User talk:King Zeal

oi dude why did you change the jin kazama edit i have it under good reference from the developers of the game that he in fact trained under Hanshi Patrick mcarthy you dick!

Well, until you post that "good reference" in accordance to Wikipedia's standards, I'm taking it out. King Zeal 16:07, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

The correct grammar is "Samus's"; NOT Samus'

Interestingly enough, it can either be Samus's or Samus'; both are grammatically correct. I didn't realize this until you prompted me to do more research. Since it was the writer's intention to make things sound less awkward by writing Samus's instead of Samus', I won't argue about it. I just thought this was interesting and worth noting. Duke Grable 10:43, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

King (Tekken)

Please explain me why King 1 and 2 are two different persons. Grumpanelli 16:04, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

For the same reason that Noob Saibot and Sub-Zero are two different people. The King that took part in Tekken and Tekken 2 is replaced by a successor bearing the same name. Though they are roughly the same in out-of-universe context (character name, move lists, etc.), you cannot simply discount that the name "King" is used to describe two separate people. King Zeal 16:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

But why is King 2 a lot (namely 10 cm) taller than King 1? Grumpanelli 18:59, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

This is why I'm against unsourced changes to stats. I have no idea what stats either King is, as I don't have a copy of either Tekken 2 or 3's instruction booklets. The only way to settle that matter is to provide a reference that proves or disproves it. King Zeal 21:02, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Since they are 2 different people, one is taller than the other. Isn't that enough? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bethereds (talk • contribs) 05:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC).

No. Which is taller? By how much? If you can't answer those questions, then that means that any other person can make any edits to his stats that they want, and you have nothing to argue against them with. King Zeal 10:40, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, I have both Tekken 2 and 3 instruction booklets on hand. King I is 190 cm while King II is 200 cm. Tekken 3's booklet also states that the Kings are two different people, King II being a young man who grew up at the orphanage and took on the "King" identity after the original was killed by Ogre.--BD Third 14:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Now, see how much of a big help references are? King Zeal 15:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Miguel (Namco) to Miguel (Tekken)

Sorry for the changes...

So, can I put the article "Miguel (Namco)" on the page "Miguel (Tekken)"?

I've already made the "Namco" page a redirect for the "Tekken" page. However, I'm opposed to adding any other information at this time because none of it is officially translated in English as of yet (to my knowledge). Therefore, it doesn't fit Wikipedia's standard of attribution. If there's an official English release from Namco then that's fine, but otherwise, it's only fan-created information. King Zeal 01:00, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

OK, I agree and I will not put non-oficial files.

Hwoarang

I don't know where the problem is. Why must you always revert my edits? Hwoarang's height (181 cm) is rounded 5' 11". So please do not revert my edit without a valid reason any more. Thanks. Il P@zzo 16:39, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Where are you getting those stats from? How do you know he's 181 cm? What's your source? King Zeal 02:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Please see google-web for more infos about his height. He is 1.81 m in every source. You will also find official websites for the Tekken characters. I'm not joking by adding Hwoarang's height as 1.81 m. I've also a handbook from the game Tekken Tag Tournament and there is also written that Hwoarang's height is 1,81m. Il P@zzo 16:48, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

You're not seeing my point. Look at what was done on the Jin Kazama page. Sure, you still have to find the Instruction Booklets that are being cited, but at least there's something official used to back things up. Also, I can't just take your word for it that you have a Tekken handbook. Not that I actually believe you'd lie, but how can I be sure? For example, if I claimed to be a professional electrical engineer and used my experience to edit the page on electricity, how would you dispute it?

All I'm saying is that you need to cite your source for that on the page. Otherwise, I'd have to take EVERYONE'S word for it if they edited any Tekken characters' stats. King Zeal 17:47, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Are you quite mad? It is Tekken, what possible motive would anybody have for making lies up about Hwoarang's height? There is precaution for preservation of truth and then there is the theoretical possibility somebody is telling porkies about whether they have a handbook in their possession. I hardly see it being a threat to our civilization, more like a few miles on the wrong side of melodramatic.

