Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Final Fantasy/archive2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive This is an archive of inactive discussions. Please do not edit it. If you wish to revitalize an old topic, bring it up on the active talk page.

Talk page tidy[edit]

Ok, sorry, but the talk page looked a state. Can we highlight the main discussions below? If anyone has any idea how we an arrange the talk page so it doesn't get into a state again would be good! — Cuahl 7 July 2005 18:28 (UTC)

  • what i find interesting, is all that was created in less than 2 days. Imagine a week. by the way, how about we bring back the active sections of what was archived. --ZeWrestler 7 July 2005 18:39 (UTC)
    • Sounds good idea to me, just put them under relevant titles below then it should be readable :) — Cuahl File:Black ribbon.gif 7 July 2005 18:43 (UTC)
I've gone and update the Triple Triad from the old version to a new version. I'm quite proud and the only reason I'm putting this here actually is because I want to show off what I've done :D — Cuahl File:Black ribbon.gif 7 July 2005 21:21 (UTC)
Ooh, much nicer. I like the use of illustrations. – Seancdaug July 8, 2005 21:52 (UTC)
Thanks! Once I began to explain the game, I found it harder not to include illustrations — Cuahl 9 July 2005 00:03 (UTC)

Key discussions from archive[edit]

What qualifies as a Final Fantasy game?[edit]

We'll work on the SaGa series and Seiken Densetsu series, but not necessarily apply the Final Fantasy standards. Category:Final Fantasy spin-offs
Don't forget the Chrono series, although I'd keep that for later and maybe Super Mario RPG, I'm not sure about this one? – DarkEvil 02:23, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
I'd more likly see us working on Xenosaga before Super Mario RPG. Mainly because Xeno was released by square, just like FF.--ZeWrestler Talk 02:47, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Well, XenoGEARS was by Square, XenoSAGA was produced by another company and published by Namco. ~ Hibana
When we start working on a game in a series, like Xenogears, we should continue working on the rest, including XenoSAGA. I myself never player these games, but will play them in the future, that's certain. – DarkEvil 04:04, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
I agree. I was just pointing it out. :) ~ Hibana

Should new localisations overrule old?[edit]

When were games released?[edit]

See: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Final Fantasy/Release dates

How should the soundtrack/album articles be organised?[edit]

What about the Final Fantasy Pray album, it is organised very differently from the rest. I like the idea of saying the original game and song from which the remake was made, but the overall look still doesn't seem right to me. What do you think? --DarkEvil July 8, 2005 00:30 (UTC)

Should the Black Mages albums be listed in Final Fantasy albums, because they contain only tracks from the Final Fantasy series, although they are specially arranged. I almost forgot that one track on their second album is original, not part of the series, but the rest are all from the games. --DarkEvil July 9, 2005 04:04 (UTC)

Oh, definitely. The only reason I didn't put them in with the other albums when I first started organizing them was because the current Black Mages article is really more about the group in general, even if it does include the track listing. – Seancdaug 16:46, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

Should albums like Final Fantasy III: Kefka's Domain have an article of their own or just be mentionned in it's japanese release as Kefka's Domain is only the domestic release of Final Fantasy VI Original Sound Version and contains the same tracks but a different cover. There's also an album like this for Final Fantasy X except that there are much, much less tracks in the domestic release than in the Japanese release. --DarkEvil 15:13, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

I'd create a new paragraph/section under Final Fantasy VI Original Sound Version and mention it there, and maybe modify the infobox to include the release information for both (like we do with the game articles). – Seancdaug 16:46, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

