Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Final Fantasy/archive/23

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Roll call: May

Please sign your name below.

  1. — Deckiller 19:36, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
  2. — ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 19:59, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
  3. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣΣ 20:03, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
  4. — Anomie 20:04, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
  5. — PresN 02:41, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
  6. — Bluerです。 なにか? 07:36, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
  7. — Axem Titanium 12:47, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
  8. — Judgesurreal777 22:25, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
  9. Sjones23 23:19, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
  10. --Rockst*r Rayne 03:36, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
  11. KrytenKoro 08:30, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
  12. — Teggles 11:27, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
  13. cocopopz2005 Cocopopz2005 07:19, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
  14. ShiraShira 15:19, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

FAs gallore

Wow, congrats Axem, Deck, Bluer et all. It seems thw WPFF can keep on chugging out FAs even without Ryu. I'm proud of you guys! Keep up the good work! Renmiri 00:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. — Deckiller 23:38, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Glad to be of service :D — Bluerです。 なにか? 07:38, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Glad to help out making various FF articles to FA and all. Thanks :D Sjones23 23:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Solution

Resolved

I have a solution to the articles like Biggs and Wedge and Gilgamesh. We can have an article called Recurring characters of Final Fantasy. Since the talkpage seems dead, I'll go ahead and start it. — Deckiller 14:52, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea, but is the title really fitting? Recurring characters kind of imply that they are the very same characters reappearing again and again in the entire series, and it's false in most cases (only Gilgamesh may be the same in some games). Kariteh 15:21, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
There's a note in the lead that should clear up confusion. The Gilgamesh and Cid articles are going to be a little tough to merge, due to all the fluff. — Deckiller 15:25, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
How about Character NAMES? ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 16:01, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
But it's often more than just names, it's overall design and treatment of the character that recurrs. Examples: Cid is usually associated with Airships/Technology, is often a gruff individual; Biggs and Wedge are usually associated with military/militant organizations, they are often a comic relief pair-up; etc. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣΣ 16:22, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
We simply can't sum up the entire article in its title, so the title will be "imperfect" in either case. Nevertheless, "Character names" is more precise than "Characters". The fact that designs and treatments are also recurring is duely noted in the article. Kariteh 17:30, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure an entirely new article is necessary for this. Maybe a merge into Common themes of Final Fantasy? Axem Titanium 23:08, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps in the future. I think this gradual crunchdown of the cruft helps reduce the shock value for some editors. — Deckiller 23:24, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree on both accounts, it should definitely be merged into Common themes of Final Fantasy in the future, but I also agree that it might be better to be a gradual process.--—ΔαίδαλοςΣΣ 02:02, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Ffvii worldmap new.png

Resolved

Image:Ffvii worldmap new.png

Isn't this image illegal under Wikipedia's policies? It's a derivative work / a reproduction of a copyrighted material. Kariteh 17:46, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

It can be used with fair use justification like anything else, I believe. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 19:06, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
The current licence tag of "public domain" would also be erroneous in that case. Kariteh 19:26, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
I changed the tag. Axem Titanium 23:03, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Worlds of...

Resolved

Should Terminology of Final Fantasy VI be moved to World of Final Fantasy VI to make it consistent with World of Final Fantasy VIII? Kariteh 21:53, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, sounds good. It'll still need work though. Axem Titanium 23:46, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Creatures and Magic categories

Resolved

With the creation of Category:Final Fantasy gameplay, these two categories are unnecessary. If nobody objects, I'll do a bit more recategorizing to remove those two categories. — Deckiller 01:08, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Nope. Go ahead. Axem Titanium 03:51, 13 May 2007 (UTC)


Music consolidation

Resolved

After the great work done to create the Music of Final Fantasy VIII, I propose that this continue with the other Final Fantasy games. A great Music of Final Fantasy VI, for example, could be created if we consolidate the music articles, and would help bolster the topic. Thoughts? Judgesurreal777 21:50, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea, I seem to recall there being lots of Final Fantasy VI album articles. The problem is finding creation information. You could say I "lucked out" with Music of Final Fantasy VIII; I found a couple of interviews with a lot of development information. Reception for each album will be a lot more difficult too (it was hard enough with VIII). --Teggles 04:52, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Merging done except for Final Fantasy Anthology Soundtrack, as it is also an FFV album. Kariteh 14:33, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
I also created Music of Final Fantasy IV, which is going to be really good. Judgesurreal777 20:32, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
I created Music of Final Fantasy VII. I left Gackt's Redemption out for now because I have to go, but it will be merged eventually. If someone wants to do it first and/or check the redirects for each album, feel free. Kariteh 22:01, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
We also now have Music of Final Fantasy III and Music of Final Fantasy IX. Judgesurreal777 05:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Merged Redemption and fixed the redirects for FFVII, FFIII and FFIX. Kariteh 10:23, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Do people think it's possible to make a Music of Final Fantasy I and II? Judgesurreal777 02:41, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Why wouldn't it? Kariteh 09:31, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Should Final Fantasy X-2 Original Soundtrack be renamed to Music of Final Fantasy X-2 for consistency? It seems to be the only article we have on a FFX-2 soundtrack, is why I'm asking, as we don't have one on any of the other ones - see here for some of them ([1]). I'm going to go ahead and do it, revert me if anyone wishes. --PresN 16:58, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Might as well, especially since there were major musical changes. So the article can discuss more than just that album. Plus, there's also the songs. — Deckiller 16:59, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
There was also a single released, and the international version got extra music, etc. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 17:16, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, there's plenty of "juicy" material available. Feel like helping out with the music articles? — Deckiller 17:57, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Merged the FFV albums. Final Fantasy Anthology Soundtrack remains a problem because it spans 2 games, I don't know what to do with it. Also, after we clean up what we have, we'll have to actually add the albums that we're missing. The FFTA albums for instance, I'm pretty sure there wasn't only one. Kariteh 16:53, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't quite see the need to have the anthology sountrack as a page -- a simple mention on wherever it talks about the game (I assume on the respective main pages for each game), and a perhaps on the music pages saying "XX was also put on the soundtrack that came with FFA in the US" or whatever, should be sufficient. As for FFTA, yeah, there was a CD called "White Melodies", though I forget what this is off hand. (And for the recond, as far as me 'helping', well, look at my user page). ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 17:36, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I've merged the Anthology soundtrack in both Music of FFV and Music of FFVI. Kariteh 17:56, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I got the last one, Music of Final Fantasy XI. Judgesurreal777 22:03, 15 May 2007 (UTC)


Characters of Final Fantasy VI

Resolved

I'm getting some flak on the talkpage. — Deckiller 11:48, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Project index

The index has been updated with statistics. Currently:

— Deckiller 15:16, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I expect the number of GA's we will actually have to do to drop greatly, as information is not lost, but formed into bigger and better articles. Judgesurreal777 19:58, 16 May 2007 (UTC)


World of Final Fantasy VII Featured Article

Resolved

Yeah, I'm going for a big one, but it seems like an FA waiting to happen, so I wanted to start talking about it.

