is "There are an awful lot of things wrong with Shadow of the Colossus". Wtf? You don't start the reivew of an 8/10 game like that... -- Steel 17:32, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One more barnstar for you

I, ZeWrestler, award you the **CVG Barnstar** for your great work on WikiProject Final Fantasy. Thank you!--ZeWrestler ^Talk 17:27, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A Favor

To start, Compliments: Again, I think your work on the Shadow of the Colossus article is very impressive. I'm also impressed that you worked FF VIII up to featured status. I know that I am in the minority in having it be my favorite FF game, so I was very surprised to see that it, and not some others, was of featured status. Two great games that I enjoy playing, and you've done great work with both. The Setup: I've actually got my own article that I'm considering trying/trying to get up to FA status that I have up for peer review. However, I'm impatient and West Liberty Foods has gotten very little attention. The Pitch: I was wondering if you would be willing to take a look at it and leave me some feedback on the peer review page for me. I understand that you are probably busy working on your own project, but if you have time, it would be a great help to me.--Dekkanar 01:41, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestion with the references. I did that and it makes the reference section look much cleaner.--Dekkanar 02:08, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I stole your article, but you weren't on at 2 in the morning, so I took the initiative :) Besides, as you can tell, I left plenty of work to be done ;) — Deckill e r 15:39, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, which is why I only fixed a few obvious things (kinda like what Gflores did for me with the Patriots article). By the way, check out Clone Wars (Star Wars), a real beauty. I only worked on a few of the lower sections, unfortunately. — Deckill e r 15:57, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- - Who knows, I still think my trilogy is similar to the Clone Wars structure. Think Xenosaga meets Xenogears meets Star Wars, and you have my trilogy. I'll give you a synopsis sometime, although the details and holes are still being filled ^_^. — Deckill e r 16:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it IS based in the Star Wars world, roughly 60-70 years after Endor. Basically, I use the whole "protagonist with no significance" thing. Yeah. My protagonist is just there, and, in reality, he's actually the bad person in terms of the greater good, although in reality, he's just a normal person trying to figure out why there's so much manipulation going on. — Deckill e r 17:24, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shadow's FAC

Could you write the nom, or at least tell me what to write. Never done this before... -- Steel 22:20, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. One was bound to turn up sooner or later. In other news, check your email. -- Steel 23:10, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It still feels like I haven't even done anything to it :S Is that weird? I'm sure the pride will come after it's been promoted to featured status. -- Steel 23:26, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just like to see it on the main page sometime. That would make my day. What's interesting is that the whole cleanup effort on the article started after that large and small argument. Who'd have thought an edit conflict would result in an article becoming featured? -- Steel 23:35, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was actually thinking of September the 18th (my 19th birthday), though I guess the same date in October has significance for the game. We'll see what happens. -- Steel 23:42, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still here. -- Steel 00:38, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Check your email again. -- Steel 00:42, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're more than welcome. -- Steel 01:04, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do what you need to do. -- Steel 13:21, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the same thing. I remember you saying that if there was anything else from the review worth mentioning then I should add it. I was thinking to myself "erm, well, there really isn't anything else to say, to be honest".
What's good though is that they didn't like Agro's controls that much, and Edge makes a better reference for that than some Gamers' Temple nobody has heard of before. -- Steel 00:15, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sharon

Yeah, I'm glad she's an admin now — I just hope it doesn't change her character. — Deckill e r 23:38, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, I didn't support the article out of the gate since I didn't get to make as many copyedits as I hoped (I was gonna wait and see if Tony felt they were necessary anyway). — Deckill e r 23:42, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter to me either way (then again, I'm tired). — Deckill e r 00:01, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding FF8 Europe

I find the information relevant. The claim of European release is incorrect. I just can't have something that's factually incorrect - why should its consistency in other articles stop us from writing the correct information? Changing the flags would be ridiculous, so I found writing a note to be the best way. If you come up with a better way to state it, by all means do so. I know it doesn't belong in the references section, but I don't know where else to put it. --TheEmulatorGuy 04:42, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shadow of the Colossus FAC

