Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Square Enix/archive/11

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


Game quote section.

I found that the Final Fantasy IX article's reference section has a "Game quotes" section. Should we do that for other articles, like Final Fantasy X, too? (I mean, it would make things easier to separate.) -017Bluefield (talk) 23:06, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm of mixed opinion on using ref sections like that (I tend to have all of the citation definitions in the references section and then split things up there by section used in) but I don't see the harm in it- if you'd like to do it while you're messing with the citations and quotes in those games, I say knock yourself out. --PresN 01:27, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Attention to Mana and other series?

I was thinking if we could check up onto Mana series as t seems t has a lot of potential but lacking in information. I personally believe t could be a potential featured topic. Also things have slowed down recently most likely due to issues in the real world or lack of information given, maybe searchnig for articles within our scope that aren't the most/least viewed.Lucia Black (talk) 09:47, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Q2 2012 Roll Call

Please sign your name if you are still with us.

  1. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 04:23, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
  2. Lucia Black (talk) 14:58, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
  3. Tintor2 (talk) 22:20, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
  4. PresN 19:52, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
  5. Axem Titanium (talk) 02:08, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

SaGa in the series template

There is an ongoing discussion about this topic at Template talk:Final Fantasy series#Saga / Mana Series. Your opinion is requested. Axem Titanium (talk) 02:09, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Proposed split on Final Fantasy III's talk page

I proposed a split for the remake at Talk:Final Fantasy III#Split DS/iOS/soon to be PSP remake. Would be great to have some input.Lucia Black (talk) 02:10, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Proposed merge on Parasite Eve's talk page

I propose merging the novel at Talk:Parasite Eve#Merge Novel? to the series article, Parasite Eve (series) . Would be great to get some views again. If not i might just boldly merge them together.Lucia Black (talk) 08:43, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

I was going to say no as there's a film, but I see that's at the series article already. Books are hard to get reception for- since the article is just a plot summary I think its fine to merge it. --PresN 17:36, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
Looking back its easier merging the series to the novel since it wont require name change.Lucia Black (talk) 19:17, 5 July 2012 (UTC)


Q3 2012 Roll Call

  1. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 22:09, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
  2. --PresN 02:39, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
  3. Tintor2 (talk) 02:54, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
  4. Lucia Black (talk) 18:53, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Advent Children

Just so everyone is aware, Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children has been demoted from Good Article status. Please see the GA reassessment to see how this article can be improved. Thanks, Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:21, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Characters of Final Fantasy IV

In Talk:Final Fantasy IV#Characters of Final Fantasy IV, I started a discussion regarding remaking the merged character list and I have been working on it in User talk:Tintor2/ draft. I managed to find some decent critical reception, and cleaning up fancruft from previous revisions, but I can't find information regarding the cast's creation. Also, some sections lack information regarding the sequels The After Years and Interlude. You are welcome to help if you want. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 17:34, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Responded to your archive problem on the talk page. --PresN 19:05, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I have started working on Characters of Final Fantasy IV adding references and revising the prose. Still needs more work though. However, I haven't been able to find an illustration that shows most of the game's cast. I have seen once one showing most of protagonists by the designer, Yoshitaka Amano, but couldn't see it again. If not what image could be helpful to the article? Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 04:25, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Colons (again)

RESOLVED
An RFC established a consensus to rename the article to Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children. Discussion closed after three days of inactivity. (Latest comment is signed 4 August 2012.)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

It looks like this discussion is starting up again. Just the facts:

So what should we choose? Some questions to consider: Does WP:COMMONNAME apply here, even though the official name isn't more complicated like all the examples given? What is the "official" name (I'm inclined to say w/o colon since that's what is printed on the back of the box)? Does looking at the back of the product count as "original research"? Axem Titanium (talk) 16:49, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