Be merged into World of Final Fantasy VII

Sounds like a winner.. Thoughts? Judgesurreal777 19:45, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps an aim for GA are more appropriate; personally, I'd rather see us get as many GAs as possible, and then focus on FAs. — Deckiller 20:06, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, that makes sense, I was just thinking out loud that it may not be that hard if the articles have enough out of universe info. But one GA would be better than 6 starts. Judgesurreal777 20:15, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Absolutely. When I was doing the article count this morning, I groaned when I typed in "29 articles" next to FF7's heading. — Deckiller 20:22, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
World of Final Fantasy VII, or Gaia (Final Fantasy VII)? Kariteh 21:35, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I went ahead and started Gaia (Final Fantasy VII). Feel free to rename the article if the other name is better. Kariteh 22:06, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm actually not sure about this one. On the one hand, my inner OCD-voice says that it should be "World of" to make it consistent. On the other hand, it is called Gaia. However, isn't the only citation we have for that from a pamphlet from E3 or something? I think it might be more clear to readers if we called it "World of" and mention somewhere that Square Enix retcon'd its name to Gaia. Axem Titanium 22:12, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I've merged everything. That was difficult! Now the article needs copyediting, further trimming, sourcing, etc. As for the name of the world, it's definitely Gaia, as shown on the Dirge of Cerberus website. There's nothing to make consistent anyway, as we wouldn't rename Spira "World of Final Fantasy X and X-2" or Ivalice "World of... tons of games", would we? Kariteh 21:14, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
What an accomplishment! Somebody give this guy a barnstar for an awesome merger!! Judgesurreal777 21:18, 16 May 2007 (UTC)


Final Fantasy XI

Resolved

Merged to Final Fantasy XI expansions

If you take a look at these articles, they say....nothing. I think that the few release dates can be added to the main Final Fantasy XI article, and they can be redirected. Judgesurreal777 01:04, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, they should be merged into the main article under an "expansions" heading or something similar. — Deckiller 15:48, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
It is not really that the expansion articles say too little, it is that the original Final Fantasy XI says too much. Much of what is mentioned in the orginal is not actually a part of the first game in the series. --Pinkkeith 17:44, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

World of Final Fantasy VIII on main page

Resolved

Another first! World of Final Fantasy VIII was selected for Did You Know; it is on the mainpage today. — Deckiller 02:18, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

"...that the World of Final Fantasy VIII is the second in the Final Fantasy series of console role-playing games to include pre-rendered backgrounds?"
Not to be a killjoy, but man, it could've been something interesting! --Teggles 04:50, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I nominated it late. Very late. Minutes before the cutting point late. Had to think fast :-) — Deckiller 04:58, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

World of Final Fantasy X

Resolved

This has been a long time coming, and I think that, like FFVII, this World of article will be a Featured article at some point, and an awesome GA article. Judgesurreal777 19:53, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't it be "World of Spira", possibly "World of Spira (Final Fantasy X)", since the other two articles referenced that?KrytenKoro 20:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I am not as familiar with FFX as others are, so obviously those who know should adjust the title of the new article to fit. :) Judgesurreal777 20:20, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Why "World of Final Fantasy X"? The world has a name, Spira, so why not use it? The merged article should be named "Spira (Final Fantasy X)" (because Spira is a disambiguation page). The only reason the world of FFVII article was named "Gaia (Final Fantasy VII)" was to disambiguate from the Greek Goddess and the FFIX and TSW homonymous planets. Trying to fit the naming "World of..." everywhere would lead to unsolvable problems with Ivalice. Kariteh 21:21, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I modified it, I think that your argument is a compelling one, all of it should probably go into Spira (Final Fantasy X) Judgesurreal777 21:30, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree, it should be Spira (Final Fantasy X). It seems to me we do, but just to make it official, do we have consensus as a WikiProject to use the name of the world followed by a (Final Fantasy ##) disambiguation if required, and to only use "World of ..." for those continuities in which the (main) planet does not have a name? --—ΔαίδαλοςΣΣ 22:39, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I think so, since it is more accurate to call it by the name of the world it takes place in, such as "Middle Earth", not "The World of J.R.R Tolkien", for example.

I merged one, one more! Judgesurreal777 23:16, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Merger in progress, feel free to take a look and help clean this big baby up! I'm trimming a bit.. :) Judgesurreal777 23:26, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
DONE! It is a mother, but I can already see the outlines of an FA... I formatted it a bit like World of Final Fantasy VIII. Needs copyediting, lots of trimming, sourcing, etc. Judgesurreal777 23:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I recommend making this priority one; both articles were GA, and it would be a pain to get an untimely delisting during the transition. — Deckiller 01:30, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Agreed. Let's spruce it up! :) Judgesurreal777 01:44, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
I'll help too. Done with APs, yo! Axem Titanium 02:41, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

List of Final Fantasy XII locations

Resolved

This article seems unnecessary with Ivalice. Also, the main reason I haven't redirected or done anything to List of Final Fantasy IV locations is that we've had people interested in turning it into something like the World Of... articles. — Deckiller 17:26, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

FFIV had a sort of equivalent to an Ultimania Guide ([2]) with lots of interesting information about the game's world, but there doesn't seem to be much out of universe information available. Kariteh 17:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, that's a real pity. Hopefully IGN will come out with some developer articles now that IV is being remade; I don't think there are any interviews posted on media sites or fansites WRT FF4. — Deckiller 17:58, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
I merged List of Final Fantasy XII locations into Ivalice. Also, I put some tags on the locations of FFIV. My impulse is to merge until we have some good remake interviews and then resurrect it as a GA. Judgesurreal777 16:00, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Characters of FFX article

Resolved

I've been working on the User:Sjones23/Characters of Final Fantasy X article. After all the work on the Characters of Final Fantasy XII article, I am getting this up to a possible GA level. I've been updating everything these past couple of months. Any comments so far? Sjones23 19:52, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Some pointers to achieving FA (based on my observations of Characters of Final Fantasy VIII) includes: In-game citation for statements made in the article, Developer interview on character creation and influence, and reception and critics of the characters by reviewers.. — Bluerです。 なにか? 20:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, Bluerfn. I need some help on this FFX Character article a little. Sjones23 22:28, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
I moved my sandbox draft to the Characters of Final Fantasy X article. Sjones23 23:40, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Also, I restored some pictures now. If anyone wants to restore these pictures, for which Gnomebot deleted in my sandbox, please do. Sjones23 00:22, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Spoiler warning

Resolved

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Spoiler warning :) — Deckiller 21:40, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Not to sound like a vote-stacker, but I think our project should seriously weigh in on this one. Axem Titanium 22:13, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Absolutely. I find it ironic. One of the most successful projects on Wikipedia — perhaps the most successful dealing with fictional topics — bans spoiler warnings a year before the general debates. We have been treated somewhat rudely for the last year because of that, but now the entire project is catching on. — Deckiller 02:12, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Spoiler --Teggles 11:37, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Policies/Wikipedia:Spoiler warning Didn't last there very long. :( --—ΔαίδαλοςΣΣ 19:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps you would say it's not going well, with majority support of spoiler warnings (yet no one responds to my "other warnings" section). However, there is clear consensus that spoiler warnings are not to be placed in plot sections. Which is a brilliant achievement for an idea that originated and was only used here (afaik).--Teggles 08:56, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Unreleased games in templates