Hi, Ryu Kaze. First of all, it's a really good article and such articles are quite rare for a video game article, so my compliments to you and other contributors. Secondly, I still object because of the pictures and I have explained my reasoning on the FAC page. Greetings, good work and happy editing, Sijo Ripa 08:27, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FF8

Honestly, I got about an hour of sleep, so I'm really still not very concerned either way; but go ahead if you want, it doesn't bother me if you revert it. — Deckill e r 15:07, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kuja

Um...that's like saying Sephiroth or Seifer don't merit their own articles. — Deckill e r 01:58, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can see where you're coming from, but again, we mustn't disrupt an article's growth because it doesn't include such information. I'd say we wait another month or so and see if more info can come out of it — if not, a merge would be very good practice. — Deckill e r 02:18, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note

Hey; just a heads up, please add even somewhat new topcis to the bottom of my takpage so I don't have to hunt for them. Thanks :). As for 1.0, we'd only be able to get the main final fantasy article on it, and the main final fantasy article is very poor, so...— Deckill e r 02:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Full stops

Just a little heads up on full stops — a few here and there are considered customary to encyclopedic prose, or so I've heard. — Deckill e r 18:10, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FACs

That's probably what it is. — Deckill e r 17:46, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Although that last shadow oppose is certainly meritable :) — Deckill e r 17:58, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Angr's opposes won't sway Raul; they are subjective opinions on fair use criteria, and I'm a little disturbed that Angr is taking the opinion to every FAC. I may even talk to him/her about it, but I don't want to stir up a hornet's nest. Oh, by the way, in relation to the Shadow FAC...told ya :) — Deckill e r 18:06, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That a person would object to the shadow of the colossus writing due to redundancies and wordiness :) I really hate the term "clumsy writing"; I've heard it twice in the last 24 hours and it's a poor statement that means nothing in relation to the prose. — Deckill e r 18:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, X-2 is just a continuation of the final fantasy formula :) — Deckill e r 18:12, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Finally

I was expecting all our objects to be like that one (prose issues and stuff). Odd how it's taken 4+ days for one to appear. Anyway, a turning to dust ref might be hard to find. Even so, it's hardly critically important info so it wouldn't be the end of the world if we have to get rid of it. By the way, I deliberately skipped his spoiler warning point. I don't want to get involved in all that and really didn't want to start a discussion about those on the FAC. -- Steel 18:25, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's not really that great *Shrugs*. Do what you think is best. -- Steel 18:55, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kewl. -- Steel 19:23, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

>_> -- Steel 19:33, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied. -- Steel 21:14, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And again. -- Steel 21:18, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And again. -- Steel 21:40, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Them giving FFX a 6 doesn't really surprise me. I've always thought it's overrated myself. -- Steel 22:28, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FAC

It seems people are going to start to do everything in their power to make sure our articles stop reaching featured status ;-P — Deckill e r 18:51, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tehehe... "The nail that stands out gets hammered" ;-) Seems it's too late, FFX2 is well on it's way to FA ! Renmiri 01:35, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images, synopsis, secondaries, etc. — Deckill e r 18:55, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FF Movie more "official" than you think

Still does not belong in Wikipedia but it was on a French magazine who interviewed one of the big guys at SE, and Nojima will do the scenario :) [4]

hi

Dunno what happened there. Might have lost a point or two. Tony 14:24, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SOTC

I hate to sound like an egomaniac, but I knew that "in order to" and "then" were redundant and fine to remove :-) — Deckill e r 15:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interspersed Replies

Hello, I am sorry if my comments were poorly inserted. Sometimes wikipedians insert comments inside other peoples comments with extra colons, and sometimes they seem to be offended when people do so. Is there an ettiquette or guideline distinction for which style is appropriate where? Bmorton3 20:05, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Judgement

See, I have to be very careful to remain somewhat on good standings with everyone, so it can reap benefits in the future. That's why I'm very careful as to how I pass my judgement. — Deckill e r 01:39, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Usually, I'm only bold in situtations where I know it won't cause possible objections, but that's because I try to play the political and business aspects of the site, as well. — Deckill e r 01:42, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Idea

Hey; I have an idea: you should take Final Fantasy VII, and I'll take Final Fantasy IX, and next week, we'll peer review each other's pushes. — Deckill e r 02:35, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shadow of the Colossus is now featured!

