Issues

Ivalice

Suggestion: Separate the Final Fantasy XII section of the Ivalice article to a List of Final Fantasy XII locations article? 私はBluerfnです 07:50, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Staff Lists

I really like the staff members. I should add a full staff list for the articles, but should I do the staff members with commentaries or additional context? I try to add the staff member lists to the articles, but they remove it at the requests because they say that without commentaries or additional context, it is trivial. Can you help me on how to do the staff lists for the games? I really need anyone's help, even an editor on how to add the staff lists. If you do have some ideas, that would be great. Thanks.

You don't want to be doing staff lists at all. However, in the development section, you could provide information on how the game's graphics were designed, providing the concept artists and model directors within there. The same can be done with story, sound and marketing. --TheEmulatorGuy 04:53, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course. I did provide information on the development section, instead of staff lists on the sites. That information that you just gave was absolutely correct. Thanks for the info as well.--Sjones23 22:06, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FFIX Amarant article

Why does every other playable character from FFIX have their own page except for Amarant? He seems equally noteworthy as Beatrix, who also has her own page. Plebmonk 02:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you hold off on creating one for a bit? If you'll look above, we're trying to establish guidelines about which characters require articles and which don't. I think it's leaning towards main male lead, main female lead and main villain. Everyone else gets merged into the game's character list. Axem Titanium 03:45, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Plebmonk 13:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's been taking a while to set up due to catching up w/other things between semesters :) — Deckill e r 16:15, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you're right, Amarant doesn't need an article, but at least the navbox should be edited. Also in my opinion, Final Fantasy IX as a whole needs to be redone. Zidane's article is very, very small. It misses the references and citations, it is totally bad. I want to do them but I need help, approval and guidelines. I'm new to the whole formatting thing, plus I dont want to spoil somep plans you are going to do guys. I think I'll just start by minor edits, removing the "really" obvious stuff. Mohamed 17:08, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Final Fantasy Summons

There is an article for the Beastiary, and there is an article on the Races, perhaps there should be an article on Summons? I went ahead and already threw together a stub for such an article here, but someone mentioned that it might not be appropriate for this project, so I thought I'd bring it up here for discussion/incorporation into the project. I think it should be included, certainly many summons are present in almost every Main Title, such as Shiva and Ifrit. But perhaps there could be some help in consolidating the list (There's 77 summons that I found with a few quick searches)? Maybe we could only list paragraphs of repeat summons, and simply have a brief list of summons that are unique to their games? I tried to put together a beginning for a section talking about the roles that summons play in the game titles. It would also help if we could find some developement info about the summons, or something (I admit, I haven't looked for any just yet). Or if this is info that you guys feel would be more appropriate as a shorter list in a subsection in another page, that's always an option as well. --Daedalus 17:59, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles about the subject have been deleted before and we're currently trying to decide what to do with the bestiary, race and weapon articles. See #This is it - Groundwork for the FINAL FANTASY CAMPAIGN. Axem Titanium 23:37, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FF I & II Navbox Template

Since there are so many Final Fantasy and Final Fantasy II articles without navboxes or any sort of connection whatsoever, I'd like to propose a template to help draw attention to these articles: {{FFI&II}} Since nearly every release of these two games as been in a compilation, I put them together in the same box, and listed all pertinent pages for both games. The style also follows the same design of the other individual game templates. Any thoughts on how this could be streamlined, or is it good to go? I think it would be nice to have, but I want to know if it will only add to clutter. Nall 22:15, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it looks like you've already gone ahead and made it. It looks good, go for it, I've already made the changes I felt were necessary. Axem Titanium 02:17, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plot summaries

I was doing a little research about the script length and the synopsis lengths on Wikipedia, and here's what I found:

Final Fantasy IV: 18,000 word script, 1,750 word plot summary (like 2,100 if we include setting/characters)

Final Fantasy VI: 22,000 word script, 1,500 word plot summary (double if we include setting/characters)

Final Fantasy VII: 58,000 word script, 1,900 word plot summary (double it if we include setting/character)

Final Fantasy VIII: 75,000 word script, 1,050 word plot summary (not including setting/character sections; double that if we include them).