    • "Look at your life; look at your choices." - Haha, loved this bit. Anyways... the idea that citing the product itself is "original research" is absurd. Have we lived and fought in vain? Original research requires that you're interpreting or editorializing; quoting explicit text as a citation for that explicit text is just using a primary source. I say no colon: if that's what the box has it as, that's what the title is. --PresN 18:04, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
    • I also support the use of no colons. Since the DVD does not have colons, then that is what the title is per the concerns by PresN. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:16, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

The DVD could have not it for a variety of reasons, but it's not important why. What's important, practically everyone in the English Internet uses either ":" (far more common) or "-". And that's including: IMDb, Anime News Network, Rotten Tomatoes, GameSpot, IGN, RPGamer, Amazon, even Final Fantasy Wikia and Facebook. Wikipedia is the only one that goes all contrarian on that, despite the rule on the common-name naming. Also an another official English website: Sony Pictures. --Niemti (talk) 19:18, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Can you talk a little bit about what those variety of reasons might be? Also, why you don't think it's important? I, personally, think it would be very important to this discussion. Axem Titanium (talk) 20:06, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Axem
Just tell me: Why do you bother?
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 20:26, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Like a DVD naming convention or whatever, or just being random, but I have no crystal ball here and it doesn't matter. Like my Onimusha: Dawn of Dreams game is written as "Onimusha[tm] Dawn of Dreams" on the side of the box case, or Kessen is written as "KESSEN", but who cares? No one, because Wikipedia always uses a common-naming name. --Niemti (talk) 20:41, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Basically, I second what Niemti said - everyone uses the colons except Wikipedia, which makes little sense. As for people saying, it appears without colons on the DVD, I presume they mean the opening credits of the film. In that case, so what? None of the Star Wars movies use colons, so are we now saying that they should be listed as Star Wars Episode V The Empire Strikes Back instead of Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back? Of course not, the suggestion is absurd. The exact same principal applies here. It's also worth noting that the Blu-Ray box and both the box and instruction manual for Dirge of Cerberus do use colons. Bertaut (talk) 21:34, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello again
I think Bertaut is right. I think the colon is part of using correct English and should be used on the virtue of this being the English Wikipedia. Square Enix doesn't seem to take spelling or uniformity of title very seriously -- and not just in this case. So, I think I would have inserted a colon the first time I made the article.
But we are not writing the article for the first time. Therefore, I don't exactly suggest renaming the article. Still, if you guys are sure that the matter is really "to be or not to be", well, I say let colons be.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 23:20, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I dont see this as an issue of english name vs japanese name. Colons based on eliable sources. Whichever is the most common regardlesss of what the DVD covers. By the way the TM means trade market. Their on most logos but does not mean they are actual part of the title.Lucia Black (talk) 04:24, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Nobody said anything about "English vs. Japanese". The discussion, for most part talks about Wikipedia style and its MOS. Being most common is not the only criterion; MOS also specifies other criteria such as correct English, capitalization, etc. The all-caps form and the "TM" sign are just examples for these other criteria. 91.98.84.185 (talk) 10:34, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
I know, and I just used it as an example of how the side box titles are completely irrevelant (there was a [tm] mark instead of the colon, but still it doesn't matter at all). --Niemti (talk) 08:19, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
This has nothing to do with the criterion. If the most common name has no colon. then we do not add colon. We do not alter names (unless it is to add disambiguation) for the sake of criteria. It is not "incorrect" if a name holds no colon. Thats how they are written. The TM is merely to show it is trademarked. It is not a replacement for colon. Do you all know what the TM is for? if not, then please do not bring it up because that example is meaningless here.
Many titles do have colons and many dont but are implied. However, it is not upto us to say it is implied or not. If reliable sources add a colon, and the most common name is with a colon then that is the one we will use. If they do not however, then we dont add one. This has nothing to do with english spelling.Lucia Black (talk) 19:41, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi again, guys.
Wow, this is pretty exciting; I read about this kind of discussion in Wikipedia Essays. You see, this is the point where the participants have exhausted all they had to say. Some start repeating themselves, gradually denying all opposing facts. "Manual of Style says this." "No, it doesn't." "Yes, it does." "No, it doesn't." "Yes, it does." ... Then, essay says the name-calling creeps in. Then, admins come, block people for name-calling and call them name-callers. Then crats come and block the admins for calling others names (namely name-callers). Then, ArbCom kicks in. Then, U.S. government kicks in. Then, UN intervenes and passes a motion. Then, U.S. vetoes the motion. Then, China vetoes the veto of the motion. Then, France vetoes the veto of the veto of the motion.
I don't remember what exactly happens next, but eventually, a nuclear war wipes out humanity. Then, a surviving roach tells me "You owe me 20 bucks!"
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 22:03, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