I have a lot of questions regarding some albums: Ergheiz, Chocobo Racing series, Kingdom Hearts, Super Mario RPG, the artists singles and Phantasmagoria. Ergheiz and Kingdom Hearts both featured characters from the Final Fantasy series, but Ergheiz is not even an RPG and Kingdom Hearts is not the same type of RPG and doesn't fit in the main series. Chocobo Racing is obviously a game not in the main series, but really part of the Final Fantasy universe. Super Mario RPG is made by Squaresoft and features a special, optional Final Fantasy like boss which makes the game feature the battle theme, victory theme and prelude in the album. The artists singles is referring to albums like Eyes On Me or Suteki Da Ne which features the song with lyrics from the game, in Eyes On Me's case, Eyes On Me is the same as in the game, plus an instrumental version and two songs not related to the game. Last, but not least, Phantasmagoria is an album made by Nobuo Uematsu, composer of Final Fantasy music since the first up to XI, but not Final Fantasy related at all. I'm nearly certain about the Chocobo Racing being included, but the others I wonder? – DarkEvil 03:52, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

I just checked for Phantasmagoria, it actually contains one Final Fantasy track. So, anyway, I'm gonna create those pages as soon as I can, if they don't count as Final Fantasy albums, let's just put them under the appropriate category later, at least, it'll make more articles for wikipedia.

What should the standard be for naming articles? (defined on main project page)[edit]

Which names should be used?[edit]

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Final Fantasy/character names

Maevyn Nooj vs. Meyvn Nooj vs. Nooj[edit]

Discuss here - Talk:Mevyn Nooj

Check it out![edit]

  • Is there any reason we can't modify Template:FFX to include Paine? Admittedly, she's from a different game, but maybe putting her on a lower line or something.... – Seancdaug July 8, 2005 07:24 (UTC)
    • Well I looked into it, but I thought I could make a FFX-2 template for Paine, Baralai, Nooj, Gippal, Brother (Final Fantasy X) etc. What do you think? — Cuahl File:Black ribbon.gif 8 July 2005 10:24 (UTC)
      • I am more inclined to say add pain to FFX. All the other characters you mentioned are not playable in the game. My question, does it make sense to have a FFX character template and an FFX-2 character template. Both of them should probally be combined to the same thing. In particular, what would happen to characters from both games? --ZeWrestler 8 July 2005 12:51 (UTC)
    • Can I just point out to everyone the differences between Tidus and Paine that made me decide this. Paine does not have an Overdrive, nor does she have a homeland. These tags would be redundant. Paine does have an political stance (alliance), as does Baralai etc. Baralai/Nooj/Gippal's height and age stats are known, so I thought it would be good to include them. Yes, ok, they're not playable characters but no one said the infobox was limited to that. Basically, what you are proposing is I make the FFX template flexible purely for ONE character, then make a different template for FFX-2 minor characters? Why? Paine's infobox will look no different from the rest of the FFX-2 characters in the end. It doesn't make sense. — Cuahl File:Black ribbon.gif 8 July 2005 13:12 (UTC)
      • Ok, i think we're thinking of two different things. I was referring to a Template:FFX-2 idea like the other templates i made yesturday. That is what i meant, the Template:FFX-2 character works great.--ZeWrestler 8 July 2005 15:38 (UTC)
        • Oh god, my fault. I thought you were talking about the infobox. Sorry about that, I couldn't understand what was the problem there. Now I've set myself on the same wavelength as everyone else I userstand... yeah it's doable, should I do it? — Cuahl File:Black ribbon.gif 8 July 2005 15:52 (UTC)
          • Couldn't hurt, go for it. --ZeWrestler 8 July 2005 15:56 (UTC)
  • Template:FFVI character - Did i miss something in the game, I have no memory of a limit break like ability until FFVII came along. Was there one i missed or should we take it out of the character template? --ZeWrestler 8 July 2005 13:10 (UTC)
    • Heh. Yeah, FFVI has proto-limit breaks, though you'd be excused for never seeing, as I never have. They're called "desperation attacks," and the show up randomly when a character has critically low HP. They're actually mentioned, IIRC, in one of the in-game tutorials, but I missed them entirely the first two or three times I played the game. – Seancdaug July 8, 2005 21:45 (UTC)