Final Fantasy X: 105,000 word script, 1,050 word plot summary (double with the setting/character sections, plus a subpage)

Thoughts? — Deckill e r 04:43, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A little number crunching for the plot summary to script ratio:

FFIV:9.7%

FFVI:6.8%

FFVII:3.3%

FFVIII:1.4%

FFX:1.0%

I dunno what that actually entails but it looks pretty good. I guess it means we're decently good at preventing extra details from clogging up the plot sections? Next time we have a FAC, we can pull those numbers out to get the complainers to lay off about the long plot sections. Axem Titanium 16:34, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These are based on the largest GameFAQs scripts for each game, so it might be a little inaccurate. Nevertheless, its pretty good anyway. Although 9.7 and 6.8 percent are a little much IMO. — Deckill e r 20:01, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What about X-2? --Mika1h 23:29, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it's in the same range as FF7.

I'd like to underscore that the percentages may be a little misleading, because the scripts include subplots. I have to sound like an egoist, but I believe our best plot synopsis is Final Fantasy VIII. It's succinct, and it covers the main points. For our next FAs, I think we should strive for that sort of length and coverage. — Deckill er 14:08, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A nice article for citations: evolution of the Final Fantasy series

Welcome to the evolution of the Final Fantasy series - a crash course through what has made Square Enix's series so loved and longed for by fans all over the world, and how Final Fantasy XII represents the culmination of almost two decades of sterling gameplay and design. http://uk.ps2.ign.com/articles/756/756635p1.html —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Renmiri (talk • contribs) 15:00, 21 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

That has mostly to do with FFXII. --Sir Crazyswordsman 04:11, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Character class articles.

I have no particular investment in them, but I happened to notice that the White Mage page had been updated due to me looking at the FF1 article recently. It seems that User:LuvLuv_G2000 has been going on a mighty swath of page moves lately (see contribs ), and he isn't taking no for an answer- I reverted his move that caused a double redirect, and he promtply deleted my talk page comment. Frankly, I don't really care where the pages end up, but someone here might want to check and make certain that there's some kind of consensus to do this. I would like to point out that WP style is to only use parentheses when required, though, making me somewhat skeptical. Heck, personally I'd support the using of parens in cases like television series episodes for consistency (at Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(television)#Episode_articles), but it seems that the decision went the other way here, and the names of character classes are a lot more unique than television series episodes. SnowFire 03:14, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Content

I am more concerned with the content of those "articles". I'm removing several lists of magical spells, which don't belong. Taken from one article:

"The Red Mage is by the best fighter of the spellcasters, and can use a wide variety of weapons and armors. The Red Mage makes a good alternative to the Black Mage, especially in normal mode."

"Mainly a Viera Job Class, the Red Mages in here are amazing. If you created one, then had her use Summoner abilities, not only would you have made a Red Summoner, but you'll have a nearly invincible character. They're still great by themselves, however."

It seems that classes are next on the anticruft campaign, after creatures. — Deckill e r 03:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, looking at what relevent information we have, we can probably get all the class stuff onto that one article with ease. But let's focus on creatures first :) — Deckill e r 03:35, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Slight disagreement here - the very few character class articles that yet exist are the ones that survived the big mergist project to put most character classes on Final Fantasy character classes and leave only the most iconic as their own articles. I think the ones that still have their own articles ought to remain (though I'm sure they need to be de-crufted). -RaCha'ar 03:41, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed about ones with several franchises and the more iconic, verifiable ones. Perhaps we should only merge Blue/Red Mages and maybe Dragoon then? — Deckill e r 03:44, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blue Mage, Dragoon, and Red Mage should easily be merged without a problem into the main article, I agree with that. The specific info about White Mage and Black Mage in individual games is borderline trivia and can probably go. Once those are gone, there's not much to their articles and they could be merged into the main article easily as well. I'm not quite sure about how I feel about summoner, I think that either the info about the summons in the magic page should be moved to the summoner page, or the summoner page should be merged into classes. --Daedalus 16:51, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took the liberty of attempting to streamline and merge the main article for Black Mage into the main article for Final Fantasy character classes. I did not actually edit either of the pages, but instead have posted my proposed new section in User talk:NicholaiDaedalus. It should contain all of the important information from both articles, and I tried to remove the non-essential information like individual game info and strat-guide type stuff. Feel free to take a look and let me know what you think of it. Also feel free to contribute to it. --Daedalus 21:20, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. Once we get everything we can merge into the list merged, I can then do a final copyedit for concision (which I still have to do for the creatures list, but not until everything is settled over there). — Deckill er 21:22, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now that Black Mage has been merged into the Main Article, why do we still have the original Black Mage main article? All of it's information is either unsourced, untagged for needing citations, OR, trivial info, or info that is redundant to what is in Final Fantasy character classes. So why is the article still there? --Daedalus 18:37, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was waiting for you to reply to the merge; all set now. Next: White mage? — Deckill er 18:48, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds great. If you haven't already started, I will start tackling White Mage in about an hour from now, unless you already had a plan of attack. --Daedalus 18:58, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free; I have accounting until 6:30, so I'm going to be busy. — Deckill er 19:35, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. As with Black Mage, the proposed section can be found on my talk page. Also as with Black Mage, anyone who wants can contribute. --Daedalus 21:30, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Creatures of Final Fantasy (phase 2)