"If the most common name has no colon. then we do not add colon." - except the most common name has colon. Because NOBODY BUT WIKIPEDIA writes it without colon. And that's including official websites, too (Square-Enix, Sony Pictures). Colon is being used also by: IMDb [4], ANN [5], IGN [6], GameSpot [7], every other WP:RS website and magazine (Variety [8], New York Times [9], etc), Wikia [10], Facebook, everyone. The only exception is Rotten Tomatoes, but even they just use a dash instead. I don't know why is it even discussed at all. --Niemti (talk) 22:21, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

(sigh) Given the fact that Niemti has made bold changes and demerged articles without discussion, as well as acting like a novice and sharing the same subjects, which possibly matches that of a banned user, I have opened up a sockpuppet case on this user. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 21:34, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
Well I can't comment on any of that or sigh about it, but it doesn't change the fact that not to have colons on this title is ridiculous. Like I said, citing the DVD cover is useless, when you consider the DVD covers of films like all the Star Wars movies, the Twilight movies, the Lord of the Rings movies. None of them have colons, so are we suggesting that the title for all of those movies here on Wikipidia is wrong; that The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring should be The Lord of the Rings The Fellowship of the Ring. I've yet to see anyone present a good case for not using colons other than "they don't use them on the DVD cover". And in any case, they do use them on the Blu Ray cover, on the back, colons are used twice. Bertaut (talk) 23:20, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
So, should we establish a consensus? Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:24, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
I think we're confusing the logo and the title. The logo is a graphic image used on the front cover. The title is the actual name of the film used in a sentence or other stream of text. The logo for LOTR:TFOTR does not include a colon because the subtitle "The Fellowship of the Ring" is on a separate line. The line break in the logo does not necessarily mean that a colon exists there in the title, though in many cases it does. For example, in this case, the logo for FFVIIAC places "Advent Children" on a separate line, but the title of the film does not include the colon, as shown by the back cover and spine of the DVD case. At present, the two sides seem pretty evenly split between for and against, suggesting "no consensus" for a change. Axem Titanium (talk) 15:53, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Axem
With all due respect, from where I am standing, it does not seem anybody have confused "logo" and "title". That said, I am afraid I don't think "no consensus" is factually accurate here. The only reason given against colon in this discussion is WP:COMMONNAME, which (per Niemti's evidence) actually supports colon. So, it seems perfectly clear that this discussion has established that Wikipedia policy is in favor of the colon. Therefore, in absence of strong consensus against the colon, the colon should stay put, per Wikipedia policy.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 03:50, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
I don't believe the "against colon" side has ever cited COMMONNAME as justification. I believe COMMONNAME only applies in cases where the "official" name is much more complicated than the name in common use (see all the examples given on that page). In this case, the official name is actually more simple than the common name. I believe Bertaut was confusing logo and title above in bringing up LOTR as an example since he was arguing that the logo for LOTR doesn't have a colon yet a colon is still in the title. That is because logo =/= title and how a film's name is depicted graphically (logo) is not the same as what it is actually called in a string of text (title). In this case, the way the title is represented in a string of text is "Final Fantasy VII Advent Children". I believe we have not drawn a consensus because there are three people for including a colon, three people against, and two people who I can't tell what their opinion is on the issue. Axem Titanium (talk) 14:51, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Axem
It seems I do owe the roach 20 bucks after all.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 02:23, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm not "acting like a novice". Now, the colon is in "a string of text" title according to both SquareEnix's and Sony's English official websites of for the film. Too. As I already said. (Some other SquareEnix websites do not have a colon, but probably just because of Engrishing/not caring.) --Niemti (talk) 21:16, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