Raul just now added it a few minutes ago. Well done! --Onlynameicanget 03:04, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

:D -- Steel 11:50, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Putnam

Your vote on my Putnam FA has been nullified by Raul. You may recast, if you wish, on the talk page of the article Hilary Putnam. Thanks.--Francesco Franco aka Lacatosias 11:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Final Fantasy VII

Great work on Final Fantasy VII so far, Ryu. Is there any way you can integrate the PC version section in the development section with the sources you have and/or hack off all the unsourced material, such as the rarity statement? Everytime I look at eBay, the price for the PC version hovers around $50, and there's not really any way to source a search query. Chrono Trigger had a similar problem, but the DigitalPress has no listings for PC games. ~ Hibana 19:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine. Don't feel obligated to get all these articles featured - I think you've quite more than any of us could ever have hoped. ~ Hibana 19:35, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You really ought to take a break. I hadn't realized that you're also majorly responsible for the Shadow of the Colossus feature. Three in one month is...well, it's incredible. I just don't want you to get burnt out on Wikipedia completely. ~ Hibana 01:20, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was kind of wondering where you had all that free time. Do you teach at a grade school or high school? I just got done with a second clinical semester, and have about two weeks until lecture classes and another clinical start again; that's why I've been on here so much in the past few days. ~ Hibana 01:28, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it sure is. ~ Hibana 01:35, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stop

Go get some rest before you die of a seizure! — Deckill e r 02:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Um

You're overdoing Final Fantasy VII — no article on Wikipedia has 119 references. The reference text takes up more space than the prose. You're going to need to cut those references down by half. — Deckill e r 03:16, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Um....what are you trying to prove? I haven't even really begun the bulk of the work on Final Fantasy IX yet (then again, I've worked 31 hours in the last three days). Going out with a bang? — Deckill e r 03:21, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We'll see what the FAC people say. — Deckill e r 03:25, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you doing this as a mockery to the reference hounds on FAC? This better not set a new precedent. If Final Fantasy IX doesn't get featured because it won't have 119 references, I'll be quite upset :) — Deckill e r 03:29, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, though. I think 119 references breaks a record. By the way, is there an Ultimania for FFIX? — Deckill e r 03:31, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'll probably do the bulk of the work on IX tomorrow, my first day off in like 10 days o.O. I'm going to model it after FFVIII, and with Tristam's structure serving as a base, it shouldn't be too bad. At least the 119 references will scare away the fancruft; but now I have to match that with IX. Again, any ultimania for IX? :D — Deckill e r 03:34, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, I'll let you know tomorrow; but I was mainly thinking development info. The gameplay section is done (I just need to add game manual citations), the plot summary just needs references, setting just needs compressing and charcter info moved to the character section (and perhaps more out of universe info),a nd then the character section needs to be modeled after FF8. It's a lot of work, but like I said, I have a day off tomorrow, so I should be fine. You should obviously be fine for everything except for a copyedit. — Deckill e r 03:36, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Go on Wikibreak

You need to go on Wikibreak. I can tell you're getting burned out, because the prose of the Final Fantasy 7 article is very rushed. Take a break now, and come back to the article in five or so days. You'll notice a major difference. — Deckill e r 13:47, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

You insist you aren't a nice guy, but I still want to thank you for being reasonable. It's a relief when editors don't get angry or personal about debates, and I'm impressed by your mature attitude. You've remained polite with me the whole time, even though it's plain that you hold very strong views that are in direct opposition to mine. Thanks for that. I've certainly encountered plenty of editors who were less nice. RobbieG 15:04, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aeri* in Final Fantasy VII

Actually, yeah, that is a 3RR vio. If you see someone make a single-purpose account like that, report them on WP:AN/3RR and let someone else do the rest of the reverting.