Resolved

Unreleased games don't belong in templates, but what about templates about unreleased games? I'm thinking of Template:FFXIII. Should'nt the whole template be deleted since it's a series of games that haven't been released yet? Kariteh 08:28, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I guess it's a navigation template within an unreleased game series so it's okay? I dunno. Axem Titanium 14:23, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I still fail to understand why unreleased games don't belong in templates...♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 14:27, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I think it was because allowing easy navigation to unreleased games encourages trolling and rumor spreading. Axem Titanium 14:36, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
It's not so much a matter of preventing easy navigation, but rather segregation. Unreleased games are rumor mills, no matter how much we edit and revert someone always inserts a rumor that they feel is reliable but ultimately is unsourcable. unreleased game articles are basically placeholders for until we can write a real article. It's also a point to consider that because it's not released yet it isn't yet a member of the series. Projects can be scrapped and changed even late in their developement, it has happened before. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣΣ 16:14, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I can understand both sides of the argument. In the case of Final Fantasy XIII, however, even if they scrap the entire game and start from scratch, it will still be the thirteenth installment. Also, we shouldn't really hide rumor mills from people; otherwise, why not just create the article after release? It's really a case-by-case basis. — Deckiller 16:16, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Character battles

Resolved

Looking at Characters of Chrono Trigger got me thinking. GameFAQs is a popular website with large polls, and a good way to gauge cultural impact in regard to fan polls and whatnot. For our reception and criticism/cultural impact sections in our "Characters of..." articles, we can discuss how the characters have fared in polls, character battles, etc. This is a form of out of universe information. — Deckiller 22:00, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I think you may be on to something. IGN constantly has polls like "Top 10 villains", Top 10 this, etcetera. That could be really good for some characters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Judgesurreal777 (talk • contribs)
Indeed. It's something to consider as we push character articles to GA status. — Deckiller 22:25, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Merger ideas

Resolved

Here are some mergers I and others have proposed lately, feel free to leave some feedback.

Judgesurreal777 19:57, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Woo, WP:FF's range is getting smaller by the day. — Bluerです。 なにか? 20:09, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
Indeed. Integrated content is stronger and has far more potential. It has been the key to our success. — Deckiller 02:14, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Merged airship, started trimming... Judgesurreal777 01:15, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Merged CGI demo of Final Fantasy VI, I am pretty sure we should put it in the reception section, though to accomodate it I think i'll change the reception section to "Reception and Legacy". Judgesurreal777 00:20, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Merged Unlimited Characters, had a very similar list on the main movie page. Judgesurreal777 02:47, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Merged FF12 locations into Ivalice. Finally, got these fictional locations into one article each! :) Judgesurreal777 03:38, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Merged Characters of FF III, used the raw materials to bolster the FF III DS article to help with its GA candidacy. Judgesurreal777 22:52, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Merged Weapon to Monsters page, fits pretty good there. Judgesurreal777 07:05, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Are you sure it was merged? It seems just redirected and the paragraph in Monsters is quite weak. Kariteh 16:57, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Well I remember the discussion of the Airship, most of the information was not merged since it only pertained to a specific game and not to airships in general in the series. Please feel free to add anything that was mistakenly not transferred. :) Judgesurreal777 21:24, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Merged Mystic Quests soundtrack using the new track listing system. It seems that it has been decided that if there is only one soundtrack item, it can go in the article, if there are more, it becomes a "Music of...", so I am proceeding according to consensus. Judgesurreal777 19:42, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Merged Crystal Chronicles soundtrack per discussion.Judgesurreal777 21:25, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Merged Unlimited music soundtrack. Judgesurreal777 00:53, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Is the Monsters of Final Fantasy page going to be updated with the old information for each weapon? A1ph0r 04:41, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Merged Characters of Final Fantasy V into Final Fantasy V per discussion, there was not one bit of out of universe information, and the main FFV page had a lot of character stuff. Judgesurreal777 01:36, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Merged Characters of Tactics Advance, there seemed to be no reasoned opposition and the article contains no out of universe info, it can always be resurrected if some appears. Judgesurreal777 02:40, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Merged Spirits within soundtrack, only one album, doesn't need whole article. Judgesurreal777 05:10, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
For those who care, I am checking the Final Fantasy wiki to make sure that the Airship article is there in its entirety so none of it is lost. Judgesurreal777 05:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Faris is one of Amano's favourite design with Terra.[3] It should be added to the FFV article. Kariteh 12:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
I checked, and it appears to already be stated in the development section, but I also added it to the Amano article. Judgesurreal777 03:58, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Soundtrack Merger Disapprovals