*Template:FFVIII character - Why does the Final Fantasy VII template uses conceptual art to show the character, then Final Fantasy VIII shows an FMV screenshot then Final Fantasy IX goes back to conceptual art. --DarkEvil 22:54, July 9, 2005 (UTC)

A-Z of Final Fantasy articles please![edit]

Things to do! — Cuahl File:Black ribbon.gif 7 July 2005 21:32 (UTC)

Article templates[edit]

(See above)

Character classes[edit]

Can someone please take a look at White Mage and tell me what they think about the infoboxes for character classes? Too much or how can I improve them? — Cuahl File:Black ribbon.gif 8 July 2005 00:50 (UTC)

"Also Known As" shows up on two lines for me, it's kinda annoying. Nifboy 8 July 2005 01:54 (UTC)
But that's the way Wikipedia handles boxes. Maybe you have your page text view on too high. It can't be shorter.. apart from if I used "aka" instead of "Also known as" — Cuahl File:Black ribbon.gif 8 July 2005 02:36 (UTC)
I really like it. I actually wanted to do this myself (when I was done with all the Final Fantasy IV stuff) but you beat me to it lol. They look great. --Warpedmirror 8 July 2005 03:56 (UTC)
I've thrown in a quick 'n dirty little CSS fix to stop the left column from wrapping. Check it out. – Seancdaug July 8, 2005 06:43 (UTC)

They look way much tidier now, but most character classes need info throwing in. I can put the later stuff (FFX-2 dresspheres for eg) but I'm gonna have to research the earlier ones.. unless someone can expand them? — Cuahl File:Black ribbon.gif 8 July 2005 10:26 (UTC)

The character classes need to be uniform. Anyone up to the job? Or is it mine to do tomorrow? — Cuahl 9 July 2005 04:21 (UTC) (ps. Tetra Master)

Should we move the classes from (character class) to (Final Fantasy), such as Black Mage (Final Fantasy), and make the (character class) articles disambiguous? They just seem so cluttered the way they are now, and it would make it easier to standardize them. ~ Hibana
I think so, after all, most article are called like that. A good exemple would be Weapon (Final Fantasy). I vote for it, but before moving a page, I'd wait for the approval of one more person. – DarkEvil 19:49, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
Does anybody else agree that this should be done? I'm pretty anxious to begin. :) ~ Hibana
I'm not sure, myself. It seems like it would be difficult to provide full articles for some classes, and splitting up, say, Thief (character class) between thieves in the Final Fantasy series and thieves in other video games almost seems a little excessive. That being said, it would make administrating the articles easier from our perspective, except that I sort of expect that we'll be getting semi-regular merge requests.... I honestly dunno. – Seancdaug 16:32, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

We can't make the "(character classes)" Final Fantasy only because FF takes these character classes from Dungeons and Drgaons. So, if it should be anything it should be D&D related. Which sucks. But we can use the infobox on every page and make it standard (ie. every page has certain information in it). We'll need to include D&D somewhere, so how about we have a few sub-headings on the character class pages. Top paragraph - standard in all articles, minor description of the character class, but not limited to Final Fantasy games. Reference - what the class refers to. White Mage will have something like this while Beserker has ties with the history books, and some others are D&D-created. Final Fantasy - here's where the FF-status comes in (so it's the most obvious and significant section). We'll have to include how the class appears in each FF (remember Bard and Songstress is practically the same thing), what magic they use etc. Can you tell I've been thinking about this for some time? If you have any ideas on what the standard should be we should decide on something before someone starts the change. — Cuahl 16:39, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I vote to merge all FF-class related articles (back) into Final Fantasy character classes. Even Black Mage is stubby, and the "reference" section feels like fancruft (mythologycruft? Cruft in any case). The creation of articles for general RPG archetypes (demonstrated by D&D's usual warrior/thief/mage/priest setup, replicated by every damn RPG in existence) could serve as a sort of category in which FF's fighters and D&D's fighters (and popular game XYZ's fighters) could both be included. Nifboy 21:20, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the the part saying that articles like warrior/thief/mage/priest should be reserved to the character class in general and not only Final Fantasy. However, I have a problem with pages like black Mage, where these things invented in video games or did they exist in already elsewhere as black magic already existed outside of RPGs in occult art, I myself don't know and just wanted to make sure. If Black Mage can refer to something which is not video game and RPG related, the page should be something like Black Mage (character class). – DarkEvil 02:20, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