No block this time as you only reverted three times, but just a heads up. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:48, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, um. I blocked that guy, but why are we using the name "Aerith" when referring to the plot of Final Fantasy VII, where it's spelled "Aeris"? I understand in the general case and when referring to the various sequels and spinoffs, but it's Aeris in FFVII last I checked. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:52, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was only "Aeris" in the English release that was plagued with errors, actually. Square Enix always used "Aerith" on the materials that came specifically from them, even back then. It was Sony of Japan who translated the game rather than SE, and SE's made a point since then to make sure that the correct spelling was used. Ryu Kaze 22:55, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, 3RR doesn't apply when reverting vandalism, right? Ryu Kaze 22:56, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't the audience for the game itself be much larger than the audience for supplemental materials? It concerns me that this article doesn't once use the name in the game itself, instead favoring a name preferred by a select audience. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:01, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and content disputes aren't vandalism. Changing "Aerith" to "butt" can be reverted indefinitely. "Aerith" to "Aeris," that could reasonably be a good-faith dispute. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:02, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't referring to supllemental materials. Everything SE themselves put has always used "Aerith" and that's how they've ensured things are done outside Japan now too. The Kingdom Hearts titles use "Aerith", Advent Children uses it, Before Crisis is going to use it. It will always be used. Extensive discussion on the subject on the Aerith page itself has concluded several times, I believe, that "Aerith" is the way we should do things here, as it is the official name.

Anyway, the article isn't preferring anything other than the character's name. Going by a mistranslation would be following a select audience, especially given that the character's creators use "Aerith" and given that there's several more titles that have used "Aerith" than just the one that incorrectly used "Aeris". Ryu Kaze 23:42, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, everything SE has released except the multi-million-selling game, which probably exceeds the distribution of the other materials. It's rather inappropriate to declare the only English translation of Final Fantasy VII available a "mistranslation" and thus ignore the way it actually spells the name when describing that game specifically.

While I agree with using Aerith in the general case (the character article, the other game articles), it seems wholly inappropriate to be using that name in the context of a plot summary of FFVII, since that game doesn't use the name "Aerith" once.

I'm suggesting that Aerith be changed to Aeris only in the context of the plot summary of FFVII itself, with an acknowledgement of the later retcon. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:48, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously we should remain consistent across all the pages. Maybe we should mention "Aeris" once, but there was no retcon. It was always "Aerith". Ryu Kaze 00:08, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That feels newspeak-esque. :/ The problem is that it wasn't always Aerith. In the game this article is talking about, it was initially released in English with the name spelled "Aeris," and that version of the game is the English-language version of widest distribution. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:17, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but it's the most widely distributed version, but if it's an error it's still an error, right? Especially when the creators have made it clear what they intended.

Anyway, I'm going to try to find out if any rereleases of the original (PAL or PC) used "Aerith". From what I've heard, one did, but I want to be sure. Ryu Kaze 00:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I suppose we should keep the discussion over on VII's talk page for simplicity's sake. Ryu Kaze 00:20, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My point is that, while it may be an error, it's not our business to be fixing these errors or deciding what is an error, but merely reflecting the work that was published. This was edit-conflicted with your comment above; I'll continue this at the other talk page. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:27, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's doubly inappropriate to be changing all references to "Aeris" in verbatim quotes of Final Fantasy VII to "Aerith". :/ - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:51, 12 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not changing it. I got that from someone's script (it's either the PC version or the PAL version; I'm unsure). Ryu Kaze 00:08, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

criteria

Thanks, Ryu. I like it. I haven't yet looked properly at the text below. Will do soon. Tony 15:32, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Hi there!