No, I'm not mad, thank you. And just to inform you, it's happened quite often. There's been multiple cases of anonymous editors coming in and subtlely changing the height, weight, and other stats for different Tekken (and other fighting game) characters. And this isn't about it being a "threat to our civilization". It's about correct and incorrect. If it's incorrect, don't put it in. Period. King Zeal 16:27, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Edit Reverts

Why have you taken it upon yourself to make it your personal mission to revert the smallest of edits? You then cite "the policy" as your reason for doing this, constantly. I would not usually comment on such a small issue, but upon visiting your discussion page I can see that it is a repeated occurance. Wikipedia "policy" is not threatened by the minor edits of some Namco pages, why do you have to be so retentive? I am sure that you only wish to maintain the truth and sensibility in the articles, but you are preventing growth more than you are doing the former. Please loosen up; others are entitled to contribute to wiki as well, and they may even know things that you don't. This doesn't threaten the precious policy. -A

You make a lot of accusations about my motives and my knowledge. I make reversions and edits based on what has been established about Wikipedia's standards of Attribution. For all of your lamenting about editing, you've only submitted one vague statement as a reference. (Bryan Fury is called a replicant! That MUST be a Blade Runner reference!) I've provided my reasons and logic to you before, and I've said why I find yours faulty. I didn't make it a "personal mission". Furthermore these so-called "minor" edits of yours (which don't even fall under the category of "minor" by the site's standards) are basically unsourced, unreferenced trivia. Which is not allowed. Period. So please re-think what you accuse me of and consider your own agenda. King Zeal 15:32, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Wait; who do you think I am? Of course, there can only be one person that disagrees with your decisions, is that correct? I am not a registered member of wikipedia, and have never commented on a discussion page before now. Perhaps taking this into account you will re-read my earlier statement without immediately refuting it. Merely glancing at the number of complaints on your discussion page is a hint. -A

Frankly, I don't care who you are, what your history with Wikipedia is, how many discussion pages you've commented on before, or how many people you think share your complaints. Again, instead of ragging on me, why don't we take this back to the argument at hand. Have you presented any new findings for your position? Any new references? Any improved sources? If not, don't peck at my head. King Zeal 17:36, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Jin kazama.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Jin kazama.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

I want peace.

I will stop puting jazzs last words if you keep the the rumor that he may be rebulit.

Thank you.71.244.63.12 16:41, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I didn't take it out. I left a tag saying that it needed citing. King Zeal 16:42, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey

Email me if you remember me, k? I need to tell you something important about Chi-town. *knowingly ignores rules* haha, oncamera^(t) 17:04, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

angel and devil (tekken)

In the discussion page of article Devil (Tekken) you specifically stated that Devil has a separate identity to Kazuya, so they must be separate articles. Yes I understand this but two complications arise:

Problem 1: *The Devil being a separate identity is disputed. Since Kazuya has merged with Devil, the article should merge aswell. This is why, if Devil has a separate article, Devil Jin should also have a seperate article - since he [Devil Jin] has also merged, according to his cutscene with Jinpachi in Tekken 5.

Problem 2: *Talking about separate entities, Angel is a completely different entity to Devil. So why is her article merged? yes she "REPRESENTS" the good half but really she was sent from heaven to stop devil from taking Kazuya's body but failed. She used to have a separate article so what happened?

To fix these problems, I suggest:

• Making a separate article for Angel first and foremost. It should also be expanded to include more backstory. Not many editors have noticed that some tekken characters have stub articles and not enough story is given for them. Then after doing this:

    *Either make one article containing both Devil and Devil Jin (to describe it as an entity)

    *Merge Devil and Devil Jin with Devil Gene.

    *Create a separate artcile for Devil Jin.

PLEASE LEAVE YOUR REPLY ON MY TALK PAGE. THANK YOU. Jagzthebest 20:57, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

hey man my name is Allen let me tell yall somethin About devil/Angel

Angel. Angel is a Angel sent from the heavens to save kazuya from devil.