General templates[edit]

Can people check out THIS and tell me what they think? I designed it to go on pages which have no other template (for example slave crown) and it can be modded to encompass any FF. I thought it would be good because we can edit the text any time and it will change throughout the pages. The only thing I can't do is set the text fresh against the picture - it seems to set lower. What do you think? I thought it might be nice touch to some blander articles. I could also make a mod where the "is currently being updated" doesn't necessarily have to appear for articles which don't require update? — Cuahl File:Black ribbon.gif 8 July 2005 13:30 (UTC)

Final Fantasy title list[edit]

Can people tell me if THIS is any improvement on List of Final Fantasy titles? I intend on improving the rest of the list, put not if people diagree with the new style? — Cuahl File:Black ribbon.gif 8 July 2005 15:04 (UTC)

I like it! It looks great, and you definitely did a good job on it. You can get some of the missing release dates from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Final Fantasy/Release dates. Also, this is my opinion, but I think that Final Fantasy spinoffs should be in a separate section from the non-Final Fantasy related games. The organization would be something like this: main series (I, II, III, etc.), sequels and spin-offs (FFMQ, FFT, FFTA, FFX2, FFCC, FF7 Compilation, etc.), compilations (Anthology, Collection, Origins, etc.), other media (Legend of the Crystals, The Spirits Within, Advent Children, etc.), and related games (SaGa, Seiken Densetsu, Kingdom Hearts, Chocobo, etc.). --Cswrye July 8, 2005 16:37 (UTC)

Thanks Chad! Page is now live at Final Fantasy series and the previous version is at /old just in case the new version is wrong. — Cuahl File:Black ribbon.gif 8 July 2005 18:46 (UTC) (ps: Sorry Seancdaug!)

Wow. That's gorgeous, guys. I do have a slight problem with the title, though: the name Final Fantasy series doesn't really describe the page all that well. I think we really should try and put across that it is, in fact, a list somewhere in the title (albeit a very fancy list). But the actualy content looks really amazing. – Seancdaug July 8, 2005 21:19 (UTC)
Thanks! Took me a while to do, but once I'd started using templates it went well. I threw up some random images just to spread the colour out, but some of these need replacing. Fair point on the name, I just thought it may be better than just another list, but I see what you mean. Should we file it for moving? Sorry I destroyed your work Seancdoug but it did go to good use ;) — Cuahl File:Black ribbon.gif 8 July 2005 21:34 (UTC)
Oh, hey, no problem about my "work." It was an ugly, kludgy design and I never pretended any differently. I just threw it together several months ago as something that was slightly better than the criminal abuse of tables on the old Final Fantasy main page. This is much, much better looking. I'm duly impressed. But I do think that "List of Final Fantasy titles" is a better name. I know we're accumulating a lot of "List of..." pages, but it describes it the best, I think. Barring that, I think "Final Fantasy titles" or even the marginally incorrect "Final Fantasy games" (as they're not all games, per se) would make more sense. One of the problems with the name "Final Fantasy series" is that several other CVG series are using that format as the main overview page for the whole series (like our main Final Fantasy article; see Metroid series). – Seancdaug July 8, 2005 21:42 (UTC)

Grand! I thought there's no harm shifting the code back - there's no destruction of history/discussion. See List of Final Fantasy titles — Cuahl File:Black ribbon.gif 8 July 2005 22:01 (UTC)