That's original research to assume that. We use colon when its used in text by reliable source, regardless if it matches the logo or not.Lucia Black (talk) 01:49, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Oh-my-god. It's like you never understand what I'm saying, all the time. So, which reliable source does NOT use a colon, huh? That is except of RT (who use a dash). Spoiler: NOBODY, ONLY WIKIPEDIA. --Niemti (talk) 01:54, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Please do not shout, as it is considered to be impolite and no one likes to be shouted or yelled at. If this type of incivility continues, I will be forced to do something about this. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:59, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
I'm not shouting. I'm repeating myself, for at least fourth time already. Spoiler: written shouting involves exclamation marks, or at the very least bold text. Now, can we close this discussion at least? --Niemti (talk) 02:01, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
point is your reasoning isnt nuetral and has original research. The reason should be because no source writes it without the colon. But instead you are seeing the title to be independent that we control regardless of sources.Lucia Black (talk) 02:07, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
And you know what? That's EXACTLY what I'm saying, all the time (that INDEED no source writes it without the colon). And the sources were even listed, complete with links. You really never understood what I'm saying, it's amazing. --Niemti (talk) 02:13, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

No. Please do not lie. Im sure it wasnt your intention but that is not what you have been saying. Please note that im nuetral (i have not argued to add or not to add the colon) but expanding the view. You replying to said view does not mean you were saying it "all the time". You wee basing this on how english text would look like. You also used said reasoning such as a trademark sign which is completely irrelevant. And recently you used original research ( assumption) as to why official sites do not use english romanization which you claim was for laziness.Lucia Black (talk) 02:23, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Let's close this discussion. It's getting really silly. --Niemti (talk) 02:17, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Now I am forced to intervene. Please don't put pressure on other users to do your bidding (that is considered harassment). Also, your edits satisfies 4 out of the 6 criteria in this Wikipedia policy, as well as "Failure or refusal to get the point" and the "campaign to drive away productive editors". This has already exhausted my patience. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:19, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Bteween you two, I don't even know what's going here anymore, or what do you really want. Not only I've stated my arguments very clearly, I also repeated them several times, to no avail, but apparently it's still not enough, and now I "put pressure" and even "harrassing" somehow. Incredible. Oh, and apparently I even "lie" about something (which is not-a-personal-attack at all). --Niemti (talk) 02:29, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

your resoning is clear. But im saying the reason you gave a moment before i replied was biased and had original research. You use no sources add colon as "part" of your reasoning but it was not your main point.Lucia Black (talk) 02:33, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Enough already

All right, now this has gone far enough. Discussion can continue, but let's just wait until we reach a consensus. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:45, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

And so your "100% disenganging" marches on. Anywyay, if it's still being controversial somehow, let's just make it a vote already, because I think everything has been already said (and by me repeatedly). You know my vote. --Niemti (talk) 04:45, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Please note that Wikipedia is not a democracy and we do not vote on everything. As such, we build things by consensus, not voting. Also, polling is not a substitute for discussion. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 05:20, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
In order to gain a more broad consensus, I have filed an RfC on whether we should use colons in the titles. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 08:18, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