Well, I have been busy whipping up 3 new forums, FFP "new and improved" [5] which you saw (txs for the cool posts!) the Spira of 1,000 years ago RPG [6] and now a second Spira RPG from friends of mine which I "rescued" from ezboard which is getting flakier and flakier and their 2 years old board was crashing all the time... It's called Eternal Spira and it takes place 5 years after FFX with a band of new baddies trying to bring back Sin [7]. Too bad you don't do RPGs, it seems you are needing a break from all the stress of the latest FA trials! Come chat some mythology and canon with us. Crazyswordsman stops there often and there aren't any FFVII fanboys to bug you ;) BTW, I have the AC cd now so I can do good screen captures if you need them... Renmiri 17:24, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Take care of yourself, will ya ? WPFF will hobble without you but your peace of mind comes first! Renmiri 17:24, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, AC was a good movie and quite enjoyable, plus it had some awesome overdrives :) And yes, it's being fun! Good luck on FFVII review! Renmiri 18:16, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, then consider my good wishes doubled! Do you have MSN messenger ? I'm on right now at my yahoo mail addy Renmiri 18:29, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No Instant Messaging ? Actually, those are great distractions so you do well by not installing them ;-) Well, triple good luck wishes then! Renmiri 18:45, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CT

Most definitely. CVG is virtually unleashing the dragon on Wikipedia right now. It's an exciting time. --Zeality 19:18, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: FF7 references

Thanks! That's one amazing article you're working on, by the way. You should definitely submit this for Featured status soon. It's really large in size (97 kilobytes), but it's a very good read all the way through. 137 references has to be some sort of record...

Here's the code for putting the references into columns, if you want to do that to any other pages.

(By the way, if no one told you yet, I'm formerly "Onlynameicanget" - just got my name changed today.)

Again, awesome article! --NateDan 20:56, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I got bored. :P I may double-column some other, non-FA articles in the future, if they have lots of references. --NateDan 23:17, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedit

Yeah, I didn't get to finish (it was two in the morning); I'm basically one of Tony's understudies when it comes to working on copyediting, I'm trying to make his 2a guide second nature (it sure is tough, though). — Deckill e r 21:07, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay; can you reintroduce that when you redo the edits I accidently reverted during the edit conflict? After that, I'll only be another 20 minutes for copyediting. — Deckill e r 21:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I got out of work a half hour ago; I'm just working on tweaking the FAC sandbox before FF7 copyediting. My edits are very minor and only remove a word or two, but I think Tony and the others will like that. — Deckill e r 21:45, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; check my latest edits; most of them should probably be reverted, as they don't really make those parts less awkward. — Deckill e r 21:57, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FA page changes and new steps

Hi, I've updated the proposed steps at Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_candidates/New_steps_to_FA, and as everybody who has commented has generally been in favour, I'm going to be bold and put them up at the same time you make the FA changes (to standardize confusion across the process!). Just let me know when that is or I might miss it. Yomangani ^talk 23:47, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up. Take a look at Template:PR-steps-proposal - I think it suggests the "Optional" element without encouraging you to skip it Yomangani ^talk 14:07, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, I forgot to say "nice work" - not only in the writing, but in handling everybody's concerns. And you are changing the page name to "Featured article criteria", right? Yomangani ^talk 14:17, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I've been keeping an eye on it as it progresses, but didn't want to fill the talk with masses of "me too" comments. Only little thing I still see outstanding is the link to Tony's 2a page - I know that is the correct title at the moment, but don't you think a wikilink to it with the text reading "How to satisfy criterion 1a" would be less confusing? Sure, they might be confused when they get there, but at least they won't be looking for advice on the lead section (the new 2a). Yomangani ^talk 14:28, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhat late, I've put the new steps live too. Yomangani ^talk 22:16, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

2a

Hi Ryu

Thanks for your concern about the title of my writing article. Starting with the length one is ... OK, doable, but it would be slightly preferable to start as you did before, with the big one. I'm unsure. How hard is it to change the names of the three articles in question to 1a (which I like, of course, because it puts writing right at the top), with permanent redirects from the current 2a titles? Is this something that an admin can easily do? Tony 02:40, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know that you teach literature: what an excellent profession. I think I can cope with the temporary confusion that a name-change will cause to Google's robots (some phrases, such as "strategic distance" now Google right to the top—gag me). So go ahead and make it 1a if you're still inclined. Tony 03:08, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, 1a's no problem. Thanks. Tony 08:11, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe a little pessimistic, but...