Resolved

Hello. I'd like to state that I don't agree with the way the merger on the albums are being handled. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against the merger per say, just the way it's done.
My biggest complaint (only one, actually), is the dissappearance of the tracklist. I can understand why they were removed, what with them being so long and everything. Plus, too much text could hinder an article from becoming feature. However I do not believe this should be done, as there is loss of content. The tracklist should be part of any album page, regardless. According to WikiProject Albums, which these pages are also a part of, tracklist should be present, and an article without it doen't even reach the start level (see here).
You might say that wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and that such information would best be kept for gaming guides, or that the content is un-encyclepedic, but I would like to differ. For starters, I realise that this is POV, but tracklisting is one of the most important piece of info I look for when I look at wikipedia albums. Second there is no real official english tracklisting for most of these albums (and don't tell me iTunes please, most are either inaccurate or typoed (see Talk:Music_of_Final_Fantasy_V)), and all of the lists that can be found on the internet are just as inaccurate, incomplete or inconsistent. As an encyclopedia, it is our job to give this info with as much detail as possible.
That is why I believe it is inacceptable to remove tracklisting all together.
Anyways, I like the current Music of Final Fantasy pages, and again, I realise how putting the track list up again could hurt them, so I'm here to discuss. Maybe putting up lighter tracklists, somthing like on the Quake#Soundtrack page, or maybe have a seperate "Music of" describing all the music and soundtracks in general, and create actual album pages. I don't know. Thoughts? Happypal 06:53, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree. It sort of disturbed me a little, although I didn't feel like asking. Tracklists would also be important especially for the singles, since these singles are from well known singers and don't pertain only to Final Fantasy. For instance it sounds trivial to say in Music of FFXII that the Kiss Me Good-Bye single "also features a cover of the song Whiter Shade of Pale", but it would also be bad to outright delete that information. A tracklist would be better as it shows the information without sounding trivial or off-topic. The problems come with huge albums like FFIX and its 220 tracks... Maybe there is a way to make tracklists collapsible like some navboxes? Kariteh 07:27, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't see how the information is necessary. In Music of Final Fantasy VIII, the amount of tracks and their duration is covered. Any further information is, well... I don't see how it should be needed. Perhaps it's a good idea to provide external links to album lists? --Teggles 07:44, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
As a consumer, when buying a certain album I would want to find out about the contents of the album. The tracklist is able to tell me if a certain music track is inside the album, and this urges me to buy the album. Without a tracklist it will be hard to know if the album is good to listen to or not. Pointing out to external links would render the page redundant. — Bluerです。 なにか? 08:11, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
You know, no information is really necessary per say. The amount of tracks and the duration isn't necessary either. The page only contains what we think people might want to know about. The thing is it is expected to be there because people want it. As such, we should put it.Happypal 08:33, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Wikipeidia is NOT a buyer's guide...as if you're saying that a tracklist should be there because you need to know if you wanna buy it or not, that's a good reason AGAINST using the list. I'm actually kinda split on the issue. The big problem, to me, is that there's just TONS of album pages out there with nothing but a tracklist. What's the point? I don't see someone making tracklists for the thousands of CDs of Beethoven's symphonies out there, why shold some video game's soundtrack get higher priority? And there's nothing wrong with external links, there's at least three great resoruces (in FF's case) for tracklists -- Chudah's Corner, Game Music Revolution, and RPGFan, all of which are nice and legit, not offering DLs and such (there's probably a couple FF Music sites out there that'd work too). Link to them, and you get the tracklists. But I dunno, really. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 11:48, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
You're just adding that "not a buyer's guide", it never said that in WP:NOT. But actually, my reply context is a consumer on real life, not on wikipedia. And in truth, as you said, it never crossed my mind to search for a tracklist in wikipedia. I'd go to those websites you just listed above to find the tracklist. That said, maybe we don't need tracklists after all? I'm undecided as well. — Bluerです。 なにか? 11:55, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I really feel the issue is not about the list being there or not, but how it impacts on the article (and I agree it does break it's continuity). Almost no album article on wikipedia has no list, and FF's shouldn't be an exception. For inserting the tracklist, maybe we can put it at the end of the article, in a section all on it's own. This could keep the continuity of the article intact, yet have the tracklist. We could have it be in list format, rather than table (again, see Quake). Maybe also use the small letering. Again, thoughts?Happypal 08:39, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I'd be fine with that. The only thing I really want is a clean implementation. The tables in the old Final Fantasy album articles looked far too messy. --Teggles 09:25, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Now the problem is which translation of track names we should use... Kariteh 09:48, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Provide a transliteration and that's it. Unless you're willing to use the iPod names (ugh typos) or there are official translations I don't know about. --Teggles 11:18, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
There are official translations, and that's actually the problem because they're all different. Some albums have English track names, the PlayStation and Game Boy Advance remakes have track names, the Square Enix website has track names, etc. Kariteh 11:37, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid I Just can't agree with "This info is available elsewhere, so let's just link to it". The basis of wikipedia is that the info has to be reliable so everything is available elsewhere, for reference. Further more, according to Wikiproject_Albums, anything without a tracklist is just a STUB. Any album on wikipedia without it is usually just an obscure album nobody took the time to write. This is NOT FFX's case. The FFX albums are great. As such, I believe it is obvious it should be there. For albums especially like FFX where info is just all over the place, somtimes in Jap kanji, somtimes romaji, sometimes translated, sometimes using pseudo official translatons..., it is important to be able to help someone who wants to find a reliable and almost definitive answer to all that.
Having said that, I also strongly agree that the lists are bulky, and don't look too good, but that is a problem we have to deal with. I believe we should rather be discussing on how to do this while keeping the article looking good n' slick, as it should be.

I would like to open a discussion on how to do this, for recommendations, comments, and eventually a local sandbox to try it out and for the others to see. Would you agree to at least try that?Happypal 14:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I think a collapsible table would be the best solution. Each table would be put inside each album section, thus keeping the continuity of the article and the convenience of not having to scroll up and down everytime. Test:
Kariteh 12:39, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
I like. However, I do believe foldaways are frowned upon in wikipedia. They were suggested for spoilers, but were severely shot down. I think it's more okay for something like a tracklist, which is really just a block of info.I don't think anyone would really object
If we use a foldaway though, is it really necessary to do a light table with only the track names. I really liked the way the FFX's track list contained so much info. Maybe something like this?:
Or more condensed, like this?
But I guess what I like the most is this, as it is a true table:
I would go for the last solution. This alows to have a very complete and informative tracklisting (which actually looks nice and clean), without having the "Giant track list Block smash right in your face" right in the middle article. I really believe this is the best solution. It should make everyone happy. If no-one has any objections, or would like to put forward a better proposition, then I'll probably put them in in a near future. Comments?Happypal 15:48, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree, I would go for the third table, it is neatly organized, it does not break the page's flow, and it has a convenient show/hide button that stretches the page without straining the page's structure. — Bluerです。 なにか? 16:20, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, the third table is probably the best. I personally don't like it that much because it's very tiresome to edit; this mere section of the talk page is already 33kb, imagine how much the real articles could weight :/ . I guess it can't really be avoided when we're dealing with Japanese track names though. Perhaps creating a template would make it a little less cumbersome. Kariteh 16:45, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Why even bother with the Japanese names? We're the English Wikipedia, after all; we can probably get away with omitting them. — Deckiller 16:55, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Then why do we bother placing kana names in the FF character articles? No, the Japanese names stay because it's the original title, whereas the English is just a transliteration, which is in error sometimes. Example: Chi wa Arubedozoku actually means "We are the Al Bhed (people)", not "Oui are Al Bhed Pirates"! The knowing editors can make it error-free by referring to the original title. Yes? — Bluerです。 なにか? 17:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't personally care about error or "musical equivalent to woolseyism", but Japanese names are sometimes necessary because they're, simply put, the only names that exist officially. The FFI and II albums are printed with Japanese track names for instance (not sure about FFX). Of course, Japanese names are NOT needed when official English names exist, like with the FFVIII OST. Kariteh 17:21, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree that we have to put japanese names, because they are the only official ones. It's even the reason I am pushing this so much. an album where it is so hard to find official information on has even more reason to list the info on wikipedia. The tables are quite heavy kb wise, but what can you do? I'd advise against the template, as this is really a case by case basis, and a template wouldn't allow the fine tuned control these big bulky tables give us. I'll try to edit them a bit to make sure they look as pretty as possible (margins, spacing, centering etc...), before inserting them back into the already real nice articles. Don't want to look sloppy, now do we? Happypal 18:14, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
<indent over> All of the mainstream FFs got US iTunes releases of their entire soundtracks, IIRC. FOr some there's also CD releases -- FFX got a single CD on the Tokypop label. In this case, the Japanese release is all Japanese tracks outside of four of them. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫
Prettiness is the least important factor in my opinion. The easiness to edit should be the prime factor, especially since this project claims not to be "a collaboration meant only for experienced editors". If a new contributor comes and wants to add a new album in an article, how would he do it if the stuff is unintuitive and too complicated to edit? I think the table could be much more intuitive if we remove these unnecessary paddings. Look at this table and its code:
It's less cumbersome and the rows can be more clearly identified in the code. Kariteh 07:58, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Kariteh, I strongly agree with your idea. Sjones23 01:22, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah sure, I guess that table is better. I don't know that much about them, but isn't there a way to put padding for an entire column or something? that would be nice. I dissagree though with your "If a new contributor comes and wants to add a new album in an article, how would he do it if the stuff is unintuitive and too complicated to edit". Most of us learned what a table is by looking at what other people wrote before us, so sticking to simple is a way of refusing to learn on wikipedia as a whole. Not using the table tool because it is complicated is not a good reason, I think. But that isn't really important, because I agree with your second argument: "the code is much clearer". So I guess we use your light table style?Happypal 02:49, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
It's already implemented. Have a look at Final Fantasy Tactics#Audio. — Bluerです。 なにか? 06:45, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I tested it on the FFT article. I reduced the width of the table because it looked too big and empty at 100%, but it's because it's missing the Japanese track names. It will probably be re-increased to 100% when those names will be added. Kariteh 11:22, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't think FFT OST *has* Japanese track names. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 11:40, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Daryl seems to have translated Japanese names [4] Kariteh 12:05, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I was misremembering. The tracklist is mixed between Japanese and English. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 20:00, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Resolved