RfC: Usage of colons in Final Fantasy VII Advent Children title

Should we include the colon in the Final Fantasy VII Advent Children article title per WP:COMMONNAME? Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 08:28, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Support colon – As per WP:COMMONNAME the official name is irrelevant, we use the most frequently used name in English language reliable sources. Looking through the sources used in the article, Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children outnumbers Final Fantasy VII Advent Children by roughly 50 to 10. There is a clear preference for the colon in English sources. Betty Logan (talk) 10:56, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Support colon – As per WP:COMMONNAME. Colons almost never appear onscreen in graphical treatments but are standard in text treatments. --Tenebrae (talk) 14:52, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Line breaks in graphical treatments =/= colons in text treatments, no matter how "standard" you think they may be. We don't say Assassin's: Creed: Brotherhood, do we? Axem Titanium (talk) 19:00, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
And we don't say "Assassin's Creed Brotherhood" neither. Which is more revelant. I think you've just shot yourself in the foot, but carry on if you want. Or alternatively, just close it already, because it never should have been even discussed in the first place, that's how obvious this is. --Niemti (talk) 19:17, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
Niemti, please be civil and assume good faith. Also, please note that insulting an editor is a clear personal attack, which is not tolerated. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:29, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
LOL nice try, but no dice. Check the url that you just linked to and notice the word "customized" in the file name. This is the official Xbox 360 cover art. Axem Titanium (talk) 22:22, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello, Axem. I am afraid that is completely irrelevant of Tenebrae's discussion. He said "...but are standard in text treatments." Niemti's previous evidence from eight different sources proves that this statement is to some very large extent true. Now, you seem to be assuming that the text treatment is the product of a purely machine-like (non-human) visual conversion of graphics to text. Again, I am afraid you are wrong: It is a matter of semantics and style guide. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 04:43, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
You forgot to add how does it change anything, because there's no colon there neither. ("LOL" indeed.) --Niemti (talk) 10:40, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
I think that's about enough for now. Since Wikipedia is not a battleground, let's end this hostility and just move forward with the RfC. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 22:02, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Oppose colon - COMMONNAME does not apply when the official name is shorter and more simple than the common name. No need to invent colons where they don't exist. Axem Titanium (talk) 15:35, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Support colon, per Niemti's evidence regarding WP:COMMONNAME. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 15:42, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Support colon – As per WP:COMMONNAME. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 19:31, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Support colon, per Tenebrae. -Oreo Priest talk 18:39, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Support colon: Although I understand what Axem is trying to get at, WP:COMMONNAME is clear that the most frequently used English language name in reliable sources is what should be used, and it would appear to be with a colon. Nomader (talk) 19:29, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Support colon: simplicity doesnt always mean shorter. Its easier adding colon then without.Lucia Black (talk) 02:06, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Support colon: for reasons I outlined above. Bertaut (talk) 22:23, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Genre discussion

A discussion regarding the genre issue in the lead section of the Final Fantasy VII: Advent Children is taking place at Talk:Final Fantasy VII Advent Children#Genre issue in the lead section. Input from project members would be appreciated. Thanks, Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:33, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

FFVIIAC GA push

I've started a discussion on bringing Final Fantasy VII Advent Children back to GA status. The discussion is at Talk:Final Fantasy VII Advent Children#GA revamp. Input from project members would be very much appreciated. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:53, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Yuna (Final Fantasy)

I've started to do some major work on Yuna (Final Fantasy) with the intention of getting it back up to GA status. See Talk:Yuna (Final Fantasy)‎#GA revamp for information. Input from project members would be appreciated. Thanks, Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:12, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

My input is: Just nominate itttttt or I'll do it. --Niemti (talk) 18:17, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

There is no deadline, as I do not want to be rushed to make this a GA. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:39, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

I've left some comments on the talk page as to issues I would raise at a GA review. --PresN 18:41, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Understood. Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:43, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
This article is now back up to GA status. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 21:26, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Dissidia 012 Final Fantasy Ultimanina

I have noticed that Hiroyuki Ito contains references citing the guidebook Dissidia 012 Final Fantasy Ultimanina -Action Side- and wondered who added it. It may be helpful for Dissidia 012 Final Fantasy that contains a small development section. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 23:54, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

User:G-Zay, this diff, back in January. --PresN 05:19, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

I think a new page should be created for Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn

It should be given a brand new page as it's basically a totally different game from the original FFXIV. --G-Zay (talk) 03:45, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Hard to say at the moment. i'm still wondering if this is considered an expansion pack or actually the name they will be sticking with. But if not, then it could be an easy split.Lucia Black (talk) 05:02, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

