Talk:Sophitia Alexandra

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

Gameplay[edit]

Okay, this is pretty much just like the old character analysis section from before. I'm removing these for the same reason people from before deleted the character analysis section. If you want to find out why, check out Taki's and Kilik's talk pages. If people want a strategy guide, they should go to fansites. Mythmonster2 (talk) 06:30, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your reason, but not directly to fansites but some other reference aside from those, I guess? And just a question since you're removing unnecessary things, do you also think the "Destined Battle" part on the "Trivia" section of SC characters must be removed?--Logicartery (talk) 15:44, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Destined battle should be included, just not under trivia.--Sanji_1990 (talk) 14:07, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weapons[edit]

shouldn't people also mention her shield as well as her sword.--Sanji_1990 (talk) 14:08, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sophitia needs some serious writing[edit]

OK there is a whole lot writing that needs to be done on Sophitia because there is hardly any info one her profile! Someone please fix this —Preceding unsigned comment added by Android 18 lover (talk • contribs) 18:32, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In video games[edit]

Sophitia's in-video-games section is lacking. I put in some information about her role in Soulcalibur 3 and 4, but someone else needs to do 2 and 1, and maybe a little about her role in the first game, Soul Edge. And it would be really nice if we could find anything on gameplay. Thanks, Swiftink (talk) 23:28, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]


This is missing lots of information. Someone needs to seriously help out. Thank you! DEIDRA C. (talk) 18:12, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Sexualized Portrayal"[edit]

Aren't almost all the soulcalibur girls "often noted for their sexualized portrayal in the series", why are we singling out Sophitia? Ivy is 100x more sexualised and a bigger sex symbol yet very little to almost nothing about that on her wiki? Taki in skin-tight-camel-toe-bazooka-boob showing one piece outfit + the rest of them wearing almost nothing but they aren't sexualized like Sophitia apparently? Clarify please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.240.243.2 (talk) 03:28, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Sophitia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:34, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Sophitia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:28, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Sophitia Alexandra/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Cukie Gherkin (talk · contribs) 00:48, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):
    b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a. (reference section):
    b. (citations to reliable sources):
    c. (OR):
    d. (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a. (major aspects):
    b. (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):
    b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

Lead

  1. Should have some more info on development
  2. Xiphos is only in the infobox
  3. Athens, Greece is only in the infbox
  4. Aya Takemura is only in the infobox
  5. Her voice actresses is only in the infobox

Conception and design

  1. Like with Voldo, should clarify that it's not unique that she was worked on solely by one team
  2. "for male fans. It would also be a terrible change" this is a little confusing; it sounds like they're saying it didn't happen.
    1. I think I addressed everything, how's that?

The changes to the stuff I listed looks good. I got some more now:

  1. Unsure about how RS is done with merch; would it be reasonable to have only merch cited by an RS? Also, is souledge.jp reliable?
    1. That's honestly the best source I have for the merch sadly, a lot of times it isn't covered. SoulEdge.jp however was Namco's own website for the game before they took it down.
  2. Reception should be paraphrased somewhat more
    1. Fixed I think?
  3. The voice actresses aren't mentioned in the article; is there no info regarding their performances?
    1. Should be fixed now.
  4. Infobox image looks a bit scuffed, and the rationale could be improved a bit.
    1. Replaced and redid rationale.

Looks good.

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:35, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by Kung Fu Man (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 00:42, 31 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Sophitia Alexandra; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

  • New enough, long enough. ALT1 short enough, interesting, and sourced (as is every paragraph); AGF on foreign-language source. No neutrality problems found, no copyright problems found, no maintenance templates found. QPQ done. Good to go.--Launchballer 22:42, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sophitia_Alexandra&oldid=1218458617"