Devil. devil is a demon spirit that was within kazuya from when he was born because of jinpachi his grandfarther really started the curse blood of the devil-gene.

now let me tell you something About jin kazama,kazuya son.

jin kazama has both devil in Angel powers within him because of kazuya and jun. now have you ever thought About jun and Angel in your head. now jun has Angel powers to save kazuya from that curse too you know. so that make Angel within jun, they almost the same in a way. so this information will help you solve question you always had About Angel,devil,kazuya,jun, and jin. think About it.put 2 and 2 together and get answers,know what should be what.--Allen jackson 20:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)Allen Jackson AKA Ace.

devil tekken

yes but what about the other things I said? You are not reading carefully here. The articles are based on story, which I know of, not palette swapping. Alex and roger do not share articles do they? You cant merge two different characters. Jagzthebest 21:31, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

WHAT?

whatever. I will create a separate article then, if you can't. Jagzthebest

I'll provide a consensus when moving

Angel deserves a separate article. I'm sorry if you don't see it my way. Most of the Tekken articles need some extra story and cleaning up. I will take care of that. Jagzthebest 21:43, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

yes but

yes but i keep discussing it with you, you disagree, then were back to square one. so who the hell am I supposed to discuss it with? look this is how it should be. You yourself said that only a small backstory is efficient and that they should be merged because of palette swap. But im making it better and expanding it so it isnt a simple article, it bigger and provides more information. If YOU CANT BE ASKED then let me take care of it. ;) Jagzthebest 21:48, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

okay then

How do I propose. Do I just write a comment on the discussion page and wait? Jagzthebest

hypocrtitical

if wikipedia is so out of universe, why does it say "this user is a heroic autobot" on your page.

User pages are not articles. Read more about the site before you start throwing personal attacks at other users. King Zeal 18:26, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

WHAT THE?

why does Miharu Hirano have a separate article?!!!!!!!!! she is a palette swap and only appears in Tekken 4. So why is she so important? she is even less significant than angel!!! What the hell?!!!!!!!!!!!!!Jagzthebest 23:49, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Anna Williams

Some weirdos with random IP addresses keep putting stuff like "She is currently dating Clockwork, Horrorcore Rap Artist on the underground." On Anna Williams' article. something has to be done about this.Jagzthebest 00:12, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Tekken 6

Can you tell those guys to stop adding speculation which they already admit was not confirmed? They said that is was sourced speculation. Can you tell them that it is not needed anyways? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.125.80.19 (talk) 01:01, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

hi my name is Allen Jackson, and i heard that you and some other guys where arguing about devil/Angel. Well i could help you out with information i know about them two, starting off with Angel.

Angel. Angel is a Angel sent from the heavens to save kazuya from devil.

Devil. devil is a demon spirit that was within kazuya from when he was born because of jinpachi his grandfarther really started the curse blood of the devil-gene.

now let me tell you something About jin kazama,kazuya son.

jin kazama has both devil in Angel powers within him because of kazuya and jun. now have you ever thought About jun and Angel in your head. now jun has Angel powers to save kazuya from that curse too you know. so that make Angel within jun, they almost the same in a way. so this information will help you solve question you always had About Angel,devil,kazuya,jun, and jin. think About it.put 2 and 2 together and get answers,know what should be what.--Allen jackson 20:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)Allen Jackson AKA Ace.

Superboy-Prime

He's at it again, complete with accusations of vandalism... Pairadox 02:09, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Speculation?

What? I'm not posting "speculation", I'm posting a fact, as is, in the metroid universe. There is NO hard evidence that Mother Brain is an Aurora Unit.GreenAiden555 21:11, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

How can it be a "fact" if you admit there is no hard evidence? King Zeal 21:28, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

..I'm admitting there's not hard evidence MB=AU.GreenAiden555 21:35, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Hold on. I wasn't speaking to you within my edit on the Aurora Unit page. I was actually speaking to the anonymous editor who put the "similarites". King Zeal 21:30, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Alright, good. At least I know there's someone who doesn't want people ruining articles.GreenAiden555 21:35, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For good contributions to Wikipedia. Steven Greiner 00:09, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Devil Gene article