As per above, I am positive that the WP:FF needs to set up some sort of External Link guide. I am only sure about Official Site's being posted on the EL section, but I'm not sure about sites such as [5] or [6]. Any views or comments on this? — Bluerです。 なにか? 15:40, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

For external links, the only real "fansite" we should link to is the Final Fantasy Wikia. Much of the information here is in greater detail there, and a lot of it has been transwikied over. That way, we're ushering detail dumpers and those who want to read more to the appropriate place. — Deckiller 15:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
To that effect, should all external links other than pointing to the Official Site and the FF Wikia be removed immediately? — Bluerです。 なにか? 16:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
What about sites other than fansites though? For example, to a category on dmoz. Anomie 16:40, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
DMOZ is crap. Nobody ever used it and it's often totally outdated. Kariteh 16:51, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't like the external links being included at all (except FFWikia and Official sites). IMO Wikipedia is not a directory to other sites, and should not link to other sites. If the information is notable then it should be included in the article and referenced, and an external link is unneccessary,. If the info is trivial then it should not be included, and an external link is still unneccessary. The only exception to this might be a generally accepted as authoritative site that deals with the minutiae and trivia (in this case FFWikia), and a link to the official pages should always be present. If I had my way, everything else would be removed post haste. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣΣ 17:33, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
If that is it, we'll remove all other external links, leaving Official Site link and a FFWikia link. I believe the FFWikia link should point to the Category list, not the article's page. — Bluerです。 なにか? 17:40, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
Absolutely, unless the article is about an individual item like a game. But World of Final Fantasy VIII should have an external link to Category:Final Fantasy VIII locations at FFWikia. — Deckiller 18:57, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

What about sites that satisfy Wikipedia:External_links#What_should_be_linked? For example, the Final Fantasy XI should include links to "Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) or other reasons." All the Wikis deleted contained neutral and accurate material that could not be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to their amount of detail. They're are also authoritatvie sites that deal with the minutiae and detail in a manner that the Wikipedia can't or shouldn't.

I've noticed that, despite this conversation you have deleted all links to the FFWikia, so now the External links site is barren and provides no meaningful links to outside sources that may contain more material. I've also noticed that you've deleted Official Sites such as the Official webcomic of FFXI. My point being that the FFWikia and FFXIclopedia contain a plethora of data that cannot be justly covered by just the Final Fantasy XI article. Yet you have deleted them.

The main page here says that this FF Project is not a method to circumvent Wikipedia policies, yet, you are doing just that by deleting links that satisfy Wikipedia policy on what should be linked. --Rolks 14:50, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I'm undecided whether to allow FFXIclopedia or not, since it's already linked from the Official Site itself, recognized as a Premier Community Site, which is good. FFXIclopedia would have been included in the EL section, considering it does apply to point three. But the thing is so do many other fansites. Allowing them will create a directory of ELs, which wikipedia strives not to have. About the FFWikia, it was removed in error. — Bluerです。 なにか? 14:57, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
FYI - only in the interest of full disclosure, I do want to admit straight up that I am one of the five administrators of the FFXIclopedia, so I may be perceived as having a bias in this decision and I don't want you to think I am hiding that fact. However, I have patrolled the Final Fantasy XI page occasionally for the same reasons you all have, and added and/or removed content that I felt was necessary, and which fit with the ideals of the Wikipedia. I am not, however, a significant enough contributor to even consider myself a part of the FF Project. That being said, trying to speaking independant of my loyalties to FFXIclopedia, I honestly believe that Final Fantasy XI the game has so much depth and detail beyond what the Final Fantasy XI wikipedia listing can give it. I also don't feel that the FFWikia really addresses that depth enough.
The other "Fansites" like Allakhazam and Somepage, really are just forum based or mere databases for the game, whereas FFXIclopedia actually has in depth pages on all things related in the game from details and historical notes about the origins of various monsters to detailed accounts of the history of Vana'diel itself, the world of Final Fantasy XI. It is this information that I refer to when I say that FFXIclopedia has the amount of detail that just can't be placed into the Wikipedia entry for the game. In creating FFXIclopedia, we have sought to make it a place that contains all the information about the game. It is a conglomeration of all the information about the game of Final Fantasy XI, pulled from all possible sources on the web, and put into one place. It contains more information about the game than any one website out there. And that was why I believe it should be added to the external links.
But as I noted at the beginning, my view may be biased, so I'll leave the ultimate decision in the FF Project's hands. I have made my case. (btw ... you guys have done a great job of making the pages look good. keep up the good work.) --Rolks 15:16, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

FFXIclopedia is on Jimmy Wales's radar and Wikia has made two attempts to obtain the wiki at FFXIclopedia. To me, this puts FFXIclopedia way above the FFWikia in relation to the Final Fantasy XI article. See my blog entry for more --Ganiman 15:56, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, so now I understand why FFXI information seems sparsely contributed in wikipedia. Hmm, that's not for here to discuss anyway. :) — Bluerです。 なにか? 16:10, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Proposal

Now then, here's a proposed guideline of ELs in WP:FF for your consideration:

  1. Official websites per WP:EL 3.1(1) - the media's website, if not the organization's website,
  2. Open wikis that follow WP:EL 4.0(12) - key words are: 1.stable and 2.active,
  3. Official resources following WP:EL 3.1(3) - related to the organization responsible for the media.