The initial move to the mainspace is complete, and the major redirects have been handled. Now all that remains is finishing the referencing job and a few tweaks. However, the images concern me; perhaps we should limit one per creature? Once we finish this, we can make any needed adjustments to the class issue above, and move on to...races? — Deckill e r 00:13, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely one image per creature. The fair use concerns would be astounding. Try to pick the most representative (e.g., not the FFXI version of cactuar, lol) and failing that, the most recent. Races next sounds good, though I can't really come up with any fair and/or consistent criteria for the inclusion or exclusion of specific races, at least off the top of my head. Axem Titanium 01:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Took care of the images earlier; I'll probably try to work on referencing that article before races. — Deckill e r 01:19, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As poor shape as races is in, it's at least consolidated into one article that reads okay. I say we modify classes next, and then races. By the way, excellent job on Creatures. Are we still following the rule of threes for creatures (3 game appearances and 3 out-of-universe statements) or are we listing only the most common and how is that delineated? --Daedalus 16:20, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For creatures, we pinpointed the twelve most common creatures that did not fit into a paragraph in the "other" section (like Ochu, dragons, and creatures from myth). I think for now we might want to expand the other section a bit to include referencing and any omissions, but I think that we got the twelve most notable creatures. I agree that classes should be next, since it could use a bit more consolidation. — Deckill er 00:50, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CFD notice

Removed cfdnotice, cfd has completed. --Kbdank71 15:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please also note Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 February 20 for a review of the decision regarding Category:Actors by series. Tim! 08:12, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taking a break

I'm taking a break from the fictional topics on Wikipedia, mainly because I've been pacing back and forth as to how are we going to find good secondary souces for a lot of our gameplay articles so that we don't get the deletionists moving on us in the future. I'll probably be working on A.J. Wright and Woonsocket, Rhode Island for the next week or two, so I can sharpen my research skilsl so that I can increase my output after the break. — Deckill er 04:25, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, I'll put them on hold a bit. — Deckill er 02:29, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The World Is Square

Is this article really necessary? :/ Kariteh 23:11, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No; I recommend sending it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. — Deckill er 23:30, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of Summons in the Final Fantasy series

This page should not exist. Is anyone aware of this page's creation? As far as I know, this was created without discussion, and added to the Navbox without discussion. --Daedalus 21:16, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My prod was removed by an anon, and I can't be bothered to kick this to AFD. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 08:21, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Too bad I'm too worried about the fallout to just delete and salt it. Sometimes, I wish I had the boldness of User talk:Philwelch. Other times, I'm glad I don't. Anyway, it's up for deletion. — Deckill er 13:29, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A gift from cousin CSM

For use in FFVI related articles. An interview with our favorite translator extrordinnaire. --Sir Crazyswordsman 02:20, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh look, we're in it. o.o—ウルタプ 03:41, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Limits?

I've noticed that the characters' limit breaks aren't usually mentioned in-article. I can understand not wanting too much clutter, but I feel that little bits like this help to flesh out the "interesting trivia" aspect of the site. Basically they only seem to come up if a characters' limit marks them as a specific "class" (such as Quistis using Blue Magic, making her more or less a Blue Mage). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.68.0.47 (talk) 01:22, 17 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

We're trying to move away from the interesting trivia issue on Wikipedia, so it might still be excessive. — Deckill er 05:02, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Other FF wikis as references?