Expanding game-specific templates[edit]

Most of the game-specific templates (ex. Template:FFVI, Template:FFX) have remained exclusive to links for player characters. I changed Template:FFIV to link to other articles related to the game. Since Final Fantasy IV is one of the less popular games of the series, there are few articles that pertain to it, which explains the lacking of content (once the Final Fantasy airships article, and others like it, are expanded with FFIV information, they may also be linked to). However, I think if templates for other games are changed around a bit like this one, they can be extremely useful. For instance, Template:FFVII can link to articles such as Sephiroth (Final Fantasy VII), Shin-Ra, and Turks (Final Fantasy VII) - articles that currently have no place in the template, making navigation much easier. What does everyone think? --Warpedmirror 9 July 2005 05:10 (UTC)

Including Zemus in the FFIV template is a bit of a problem, because it's a spoiler. You're not supposed to know he exists until very late in the game. --Dalkaen July 9, 2005 06:17 (UTC)

I have concerns on this - There are a lot of Final Fantasy VII articles and there's soon to be a lot more. This is going to create a stupidly huge box at the bottom or every FF7 page. This is not a fan-website too, and I worry that the more of these boxes we put in, the more we're trying to convince ourselves it is. I like them, they look nice, and when it just included the characters it was nice. But adding more maybe a bit extreme. I was proposing that we make a Final Fantasy index/directory which lists all Final Fantasy related articles. This will be one page. What do people think? — Cuahl 9 July 2005 13:06 (UTC)

  • Alright, I got rid of all non-PC related stuff. If everyone agrees that these should just pertain to PC's then I think title of each othese templates should just be [Insert game title here] Player characters and we should remove the Player characters: deal, since there will be no more sections in that template. I was thinking of creating a "Non-player characters of Final Fantasy IV page" - including all the major non-player characters of the game, that don't exactly have enough bulk to deserve their own article. This idea can be used for many games, if everyone likes it. Since the Zemus page was brought up in this discussion, I have a question to ask about it. Someone (not part of this project I believe) proposed that it should be merged with the Final Fantasy IV page (or with the FFIV NPC page if it is created), because Zemus is such a minor character (though he did clarify that Sephiroth was important enough). I think being a final boss in a video game qualifies as being a fairly major character. I think Zemus is just as important to FFIV as Sephiroth is to FFVII, except Sephiroth has fanboys. Does anyone else think that Zemus is too minor to have his own page? I have no problem with that, but if that is the case, Chaos (Final Fantasy), Ultimecia, and other FF bosses should be merged with their appropriate articles. By the way, I think your idea of the list of all the FF articles is a must. --Warpedmirror 9 July 2005 15:46 (UTC)
    • Cool. We could make /index into a page like List Final Fantasy articles or Final Fantasy articles (by title) or A-Z of Final Fantasy. Suggestions? — Cuahl 9 July 2005 16:10 (UTC)
      • I think List of Final Fantasy articles sounds like your best bet. — Warpedmirror 22:53, 9 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • *ahem* Guys, I really hate to sound like a broken record here, but I would like, again, to point out that this is precisely the point of having Category:Final Fantasy and it's related subcategories. We have Category:Final Fantasy VII for articles dealing with FFVII errata, and we've even got Category:Final Fantasy VII characters for dealing with characters. Not every game has its own dedicated subcat, as when I embarked upon my categorization effort a couple of months ago, there weren't enough articles to justify creating one for every single game. But we can create new categories easily enough should they be deemed necessary at any time. Creating a list of articles only duplicates the information that is already stored more efficiently in the category tree, and takes a lot more time to administer: if a page is moved, or deleted, or substantively changed, those changes can be reflected automatically in the category list. If we maintain a static list, we'd need to edit it by hand, which is a very daunting prospect consider that anyone can do pretty much whatever they like to articles, while there's only a dozen or so of us actually putting in the effort needed to organize the whole shebang. – Seancdaug 00:28, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
        • As a semi-related aside, the reason for infoboxes, IMO, is to provide a quick one-link connection to closely related articles, not to impose some sort of informational connection between all articles relating to a broad topic. Having an infobox that links major playable characters makes a certain degree of sense, because it's reasonable to expect that readers will interested in jumping between two main Final Fantasy VI characters fairly regularly, and to save the hassle of the extra step of jumping into the category page (which may also be filled with a variety of non-playable characters, like Kefka, for instance). You're absolutely right that we shouldn't overdo it with the infoboxes, which should, IMO, be seen as navigational shortcuts, not a means of organizing the overall structure of information. – Seancdaug 00:35, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • Hmm. Zemus is a borderline case, actually, mainly because he's not a major presence throughout the game, unlike, say Kefka or Sephiroth. Similar situation with Ultimecia, which I've actually mentioned over on the talk page: as it is now, the article is really rather slim on information about Ultimecia herself, and is devoted primarily to info about the R=U fan theory. All that being said, I don't really have a problem with having articles on all the end bosses, and feel a little funny having one for Sephiroth and not Zemus, even if a case can be made for that. I'd say keep 'em, even though I suspect we may have to frequently make the case against merge requests of VfDs. – Seancdaug 00:28, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • since i created these templates, i strongly suggest, they remain for playable characters. i really don't want to see this becoming too cluttered. --ZeWrestler 01:36, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Standard "List of locations in..." format[edit]