I've nominated the article for deletion here, if you want to join the discussion. As you know, my attempt to merge it to the Tekken article was rejected by another editor, but if you were to merge it somewhere more relevant that would be alternative to deleting it (assuming that was done before the AFD closes) Masaruemoto 05:14, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of terms in Tales of the Abyss

I have nominated List of terms in Tales of the Abyss, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of terms in Tales of the Abyss. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. TTN (talk) 20:41, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Edit Summaries

Please write in edit summaries each time you edit an article, especially when you take out a large amount of text like you recently did to Claymore (manga). I understand that you moved it to another page, from the outside, it appears to be vandalism. Just a friendly reminder. Thank you :) Jezebel Parks (talk) 05:34, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Centralized TV Episode Discussion

Over the past months, TV episodes have been reverted by (to name a few) TTN, Eusebeus and others. No centralized discussion has taken place, so I'm asking everyone who has been involved in this issue to voice their opinions here in this centralized spot, be they pro or anti. Discussion is here [1]. --Maniwar (talk) 18:30, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

AN/I

Please disregard Smith Jones comment. I'm reviewing the situation. You are well within your right to post the thread, as it is a legitimate concern. And you took it to the right place. Lara❤Love 15:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Are you single? I kid. I kid. =p King Zeal (talk) 15:13, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

re: Claymore pics

alrighty, i'm on it :) Twsl (talk) 21:46, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Trivia

This article is full of useless trivia. I'm going to sort this out and create a separate section. LOTRrules (talk) 18:50, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorted out most of the mess. LOTRrules (talk) 19:46, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Wait, how are Endings trivia, but a list of Nina's various ages not? King Zeal (talk) 19:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia states that you are not supposed to state the endings of a game - this is moderately done through the plot. Heavy concentration on just ending alone provide gameguiding - which lead back to trivia. Another thing, her age marks an incident where she got pregnant and would explain why she suddenly is 40+ years old vis a vis relates to plot. However I'm going to research this further if we all want this to get to GA status - it's not even a start-class article. So trivia sections are a big no-no. They belong in the Media section. Revealing plot details like endings in one section of the article is against Wikipedia policy unless its the main game article itself - but that is a different story. No gameguiding is allowed. LOTRrules (talk) 21:19, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

That's the first time I've heard anything about that. Can you link me to the policy itself? However, that still does not justify an entire section to explain Nina's age. It's something that can be explained within the plot section itself. All you need to do is integrate it into that section. King Zeal (talk) 21:22, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay I will intergrate that but leave it up there so I can blend it in. By the way why did you copy-edit the bottom section? It should be in past tense since she did star in the game - plot details should be written in proper prose. LOTRrules (talk) 21:25, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure about that? I thought that fictional works were supposed to be expressed in eternal present tense. Also, can you remember to link me to that policy you described before? King Zeal (talk) 21:30, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes. I will link it soon. I remember that the policy was often quoted to me by editors in BOW, I gave the ending away a lot and have since learned my lesson. I'm just looking for it right now...LOTRrules (talk) 21:32, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a game guide - I checked out the policy and you were right about present tense. However I still think plot details that big and to dedicate an entire section to the ending makes the article look tedious. the endings are explained throughout the plot. Most of the info given on ending was a sort of game-guide. LOTRrules (talk) 21:44, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lei_Wulong Other characters like this one have these trivia sections which are discouraged from wikipedia] - I mean how does a referance like "Jackie Chan movie" give encyclopaedic content? LOTRrules (talk) 21:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

See also - Wikipedia:Trivia sections LOTRrules (talk) 21:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Okay, but I don't see anything there that says that multiple endings can't be described, especially when they're alternate scenarios for the characters' story. For example, not one of Ling Xiaoyu's endings is ever mentioned in any of her story details for any of the Tekken games. I don't see how providing a brief (that being the keyword--I do agree that some of the sections are way too long) description of the ending is acting as a game guide or being trivial. If it can be integrated into the story (such as ALL of Jin's endings), then fine. But if not, how is excluding it doing the character's page justice? King Zeal (talk) 00:00, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Regarding your Message