The new name has the feel of a sequel or expansion rather than an outright remake. Naoki Yoshida, the producer of the game, has confirmed that the story in the origial FFXIV will not be in A Realm Reborn. It will instead have a story that continues on from the last story episode of FFXIV. As a result, not only is A Realm Reborn a separate game, but it's also a sequel rather than a remake. It should therefore have it's own page as both it and FFXIV are totally diferent games with different stories and gameplay mechanics. --G-Zay (talk) 05:28, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
Is it though? If it's a free update to an existing game, even if it drastically changes it, that sounds like either an expansion to me- which might deserve its own article- or just a massive patch, which doesn't. I think we should wait until closer to release to make a new article. Personally, I don't think slightly changed combat and graphics and a new plotline makes it a "totally different game", but it's not like I play the game so my opinion might not be justified. --PresN 05:58, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
now that i think about it, it probably wouldnt be best to split even if it was an expansion pack or patch (which in this case it could be both). We do know howevr its part of the same game. It is not like you have to buy a completely new game.Lucia Black (talk) 15:47, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
I think this is a discussion for when the game/update/whatever is actually released in Oct/Nov. We still don't know how many changes there are. Axem Titanium (talk) 17:25, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

We'll see by then.Lucia Black (talk) 02:37, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

OK, let's just wait it out until we get some gameplay footage of the game. --G-Zay (talk) 12:32, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
it's not about gamepkay. Its whether the game will be separate entity of the oriiginal. The game already came out in pc and not on ps3. We have to consider if this is an update of the original. If so, whatever gameplay changes they made also affects ff14. Therefore it could still be the same game but changed completely. Or if you can play ff14 original version and the realm reborn separately then it could be considered two different games.Lucia Black (talk) 18:12, 6 August 2012 (UTC)


RfC discussion

Hi. Just so everyone is aware, there is a discussion whether we should use Top X-style lists to determine notability of a video game character if it is backed up by a reliable source. The discussion can be found at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines#RfC: Top X lists in video games. Input from project members would be appreciated. Thanks, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:03, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

FFXIII-2 GA push

All right. I am going to start working on the Final Fantasy XIII-2 article so we can get it up to GA status. Comments and suggestions would be very much appreciated. Thank you, Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:54, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Chocobo Racing 3D

There's been a request at WPVG article requests for an article on Chocobo Racing 3D (redirect) for a while now. Does anyone here have the inclination to write that article, or think that it would even be viable? Below that is also a request for Slime Mori Mori Dragon Quest 3. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 22:54, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

User:Xifanie (who seems to have previously edited under an IP) continues to add a section to FFT:WOTL that uses a forum link as a source. Trying to explain to him why it's a problem he screamed "report me"....so here we are. Anyone want to help on the matter? ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 15:43, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Seems pretty cut and dry. Notify again if you need more voices. Axem Titanium (talk) 15:21, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

FF7 FAC

I drop off of WP for a couple weeks, and when I turn around I find that FF7 is now at FAC! This seems like the kind of thing we should be helping out with- looks like Niemti could use some extra hands. --PresN 21:10, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Was it nominated? I saw no proposals or anything. Anyway, the link is Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Final Fantasy VII/archive2.Tintor2 (talk) 00:55, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
Oh yes, sorry, /archive2 not /archive1. Yeah, far as I can tell Niemti started tweaking it a few weeks ago, got it passed for A-class, then sent it to FAC. I'll deal with the citation problems tomorrow; hopefully the article is solid enough that the nomination won't be wasted. --PresN 03:13, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
I will attempt to assist but unfortunately life has gottem hasty.Lucia Black (talk) 03:36, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Some help with Final Fantasy Dimensions

As the game has released and there already several reviews, it would be great if someone could help fill in the reception section. I'm very busy in my life at the moment and i can't really help out as much as i want to. It would be a great help if someone could do me a favor and add more to the reception.Lucia Black (talk) 19:26, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Square_Enix/archive/11&oldid=1087828611"