I asked a question way back in November on Talk:List of Final Fantasy XI characters about whether FFXIclopedia was considered a legitimate source for our articles. Only now has someone - the person who added the cite in the first place - responded to it. I still haven't actually had my question answered. Are other wikis considered legitimate sources for references? -RaCha'ar 12:13, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I just found this: WP:RS#Self-published sources (online and paper). -RaCha'ar 12:17, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FF GuidesGET

One of the biggest problems we seem to have is that no one here has the official guides for any of the games, except possibly XII and X. Well, I now have the Brady guides for III, Anthology, Chronicles, VII, IX, X, and X-2, as well as the Versus guide for VII. I've started up a userpage at User:PresN/FFGuides to put in the ref information, as well as various useful pages numbers, as I find them. I've started sourcing Monsters of Final Fantasy, but if anyone needs a reference that they think/know is in one of those guides, just ask me on my talk page, and I'll look for you. Feel free to add page numbers/guides to my userpage there if you have one of these or other guides. --PresN 06:45, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I've mentioned elsewhere, I used to have more but currently only have the StratGuides for FFVII, FFVIII, and FFX-2. So I'm really only adding the Guide to VIII to the table, but it's something. --Daedalus 19:32, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Problem at Talk:Squall Leonhart

An anon has been constantly reverting the word "protagonist" in favor of the POV word "hero". Mind sharing your two cents? — Deckill er 10:29, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This debate is absolutely amazing to me. I've never seen someone on Wikipedia actually argue that a word shouldn't be used in an article because "a lot of people don't know it." I applaud you for keeping your cool. -RaCha'ar 12:31, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :) I try to adhere to WP:BITE, but sometimes it doesn't work. I guess it's mostly due to the whole "seen it all on Wikipedia" mindset. You put it very succinctly on the talkpage though, which is good. — Deckill er 12:45, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you guys think a straw poll would be appropriate to determine consensus? By the way, I really need to learn how to do that succinctness thing. :P Bhamv 13:06, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe, but it might invite sockpuppeting :) If we restrict it to accounts only... — Deckill er 13:09, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am much divided on the subject, while I do like Encyclopedic context of the word "protagonist" its is extremely annoying to read articals that are constantly using the word over and over. It begins to sound like technobabble and in many cases could be changed so something more pleasing without disrupting the context of the article. Syxxness 21:10, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is, in many cases, it can't be changed to something more pleasing. Anything other than 'protagonist' would delve into point-of-view, like 'hero' and 'main character', etc. Not to mention 'something more pleasing' is a matter of opinion, one that is probably not worth deciding a consensus over. --Teggles 05:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Final Fantasy Tactics players, need some help

Could any Final Fantasy Tactics players please list which job classes are new in the following page? The page isn't public, I found it by 'other' means, and it could be helpful. jobmaking_more.swf --Teggles 04:14, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The only new jobs are the first two ones on the left of the first page, Onion Knight and Dark Knight. Now, we've known about their inclusion to FFT: Shishi Sensou for a while now (Onion Knight came up first on the official site in December, Dark Knight showed up later), BUT the text from the this site could be useful if we could translate it well enough, since there's not a lot of info one how either class functions right now. Cool find! Nall 07:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Final Fantasy campaign continued

I'd like to throw out ideas for some goals that might help the project. I don't want to sound bossy, because this is a Wiki, but perhaps these ideas thrown out onto the table will help us:

I think we're going a hell of a job on Monsters of Final Fantasy and Final Fantasy character classes, with Races of Final Fantasy not too far behind. The others, like Final Fantasy magic, are also on the horizon. Nice work everyone; let's keep it up and get even more reliable sources for those articles, as well as continue with the strategy guide referencing!

I'd like to set a goal to get at least two of the following articles - Monsters of Final Fantasy, Final Fantasy character classes, Races of Final Fantasy, and Final Fantasy magic - to Good article status by May 1. I think we can make it. In addition, by May 1, I think we should consolidate the other gameplay articles, and perhaps start on Gameplay of Final Fantasy.

Out of the main 13 (including X-2) game articles, only one (II) is not at least at Good Article status, and XII barely passed because of the excessive in-universe info. Perhaps a goal of March 20 to get II to GA status and XII trimmed?

After May 1, we can probably focus on getting the remainder of the 13 game articles to Featured Article status.

After that, I think the major concern is the main article, and the location/character articles and lists.