Thanks, You seem nice and very knowledgeable also I must say you're quite fun to debate with. Can't get enough of it. well my email is m3d@optimizing.net (right now I cannot receive email because my service changed some settings and screwed the whole thing up, pardon my language) hope to talk to you soon. (Also on a side note I can send emails just not receive its a bummer) --SlaveofBetrayal (Talk)

Copyright Issues

This is regarding Nina Williams article. I see that you have contributed well in the past to Tekken games. But an issue has popped up. While researching for referances and citations I came across websites that were written exactly like this article had been and a few others as well. And they seemed to be running for a while - ie before this article was created. Did you by any chance copy them and put them here? I'm only asking because you seemed to have contributed a large amount to the article. I am not accusing you, just asking because if this was discovered in other Tekken articles they could be deleted. Furthermore I have re-worded statements so it will be unlikely this will get deleted. Many thanks for contributions all ready. And drop me a message soon. LOTRrules (talk) 20:33, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

No, it wasn't me. I've made the Tekken series my personal "pet series", but I've tried hard to make sure they remain decent contributions. I didn't put any copyrighted material to my knowledge. King Zeal (talk) 21:10, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Tid Tad Piddly Pad

Hopefully you get this one :) Thanks, You seem nice and very knowledgeable also I must say you're quite fun to debate with. Can't get enough of it. well my email is m3d@optimizing.net (right now I cannot receive email because my service changed some settings and screwed the whole thing up, pardon my language) hope to talk to you soon. (Also on a side note I can send emails just not receive its a bummer)--SlaveofBetrayal (Talk)

Abilities

Please read the information I gave out again thoroughly. I'm not angry but an endings section is way out of line - it was written like a game guide and most of it was trivia-esque like. A list of moves provides information - stats, facts whatever you want to call it - falls into a catagory. Never in the history of editing the article have I written explicity her moves were from the past or present that would be trivia - I just simply listed them. Ergo this meant that the article had more information about her moves. The endings I mostly blended into the plot as much I could but giving heavily explicit information on just endings alone - and the way it is written - sounded like trivia. It fell into Wikipedia is not a gameguide policy. Also if you have the time look an endings section is not in the Resident Evil articles nor are their moves because RE concentrates on story and plot. If you could want, you could create a separate article because we have enough information on the endings section alone - you see in the article they just looked like tedious trivia. The list that I made didn't fall into the gameguide chasm. Remember they are just statistics on the information of her character, her potential, her skills and techniques. See also WP:LIST and WP:EMBED for additional information on lists. LOTRrules (talk) 21:54, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I still don't understand how a list of moves is any less trivial than an Endings section. How is describing what happens in a character's ending more trivial than listing only the names of what a character can do? Facts without context is the very DEFINITION of trivia. For example: Why are the moves relevant? What do they say about the character? What have other sources said about her moves?

Do you see what I'm saying? Without adding any of that detail, the list is just cruft. King Zeal (talk) 21:58, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes I do see what you're saying. This is a complicated debate. I'll list them in order of skill. This is not trivia - there are hundreds of texts out there that describe her moves and I'll do the exact same. My local library has info on books - Tekken included. How much damage she can inflict, how her moves relate to her martial arts skills and techniques. Currently I'm just listing them and then I'm going to delete anything thats irrelavent and then finally add in the referances - a structured approach will get this to GA status. Look at my stats I have edited this article 115 times and still working on it. I'm finding quotes and referances as we speak. Just let me do all the work for that section and we'll have a GA article soon. LOTRrules (talk) 22:06, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Now, wait. Read what you just said: You're going to add information about Nina's moves that correspond to how much damage she can inflict. If that doesn't fall into the category of being a game guide, I don't know what does. What books, exactly, are you planning to get this information from, anyway? Because if it's an instruction manual or game guide (which are the only two types that I know of), then that brings us right back to where we started: Wikipedia isn't a game guide.