Please discuss. Maintain good faith and no vainglory talk please. — Bluerです。 なにか? 06:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I think point 1 is a no brainer. I think point 3 is also important, as long as they are official resources. Note: Referring to my above comments, I do not consider any of the Premier sites to be "Official" resources, even FFXIclopedia. Of course, neither is FFWikia. But each of the Final Fantasy games has put out official guides by Brady Games, and if there was a web presence for those, then I could see those meeting point 3.
As for point 2, we originally included FFXIclopedia solely because it was a wiki. But after reading the WP:EL 3.1, I don't think that just being a wiki is sufficient. Even if it is stable and active. I think that, although stability and activity are important, the more important issue is "Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) or other reasons." This does not include sites that just provide statistics, walkthroughs and/or forums. These would need to be sites that, but for the fact that they were created by an unofficial source, are so comprehensive that they could easily substitute as an official source or guide. And, in this criteria, stability, activity and comprehensiveness of all aspects of the game, are what would be important. If you want to limit this point to just wikis, that's fine, but I really think the issue of comprehensiveness, as opposed to just be a repository of some knowledge of the media, is what is important. --Rolks 15:05, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Should this template be deleted? Template:FFVI character external links - Kariteh 15:37, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah it should be deleted. It's not used anymore after the character page merges. Anyway, I don't feel like unofficial ELs should be limited to wikis, there are active, stable non-wiki sites that offer good information not found on Wikipedia too. The standards for their inclusion should be higher though. Axem Titanium 18:48, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I agree with Rolks. Should add "comprehensiveness of the subject" to Guideline 2. — Bluerです。 なにか? 04:29, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Square Enix Party?

Resolved

Recently, there has been a lot of new info about FF games coming from Square Enix Party 2007. I was just wondering if it's notable enough for its own article. Axem Titanium 02:46, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I think for our purposes, it would make a good development reference in each of the articles of the games that are created by the announcement. Judgesurreal777 02:48, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

FFII character merger

Resolved

Please pardon my ignorance, but i can't for the life of me find an answer to this question anywhere on the entire site. Why in the world has the Characters of "Final Fantasy II" been redirected to the Main FFII page, which scarcely has any information about any character at all? I might be able to understand that you would want all of the FFII information on one page, but why didn't you at least keep the information that was on the original character page? Thank you. Dr. D 21:21, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

If you would like to restore some of that information onto the main FFII page, please do. It would make a good starting point for further expansion. Axem Titanium 01:13, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Spira (Final Fantasy X)

Resolved

This article goes into so much depth that it feels like a crime to be hacking away at it. This is going to need a lot of work to straighten out what needs to be said and what does not. There's just so much backstory. I'll see what I can do. — Deckiller 15:45, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

For now, I removed the location list and added a link to where it appears, word for word, on the Final Fantasy Wikia. We can probably add a couple paragraphs outlining the areas, but 30 KB is way out of line. — Deckiller 16:10, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Are there any online sources with which to source up the article? Judgesurreal777 06:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
The flaregamer article that we've used quite a lot is as reliable as we're going to get. IGN articles are also fairly reliable, as are developer's interviews if we can get any. — Deckiller 22:29, 21 May 2007 (UTC)


Final Fantasy X characters proposal

Resolved

Yes, I just wanted to do this in one fell swoop :) Now, do any of these have a strong chance of getting to Good Article status, or do any have a better shot as part of the main character article?

Thoughts? Judgesurreal777 06:48, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I would say go for it but you seem to be on a rampage to merge stuff. Maybe slow down a bit to bring some of the post-merge stuff to GA before moving on? It's easier to defend a merge when the article is GA. Axem Titanium 15:17, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I recommend taking this a little slower. I've been plotting a FFX character merge for a few days now, but I'm waiting to see what Sjones is up to with his sandbox. — Deckiller 15:41, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Haha, yes I am Rampaging, sorry about that. I am just feeling very positive, to be honest, that we finally have a group of people who understand the potential of the mergers. One thing I want to be clear about though, I AM NOT SAYING ANY OF THESE ARTICLES SHOULD NECESSARILY BE MERGED AT ALL, I am here to ASK, and only ASK, if it's a good idea. I want to be respectful of the group, and there is no rush to merge anything, it just popped into my head that these mergers could happen and should be discussed. Trust me, this is the last of the merger stuff for a bit. Many of the merger-created articles, like the "Music of" articles need to be given time. I think I'm going to switch gears and, as suggested, get go GA's under my belt, thanks for the suggestion. Judgesurreal777 21:40, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
On the other hand, if we can get all the necessary merging done now, then we can focus our attention to quality. Or we can do it in a rowing style. Fortunately, there isn't much left that has to be consolidated. — Deckiller 22:41, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
I think the merge needs to wait, get the other merges stabilized first, then move on and merge FFX. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣ 17:29, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
True, I have been trying to make sure the mergers "stick". But I do think that, if the mergers are going to happen eventually, might as well do it while we as a community are focused on it and seemlingly in agreement. We are very close to being done with merging for a while I think, and then we can get Characters of VII and X to GA status. Judgesurreal777 20:51, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Chocobo Stallion

Resolved

I proposed it be merged, since the article stated the game was simply cartridge release of the chocobo racing from Final Fantasy VII, and the Stallion article is extremely small...but since there are no sources, I am not sure if it is just that, or if it was developed with the FFVII chocobo stuff as a basis...could you take a look and help me determine? Thanks! Talk:Final_Fantasy_VII Judgesurreal777 20:17, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't actually know, but I think it's a completely new game. Best just to leave it. --Teggles 01:06, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Maybe...but it would be good to find out, don't want to do two merger candidacy's. Judgesurreal777 01:11, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Amazing how little information there is on this game....can't find anything so far! Judgesurreal777 01:50, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Maybe... the game actually doesn't exist! It's all a figment of your imagination. DUN DUN DUNNNNN. Axem Titanium 03:03, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm about half way there myself :) Judgesurreal777 03:11, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Most Chocobo Stallion info is in Japanese. From what I could find out, this is an entirely separate game, as it also include locations from FFVII as well as FFVIII - Esthar and Winhill to name a few. It also has different characters, from what I read I can say no FFVII character is in this game. This is from the japanase wikipedia version. — Bluerで す。 03:38, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I got concerned when I saw the japanese screenshots, looked like a different game...Thanks a ton! Judgesurreal777 03:41, 31 May 2007 (UTC)


FFX Character article

I need some help on the Characters of Final Fantasy X article. This article had its non-free images removed by Gnome-bot while working on my sandbox and when I moved it, I knew I had to restore those pictures. Can anyone restore these pictures to this article? That would be much appreciated if anyone responds to this. Thanks. Sjones23 22:28, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Seems like that was taken care of pretty quick!, Anything else you need help with? Judgesurreal777 22:40, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
I think so. As what Bluerfn pointed out to me, try to use the infobox used for the main characters so that the voice cast and image can be organized well. Sjones23 01:21, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Things the characters of FFX article needs to accomplish:

  • A consolidation of the FFX and FFX-2 character pages. This will remove a lot of redundant statements and allow for a more seamless merger of Auron, Waaka, Lulu (Final Fantasy X), Kimahri Ronso, and maybe Rikku/Paine (Final Fantasy). This is probably iffy, but it might work.
  • Removal of the extremely minor characters, especially Zanar, Lord Zaron (should be mentioned in the Yunalesca blurb), and others. Perhaps one section for all the blitzball teams.
  • Expansion of the development and cultural impact sections.
  • Significant work with the Aeons section; each one shouldn't have a huge paragraph devoted to it. Perhaps just a couple paras listing who and what they are.

It's making progress. — Deckiller 22:21, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I removed the section on Zanar. Anything else that needs to be accomplished must be done as per the above statements by Deckiller. Also, another thing that needs to be accomplished is to remove the game guide POVs on some of the characters. Sjones23 21:43, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Sjones, when you were adding your changes, you accidently reverted two mergers (Jecht and Seymour). Those merges really need trimming; each three times too long. — Deckiller 14:15, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

User Headstrust and co.