I have a strong feeling, from past experience, that the FF7 won't pass FAC because of the length of the story section and the high amount of references (and perhaps the inclusion of a few minor development details that can probably be left out). I think at this stage, we need to go through and trim the excess; I'd be willing to do this as the secondary editor, since I think I added a grant total of two references to the entire article, lol. If we can get it down to 70 KB, we might stand a chance. — Deckill e r 04:58, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's up. — Deckill e r 17:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

== Leonhart (a real Lionhear !t) ==

I'd would like to thank you infinite times for making FF VIII and FF VI FA articles. May Zell, Sqall, Sabin and Celes help you through precarious situations ! Cheers. Amir85 21:06, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edge

Hey, Ryu, remember me? We got SotC featured a while back. Seems like forever, doesn't it? Anyway, how would you describe Edge's reviewing habits? At the moment on MGS3 we've got "UK-based magazine Edge, who are known for their relative harshness in reviews, rated it 8/10.", but someone's objected (not majorly though) to that wording. You know more about the magazine than me so I thought you might be able to help. -- Steel 00:25, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Ryu!

Hey man! Hibana got me into the wikipedia final fantasy project. I see you gave her a barn star thing for helpful edits. Can I have one? I've cleaned up around Final Fantasy games and FF related articles (weapons, magic, chocobos, etc), and reverted vandalism, etc, though now if you look in there history there swamped by Hibana and your edits :D

Well anyway. Keep up the good work :D

cocopop2005

Shadow of the Colossus page

A user is causing some issues over there. — Deckill e r 19:32, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Burning out

I think we're both burning out. Between your research and my copyediting/admin duties, we're starting to lose our temper. We really chewed that user out on the SOTC boards, and we really went all out defending the FF7 FAC. — Deckill e r 21:12, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chrono Cross (the second advent!)

Yeesh, I can see why you need archives for this talk page. I'm just stopping by to ask whether Chrono Cross is doing good in the fair use department and what might need to be cut / added / "rationaled". You are probably best qualified to take a glance because of the FF7 business. We're nominating tomorrow (though I'm going to do one more little minor round of copyediting tonight), so if you're available, just point out any needed work and I'll take care of it. The CVG revolution is being fueled by Rock Lee 200% dedicated, and I will give no less in getting Chrono Cross up to Featured Article. --Zeality 22:00, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; no problem about the article. It's more experience for me, and FF7 definitely has to take precedence (months ago I was curious why it hadn't been cleaned up for FA considering its importance). I'll fix these up. Hopefully Swordsman can get FF4 FA in the off-time, eh? I'm thinking about copyediting that one myself. --Zeality 00:54, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Totally forgot to ask something. I'm going to reduce the literal size of the images and reupload them, but should I reduce the thumbs on the page as well? The screenshots are mostly 250px. --Zeality 00:59, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing it out. Two more supports for FF7; looks good. --Zeality 01:05, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I received a question concerning the use of NA and JPN in place of the flags on the CVG infobox, as I used them on Chrono Cross before nominating it for FA. Is it related to the image crackdown or anything? --Zeality 16:22, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That was me asking the question by the way. In your edit summary on FF8, you said it was to clean up the infobox similar to FF7, though when i go there, it was actually User:TheEmulatorGuy who did it in the first place. Just wondering since I was adding aflags to things yesterday. --PresN 16:33, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FF5/6

I honestly think that's overreferencing and overexplaining, and we probably don't need to include it in the article. — Deckill e r 16:51, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shadow

This really isn't good enough. I think there's still one sentence near the end which isn't sourced. -- Steel 21:35, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Er, you did detect the joke, right? -- Steel 21:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I've seen FFVII's page. That's just insane (in the good way). -- Steel 21:54, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kara

I assume s/he was one of the participants in the edit war on that article in previous months? I think we may have to be quite upfront and nip the issue in the bud (I seem to be saying that a lot lately). — Deckill e r 02:20, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your revert to Shadow of the Colossus