To sum up my ideas:

Final Fantasy II to GA status by March 20;
Keep improving Final Fantasy XII
At least two of Monsters of Final Fantasy, Final Fantasy character classes, Races of Final Fantasy, and/or Final Fantasy magic to GA status by May 1;
Start working on the other gameplay articles, like Final Fantasy items and Final Fantasy weapons and armor; perhaps create Gameplay of Final Fantasy by May 1; and
Elevate all 13 primary game articles to FA status from May onward. — Deckill er 00:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think these are tangible goals. Do you all agree? — Deckill er 01:25, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Page reworking

I decided to be WP:BOLD and update the main page to fit the times better. I'd normally open up a sandbox, but I feel that it strikes a good balance between everything discussed with the wikiproject and the actions being taken up to this point. Thoughts/concerns/ideas/criticisms? — Deckill er 23:11, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In general, I like the changes. I like the addition of the Content and Behaviour Section, it really explains what we are and what we are not doing. I don't like the implication that we are redefining what is and isn't a RS for our own purposes, perhaps we should rephrase that line. I would like to see the scope and goals more clearly addressed / more prominently displayed. Merging them into the prose of the intro paragraph is very concise, but it underplays their importance. I recommend we add a note or paragraph about using most iconic illustrations as opposed to complete lists, this seems to be our number one problem IMO. We should also mention Notability of topics that can stand alone, and topics that should be merged into a larger list article, another big problem as people have resisted merges of articles like Moogle. I predict this will become a very big problem when we start merging character articles into their parent game articles, and it would be nice to have something authoritative to point at that already establishes consensus and precedent, it would avoid many unneccessary debates and edit wars, as well as prevent meaningless merges. --Daedalus 20:28, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah; there's a lot still to add. I disagree about the RS, though, because I've witnessed a lot of the FACs, where people complain that citing the game itself for plot summary is not a reliable source and whatnot. That information can be expanded in the manual of style, like the prose states. I feel that our goals are concise and that adding them to the lead actually strengthens them, but I think we need a section where we break down the plan to attain each of those goals or how we attain them on a regular basis. For instance, doing something similar to the Goal#2 subsection for the other two goals. As for scope, I don't know if we can really mention more of it without providing a list of the articles we cover (which we should post, if it's no longer around). A lot of the merge/notability information can go into the manual of style...the more I think about it, the more I think we may need just an entire 1-2 paragraph section outlining the manual of style. — Deckill er 21:31, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Topic nominated for removal

Since this is the center of the appropriate wiki-project please see Wikipedia:Featured topic removal candidates/Final Fantasy X The Placebo Effect 02:05, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List nominated for removal

Might want to see this too: Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of Final Fantasy titles. Kariteh 09:49, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

:I strongly disagree with the FLR for four reasons. 1.) The issues present are relatively minor cases of list modernization. 2.) The list was originally intended to be list the games in the series, not the radio/novels, to the best of my knowledge. 3.) Some of the sources can easily be swapped with more reliable sources (not to mention the fact that it's not a controversial subject or a fancruft issue, so placing an inline citation for every point is redundant when sources at the bottom chroincle the topic in a similar manner). 4.) It provides too much of a distraction for the project, which is spending time focusing on other tasks. — Deckill er 14:09, 3 March 2007 (UTC) The main thing is that the issues are minor enough to be contained to this WikiProject when we get around to it. — Deckill er 14:13, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How would I reference these things?

Perhaps I should have asked this somewhere else, but I disagree. I need some help referencing some release dates from different sources. First off, I have a promotional box for Final Fantasy VIII [1], a limited edition poster received with Final Fantasy XII [2] and an advertisement for Final Fantasy VIII in a magazine I do not know the name of (found it on the internet) [3]. Any ideas? --Teggles 04:30, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The magazine is probably the most reliable source to use out of the three, because it has editors and secondary material. — Deckill er 19:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They're all for different dates. The first is for the FF8 AU date, the second is for the FF12 AU date, and the last is for the FF8 NA date. Either way, I would probably put official merchandise on the same line as magazine advertisements in terms of reliability. What I was asking is HOW to reference them. --Teggles 03:44, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure; perhaps it might be best to use other sources if possible. — Deckill er 21:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Manual of Style

I'm going to update the Manual of Style to modern standards; stuff like attribution, inline citations, and so on. Ideas/thoughts? — Deckill er 21:21, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kadaj(Main Article)

Anyone aware of the creation of this page? It seems it's a case similar to the "List of Final Fantasy Summons" page that was created some times ago, i.e. it probably doesn't meet the criteria of notability as individual article. Kariteh 08:49, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, Kadaj is a single character in a sequal of a single iteration in the series. He is a trivial character and best suited to be contained within the Advent Children article. --Daedalus 16:36, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged it for deletion. Highly, highly implausbile redirect. Hbdragon88 22:09, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Transwikifying location lists