Seems to be reverting several recent mergers. Judgesurreal777 04:59, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Ageslimit (talk · contribs)

…help?—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 01:06, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

...I direct you all here and here. Jesus Christ.—Ｌｏｖｅはドコ？ (talk • contribs) 01:22, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Neeeeedstepss (talk · contribs)

Déjà-vu?. - Kariteh 07:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:SOCK? Not so much this person but I strongly suspect Headstrust (talk · contribs). Axem Titanium 11:23, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
I believe he is also User:Iran5milestoday,hurray! Judgesurreal777 22:30, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't know if he is Headstrust, but he is probably Runsboats. Kariteh 06:50, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
  • All of these users are the same person. I am submitting to checkuser as a formality, but I have a feeling that within 2 days I will be issuing numerous indefinite blocks. — Deckiller 14:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Main priorities

What are the main priorities to work on right now? Perhaps an importance-level system (project-specific) would help with working out what to edit. --Teggles 21:50, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I think the project goal of the moment is to get all articles to Good Article or featured list status....Otherwise, there are articles that are close to good and featured article status up in the corner.....perhaps we could start a featured article drive for Final Fantasy XI since its so far along.Judgesurreal777 22:01, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
You might also try Final Fantasy IX. You might spark an FA push. — Bluerです。 なにか? 22:26, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
I would like to field a proposal that we nominate an article for featured status, since we seem to have some articles that are ready....Should it be 11, 9, or another one? Judgesurreal777 23:42, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
  • I've had my eyes set on FFIX for a while; so has Daedalus. If a couple of people want to get XI situated for a FA push, then we can do two at once. — Deckiller 02:37, 27 May 2007 (UTC)


Vagrant Story

I'm quite aware that Vagrant Story had small connections with Final Fantasy. But I've recently nominated the game's article for FA. Feedbacks from this WikiProject is very much appreciated. — Bluerです。 なにか? 10:02, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Quick link to FAC here, for anyone who is interested. I'll take a look at the article when this week is over (my teachers decided to make it hell for no apparent reason). Axem Titanium 14:41, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Kingdom Hearts peer review

Hey, everyone, please comment on the Kingdom Hearts peer review. A couple of editors and I are FA-pushing it. This is quite in the same vein as the above. Axem Titanium 18:35, 28 May 2007 (UTC)


Final Fantasy VII Characters proposal

Resolved

Now before everyone starts screaming :), I want to say that I do think one or maybe two of these could stand on their own, like Tifa Lockhart, but several of these, seemingly all of them except Tifa, are unlikely to stand on their own, so I wanted to start a dialogue on which should be merged and which should be refined to GA status. PLEASE KEEP IN MIND, the more consolidated our topic is, the easier to get to GA status, and any information that cannot be included should automatically be checked to make sure its found at the Final Fantasy wikia, as has been done with Spira (Final Fantasy X), to make sure nothing is ever lost.

PUSH TO GA as part of Characters of Final Fantasy VII

PUSH TO GA SOLO

Merge into Characters of Final Fantasy VII

Thoughts? Judgesurreal777 23:20, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

  • This one is a little tough, because all these characters have prominant roles in more than just one game or story. I'd say most of these are an exception, except the Turks, Rufus, and maybe Zack. — Deckiller 23:26, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
That is exactly what I want us, as a group, to determine. I didn't want to have people fighting over their fate :) Judgesurreal777 23:40, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Tifa is a major love interest so I'd like to keep her separate. Vincent has his own game and so does Zack (Crisis Core) so I want to let them have their own articles too. I feel like the rest can be safely merged without vocal disapproval, except maybe Turks since they have their own game too. I'm not sure about that one. My gut still says merge for Turks though. Axem Titanium 01:57, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
We should probably go for the safer ones first — Cid, Nanaki, Rufus, and Yuffie. — Deckiller 02:51, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Add to that list Barret and Cait Sith, they should be safe to merge, too. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣ 17:27, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Why not merge them all in a Recurring characters of Final Fantasy VII article, and create a Characters of the Compilation of Final Fantasy VII for the rest? Just a thought. Kariteh 17:30, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
That ignores the fact that many of these characters play large roles outside of FVII games, and calling them recurring characters is a bit redundant. Characters of Final Fantasy VII is just fine. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣ 17:58, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
I made a "mini proposal", please rearrange/discuss. Judgesurreal777 22:42, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
I support this. Axem Titanium 22:47, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Well! I suggest that we merge to top seven; I would do it myself, but I am not as familiar with FFVII, so I wouldn't know as much what is crucial. Judgesurreal777 20:06, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
The Top Seven should indeed be merged. None of them have enough backstory or prominence to warrant their own article. Turks do have thier own game, but unless that game provides a considerable amount of stuff, there's not enough. Tifa gets her own article based on prominence and popularity, Vincent has his own game and a wealth of backstory so he should get his own as well. Zack will probably deserve his own article....once Crisis Core is released. Until then, he's of minor importance and there's little information about him.Xenon Zaleo 16:17, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

But I am sooooo fond of the Rufus page :(...however it doesnt quite warrant a full page on its on in its current state, so perhaps merging is better. Gavin Scott 16:31, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

The Rufus page DOES have a lot of nifty information, but it's questionable if he really deserves all of it.Xenon Zaleo 23:34, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps if given time I could construct an article worthy of being seperate. However, I could do that for every character and I don't think thats quite what the project wants. Gavin Scott 09:13, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
I still think, mergeritis not withstanding, that this should be merged. We have discussed this, and it seems that there a consensus for a merger of the seven and the preservation of the 3. Judgesurreal777 03:36, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps we should save these mergers for another day... Judgesurreal777 04:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Final Fantasy VIII: the perfect model

I think we have found our ideal model for how Wikipedia should cover fictional topics with the success of the Final Fantasy VIII topic. The article's plot summary is perfect: 950 words, covering the main points with concision. Sub articles for setting and characters cover mostly out of universe information with in-universe context thrown in to round out the story. After reading FF8's coverage of the fictional aspects of the game, the reader will have a basic grasp of the setting, characters, and back-story without it substituting the game; in other words, they will still have a lot to gain by actually playing the game and drinking in the story. That means we've done our job: we have informed, but not replaced the actual work.

And now that we are continuing the trend with the other FFs, I'd say we are starting to slowly close in on the point where we can start pressing this formula throughout Wikipedia. Heck, I wouldn't oppose if someone AfD'd Final Fantasy items to tie up that loose end rather quickly, but I digress.

Eventually, I will draft a rewrite of WP:FICT and a new MoS entry for Plot Summaries to supplement WAF and FICT.