Hello there! I am leaving you this message because you reverted a recent edit of mine on Shadow of the Colossus claiming that the addition of the PAL region cover art (which was found unused in Category:Orphaned fairuse images as of 6 August 2006) was a violation of WP:FU. While I somewhat understand your concerns, I am asking you to be a bit clearer. Even though the cover art is similar to the American version, it still has its differences and is being used to illustrate the critical commentary at Shadow of the Colossus#PAL version. WP:ADMINs have commented that showing and commenting on other visual concepts of subjects, be it video games, movies, or albums, is exceptable in an encyclopedic way, especially for Wikipedia. If nothing else, it is a documentation of other "packaging." Though I can see it getting out of hand with products that have MANY varieties, I don't see how it harms articles such as this that may only have three variations (Japanese, American, and PAL). -- moe.RON ^{talk | done | doing} 03:11, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your concerns and will keep an eye out in the future for further WP:FU changes. Good luck on the article. Cheers! -- moe.RON ^{talk | done | doing} 03:28, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FF7

I was trying to formulate a point to defend the article's length, but I realized you and Deckiller have already added support for the article in its nomination. As a revolutionary game, FF7 encyclopedically deserves this kind of attention. But yeah, I'm not quite sure how to defend it, other than to compare the actual plot section length (minus the backstory) to that of CT or CC. --Zeality 13:04, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Kaldari. The changes you made are okay, I guess. I just want one line you removed to remain in (more info on the FAC page). I also trimmed another line that I felt should be dropped in light of the ones you had taken out. Please let me know if your changes and mine are enough to ease your concerns. Ryu Kaze 01:43, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Opposition withdrawn. Please see my comments on the FAC page. Kaldari 05:29, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1a/2a

Ryu—Please go ahead and move it, with a redirect from the current name, I guess. I'm not very good at these technical things. Tony 15:41, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thx. And I guess the two linked exercise pages should have "2a" changed to "1a". :-) Tony 15:48, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kewl!

File:Hand with thumbs up.jpg

Tony 15:57, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FF7

Sorry I didn't copyedit the article a whole lot, I figured I'd let you do the bulk of the work as your last project, but someone just performed a somewhat heavy copyedit anyway. — Deckill e r 05:40, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedit

User:Tony1 recently gave me a list of users who might be able to help properly copyedit the Megatokyo article, in order to help it pass 1a of the featured article criteria. After glancing over the interests and histories of the people he named, you seemed to be the one who would most likely be able to help. I understand if you can't, though - your Final Fantasy VII nomination is pretty busy, and this may not be in your field of expertise. If you can't, could you possibly recommend someone who might be able to help? Thanks. JimmyBlackwing 11:03, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I've been going a little crazy on the copyedits for that article; I probably won't get to the rest tonight though. — Deckill e r 04:55, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FAC

Hi Ryu

Sorry that it's come to my squabbling on the talk page over this vote thing, which I thought was required by the sign at the top. That's why I dutifully started the vote, and why I was particularly peeved that Raul should blunder in and call it "silly". I feel that he's tending to be too assertive at the moment, including his sudden and unexplained removal of a FAR listing, his ebullient edit comments, and now this. I wouldn't want to have to do his job, and he (mostly) does it OK, in my opinion, but that doesn't mean that he's the lord of the manor. I will challenge him again if he appears to overstep the mark!

Congrats on the new criteria. I like them a lot, and it will be interesting to remind people of a few new requirements if necessary, such as the need to disclose prior contributions to a nomination when supporting, and the "professional" requirement. Nice! Tony 12:38, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kewl. BTW, Peirigill wonders why I've included the solar flare pic at User:Tony1/How_to_satisfy_Criterion_1a:_exercises_in_textual_flow. He says: "What's the point of having an image of the sun? You're editing the copy, not the image, which is incongruous when every other image illustrates the art of editing."

I said that it comes from the article I took the lead from, but he thinks it's conceptually different from every other pic I've used in the 1a project, which are to do with writing itself. I said I'd ask other people's opinion: should I dispense with it? Tony 13:02, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

I'm looking into Frank Klepacki now. About to submit it for peer review. --Zeality 18:06, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]