And, I'm sorry, but I can't let you, or anyone else, do all the work when it comes to a Wiki article. That kind of defeats the purpose. King Zeal (talk) 22:13, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Fine. I'll just do what you said. Don't delete it. and don't don't get rid of everything. I'll list the books her tommorow - they are NOT gameguides - and what are you sorry for? I just said that one little section. Don't pity me. LOTRrules (talk) 22:21, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Jean

I didn't get if this user is a bot or human, but in case it's a bot, this edit http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Claymore_characters&diff=197215197&oldid=197160914 was irrelevant. Lysis rationale (talk) 21:13, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:FG invitation

Have I invited you to join WikiProject Family Guy yet? There is no minimum participation obligation, and you are already doing good work in those articles. / edg ☺ ☭ 20:31, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Mutant

It took me a while to decipher your note ("rmv OR"). I am curious as to why you didn't delete the majority of the article though. Regardless, please don't be so quick to make judgments about "OR" next time. A simple Google search yields hundreds of articles on the topic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dgmjr05 (talk • contribs) 01:11, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Non-Canon Zelda

The fact that those games were not made by Nintendo automatically makes them non-canon. See Canon (fiction). Since those games were not made by Nintendo, they are not genuine and are therefore non-canon. It is simply an adjective used to describe the games. Artichoker^[talk] 18:32, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Tekken move

If anything I disagree: the section in that article on Jane would be best merged with Jack's (since she's primarily relevant to him) and the later half covering groups etc. split into a separate article (it's an article about characters, not groups locations or themes in the Tekken setting). Every other merge only needs to cover citable fundamentals and fit just fine alongside non-combatant supporting cast members.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:26, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

That could work, though you should think out fully such a move and setup before you do. As it stands you could trim away a lot of the article by cutting out some of the plot detail that ends up too much. Just go with the basics and required bits to understand a character in each case, then build on there.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:40, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for removing that speculation, at that time i didn't know where to put that fans on boards speculate that about Devil (Tekken). Anyway, do you have an idea why he's even in the first Tekken? Ultron5000 (talk) 16:26, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I didn't know my way around at the time i wrote it.. And i really can't figure out why he's in Tekken, he serves no purpose other than an alternate costume, but it seems deeper.. Some forums suggested that since he's the final boss if you play as Heihachi that maybe Kazuya transformed during his fight.. Anyway, i wanted to get a pic on here of his game art from the first Tekken to compare to the second, any idea if it'd be possible? Ultron5000 (talk) 19:03, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

No, you misunderstand. I have a couple pics of him in the first one right here, one during gameplay and one of the game art, i was wondering what all i need to get them on Wikipedia. Ultron5000 (talk) 19:44, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Ganondorf image

I opened a discussion on which image to use. Just curious, do you oppose the usage of the Twilight Princess image? - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:53, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

SC IV source

I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong, but I can't source that text you had removed. The edit doesn't seem to be appearing. Source is Gamespot, by the way. I hope that helps. --James599 (talk) 16:38, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

theories of tekken

i have a theories about tekken, these theories is for the games series and comic series..

1. angel is a part of kazuya's soul. now many people believe that and some dont, well name a tekken game where it actually states that, in words or from namco.. you see in tekken 1 the game did not state that angel is apart of kazuya's soul in word nor did it show it, even in tekken 2 it did not state it in words or have shown it. heck the movie dont state it.. that means that it is an inference. an inference is somewhat of a theory, some thing that is infered

--Teriko —Preceding unsigned comment added by Teriko (talk • contribs) 21:35, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

do you know about tekken 6: bloodline rebellion?

Liurane —Preceding unsigned comment added by Liurane (talk • contribs) 19:26, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Leo (Tekken)

Thank you, I missed that one, indeed. Isn't that great how the home versions of Tekken 6 won't be released until Fall 2009? That means we'll have to keep an eye on the Leo article/blurb until then! Yay. Erigu (talk) 18:34, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Finally! Erigu (talk) 01:42, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

AfD notice

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pity sex (2nd nomination). rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 14:14, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Please take a look at Eddy Gordo

I've been working a lot on Eddy Gordo and would like for you to take a look at it. I need some guidance because i'm working on it but I don't seem to make it enough. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 00:39, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:05, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, King Zeal. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, King Zeal. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)