I think a lot of the location lists of the early Final Fantasies, which list every place in the game under one sentence sections, do not belong in an encyclopedia. The locations and setting is already explained in a few paragraphs on the main page, and there's no need for a list to explain every town and place. That information is better suited for the Final Fantasy Wikia, where a lot of it is already. Thers is an idea in the works of a more formal and enforced way of transwikying all in-universe information without a potential for out of universe coverage (or not enough to stand on its own as an article) here: User:Seraphimblade/sandbox2/2. I suggest we become a working model for it. — Deckill er 23:33, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If this is not a big deal to anyone, I'll go ahead and display a working example tomorrow, with List of Final Fantasy locations — Deckill er 05:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you still going ahead with this or is it pushed until after FFXII's FAC? Axem Titanium 02:32, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's pushed a couple days; I decided to go ahead and transwiki Xenogears and Xenosaga first. But we can probably start tonight if anyone else wants to help work on expanding the setting subsections for the first, say, 5 final fantasies so the location lists can be transwikied to FFWikia (if not there already) and then redirected to the main article. — Deckill er 02:42, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it looks like Final Fantasy IV location list can be transwikied and redirected without any merging to the main article, since it already has detailed synopsis and setting sections. — Deckill er 02:53, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FFI has been handled, because the plot synopsis already describes key locations. More to come. — Deckill er 16:53, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Video game navbox discussion

A centralized discussion about video game navboxes, which may impact some or all of this project's navboxes, is ongoing. Members of this project (or anyone else interested) are invited to participate. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 07:47, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Japan flag type vandalism

User:Hinomaru (blocked)
23 accounts in the sockpuppets category (blocked)
+ User:Flag over Japan (still active)

What should we do about this dude? He has been vandalising since October 2006 to today, each time by replacing articles with a big Japan flag. Is there a way to block his IP instead of accounts that he keeps creating? Or if he has no single IP, is there something we can do still?

I posted this in the Counter-Vandalism Brigade wikiproject but have yet to get a reply. Kariteh 08:00, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: Added his new account, even though it seems nobody cares here either. Kariteh 15:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I do care, even if I don't post. I just have no experience dealing with repeat vandals and their reprimands. It's sort of a watch-and-learn situation for me. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣ 16:34, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

TfD nomination of Template:Final Fantasy bestiary

Template:Final Fantasy bestiary has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Kariteh 18:10, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Order of Main Characters in List Of... Articles

In the List of Final Fantasy VII characters article there was an ongoing argument concerning how the main characters should be arranged, eventually I got involved and put it in the order a character joins the party. However, this is out of line with other Final Fantasy List of Characters pages which put the hero then the heroine(love-intrest) followed by the rest of the party in joining order.

Should there not be a rule created dictating in what order main characters appear in the lists. Such as:

Main Character
Heroine/Love Intrest
Rest of Main Characters in the order they join the party.

Although, this wouldn't help much in FFVII's case as there is no clear agreement on who the primary love intrest is...Aerith or Tifa? HELP US! Gavin Scott 23:20, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article on Did You Know

Template:Did you know/Next update :-) — Deckill er 13:58, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, awsome. --PresN 15:03, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone decided to remove it from the next update because I merely moved the character list edit history to preserve redirects. I thought it would be obvious that it no longer is a list of characters, but it seems to be against the norm or the procedures there. I guess that's further incentive for another FA push. — Deckill er 17:32, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why have all of the FF character articles been moved?

List of Final Fantasy VIII characters was changed to Characters of Final Fantasy VIII because it includes development information, merchandise information, reception etc. But now all of the other ones have been renamed in the same suit; which should not have happened, they are still normal lists. Why did this happen? --Teggles 07:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While what you say is correct, the uniformity introduced by the new title brings these articles into line. After all they all link to each other. Besides, Characters of Final Fantasy # doest actually mean anything other than List of Final Fantasy # Characters. Gavin Scott 21:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the moving; our eventual goal is to get all articles to at least GA status, so they will all have to be moved eventually anyway. Also, in the past, I've noticed users mistaking these character lists for something like, say, List of rock instrumentals. The two are not the same; the character "lists" are, more accurately, merged superarticles. — Deckill er 21:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If I can just say, I am sorry if my moving of all the articles has vexed anyone, but it was the direction we were going in. Gavin Scott 21:54, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review

A peer review is up for Characters of Final Fantasy VIII at Wikipedia:Peer review/Characters of Final Fantasy VIII/archive1. Feel free to comment! — Deckill er 23:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article, as well as Final Fantasy XII, are also up for A-Class status at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Assessment. — Deckill er 19:57, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]