Other loose ends include the Gameplay of Final Fantasy article, which has really stalled in my standbox for quite some time; elevating the Monsters, Minigames, and Character class articles to GA status; and everything else :) — Deckiller 00:54, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I applaud and agree with those sentiments. I would also like to add that I think that all of those music articles that are not game specific may be good within a Albums of Final Fantasy article, or a similar name, so that one would be a GA. Judgesurreal777 01:16, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Just an idea for the gameplay article, I think Square Enix battle systems would be a good launching point since 1) it already talks a lot about it and 2) it doesn't seem to cover any battle systems outside of FF anyway. I propose moving it to Gameplay of Final Fantasy and working from there. Axem Titanium 01:54, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
I definitely agree. Even if this isn't moved to Gameplay of FF, it should still definitely be moved somewhere else because of Talk:Square Enix battle systems#Move. Kariteh 14:32, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Eyes on Me (FF8 song)

Resolved

I know that it will end up getting merged anyway which I disagree with since it just needs to be overhauled etc but what I don't agree with is that it got merged with Music of Final Fantasy VIII in less than 24 hours without as much as a discussion. When the discussion finally arose, it was already merged. Any ideas or whatever would be helpful. RIANZ 02:53, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

IMO, I don't see why it shouldn't be merged. What is there to cover on this song apart from which the said article has already covered? If it is for the sake of discussion, what is there to discuss, what is the issue with it being merged to the said article, really? — Bluerで す。 03:05, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
The fact is that it had already been merged long before User:Kappa revived it without discussion (see its article history). The merge was a long time coming and I don't think some hot shot with an agenda should have the power to unilaterally undo that (to the crappy old version no less). Axem Titanium 03:09, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, lucky I'm not the referred to hotshot, hence why I really can't be bothered starting an edit war. But it may have been the "most universally disgusting article ever made in the history of the wikipedia and defies being even associated with the Final Fantasy project" but really it just needed work. Yes, I could have done work on it, you could have done some work on it. The "hotshot" could have as well. But instead the simplistic (I refrain from saying "lazy") way was taken because someone found it that repulsive I'm positive they "threw up in their mouth" a few times whenever they viewed it. Oh and even though the merge may have been a long time coming but the proposal seems to only appear on May 28th (it's the tail end of the 29th where I am). Yay I added something different :p RIANZ 03:58, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Oh oh oh, since we love merging things, do the same for... Simple and Clean from Kingdom Hearts. May as well. But like I said. I don't agree with the merge but if it happens properly, it happens. RIANZ 04:02, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Good idea, might help get Music of Kingdom Hearts to Good Article status. Judgesurreal777 04:13, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
When I merged the article into Music of Final Fantasy VIII, its condition didn't matter. It was the possible content. When you look at it, there isn't much to elaborate on. Everything relevant easily fits in the Music of Final Fantasy VIII article. Just because the article is allowed to have an article doesn't mean it should. Frankly the "bury" argument is ridiculous, it has its own section and is linked directly from the Eyes On Me article. The argument solely seems to be that it deserves to be an article - which somehow reeks of the people who claim Pluto deserves to be a planet. --Teggles 04:33, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
I guess also Eyes On Me can only be considered as a stub rather than article, so it should be merged. In the past, I spent a lot of time thinking of how to improve Eyes On Me and the answer is I couldn't! So it make sense to merge. --Cyktsui 15:03, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I reverted the Terra merge

Resolved

I am pissed off that you would disrespect my contributions to the project by destroying it and removing info that if it were an article on Cloud would be encyclopedic (i.e. out of universe stuff). I also think it's unfair for a MINOR character like Wakka or Lulu to get an article over a MAJOR character like Terra. --Sir Crazyswordsman 03:40, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

First of all Crazy, I didn't merge the article, if you look at the history, we have just had a major case of vandalism in which someone resurrected the article after it had been merged, which I helped to revert. Also, if you look at our discussion above, we are discussing mergers of those characters from FFX and FFVII that would not constitute a full good article as there isn't enough out of universe information.

I would further like to say that Terra's out of universe information should have been merged, and we should immediately make sure it all got transferred from the old article. Also, some of us have been making it a rule to transfer topics that are very good but are not particularly encyclopedic over to the Final Fantasy wikia, which perhaps should be done in this case too.

But as to Terra having her own article, do you think it has enough out of universe information to become a Good Article, for example? The reason it was merged because it was felt it didn't. If it can be demonstrated, great. If not, it would be preferable to combine it into the FFIV character page. Judgesurreal777 04:12, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Terra can have her own separate article as the main character; if, once the Characters of Final Fantasy VI page is perfected and elevated to at least GA status, it is fairly short yet concise, a correct merger might be appropriate. — Deckiller 17:27, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Terra is not the main character of FFVI. There is no main character in the game; this has been explicitely stated by developers ages ago. Kariteh 17:30, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Bahamut

Resolved

The Page was for some reason merged into a main Bahamut page though I find zero discussion about this on either talk page. In any case, due to Bahamut's appearance in several different games, a request on the main Bahamut page that the section needed trimming, and the fact that the article has a primarily out of universe tone, I removed the redirect and reestablished the page. So it probably needs to be part of the project again. It could use a few more sources, but other than that there's no reason it should have been merged in the first place. Xenon Zaleo 16:02, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Bahamut isn't really notable enough to warrent a separate article; I recommend placing the information in either Common themes of Final Fantasy or, preferably, Recurring character names of Final Fantasy. — Deckiller 17:27, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
The request that the section needed trimming was supposed to lead to a trimming of the section, not an expanding... Kariteh 17:31, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
First, Bahamut is in EVERY Final Fantasy except for two of them, and plays a significant story role in more than one. For that reason, he's possibly more notable than any single character in the series except for Cid. However, that said, he may belong in the Recurring character page. Second, I removed the section from the main article, so it was trimmed to nothing with regards to that article, which is what the request deals with. And finally, just because one person thinks it needs trimming doesn't mean it actually does. But the section was as big as the entire rest of the article, and so it was overwhelming for that article, hence the move.Xenon Zaleo 23:32, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
But you're completely wrong about notability. Notability is coverage in multiple reliable sources. It has nothing to do with popularity or importance. Bahamut is barely covered at all in reliable sources, as far as I know. That means it is eons (whee pun) less notable than other characters, hence the reason for merging it. --Teggles 01:12, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
The Notability guidelines are flawed with regards to fictional characters and I have no reason to believe that any character save for Cloud and/or Tifa and/or Aeris are in any more "reliable publications" than Bahamut. And do all mentions mean the same thing? He's got a whole page devoted to him on the Square Enix Website for XI, does that mean that same as say....a list of characters? Notability can be clearly established by familiarity with the series, simply because it has not been sourced as of yet with every book and/or review doesn't mean it isn't worth keeping until they get up there. But I digress. I will add what sources are immediately available to me, and we'll take it from there.Xenon Zaleo 23:16, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
The reliable sources need to be independent of the games, so official sites don't count. To be honest, there's probably enough for Bahamut to be notable, but no one has proven that yet. Right now the current article has no secondary sources, aside from official links and those irrelevant to the creature. --Teggles 01:06, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned redirect

Resolved

Please give your opinion on Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 May 30#Basuter sword → Final Fantasy weapons#Buster Sword. Kariteh 09:40, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference contributions was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Final_Fantasy/archive/23&oldid=1137383748"