I've been looking over the various location lists we've got, and noticed that, well, none of them seem to adhere to the same format. It seems like we should try and figure out a good generic "look" for these kind of pages. My personal preference is something like the List of Final Fantasy VI locations article: hierarchical headings with images where appropriate. But I dunno what everyone else thinks....

Oh, and while I'm on the topic, does anyone have a problem with combining the numerous FF1 location articles into a single list? Entries like Pravoka, Coneria, Castle Coneria, Gulg Volcano and Temple of Fiends are kind of "limited growth" articles, if you catch my meaning. There is, of course, the question of what to call this new article (I'm personally opposed to "List of Final Fantasy I locations," because the game's title isn't technically "Final Fantasy I," but "List of Final Fantasy (video game) locations" sounds a bit unwieldy...), but whatever.... – Seancdaug July 8, 2005 07:20 (UTC)

I think both of those are good ideas. I personally think we should just grit our teeth and call it "...Final Fantasy I locations". Heh, at least we're better off than the folks at Mega Man who have to deal with the same title for a series, game, and character. :) Also, should we do the same with "...Characters" and "...Terms" articles as in FFVII? I understand the earlier games have less of both of these, but we need a place for bare articles like slave crown. ~ Hibana
I think List of Final Fantasy I locations may have to be done. I guess if we have to reason for it, in the new remakes of the game it's referred to as FFI. — Cuahl File:Black ribbon.gif 8 July 2005 10:30 (UTC)
Is it? The only place I can remember it being named FFI is one of the two cell phone releases, and even then, it was Final Fantasy i, technically speaking (because it was on the DoCoMo 9000i series...).
I was thinking of ways to handle this, and a thought occurred to me: there's no reason not to have locations lists for every game in the series. And, if we do have individual lists, then List of Final Fantasy locations, in its current format, is redundant, being little more than an overly long article which duplicates information stored on a dozen distinct pages. So perhaps we could junk the current content of that article and use it for the FF1 list (where it would most logically belong). The only real problem I saw with that was the question of how to properly guide readers through the various different location lists. So I cobbled together a tiny little infobox navbox for just this purpose. We could stick it on each of the "List of Final Fantasy x locations" pages, and it would allow a reader to switch easily from one game's list to another, and it would free the original List of Final Fantasy locations so that we can use it for locations from FF1. The box in question is currently sitting in the sandbox, so check it out and tell me what you think of the idea. – Seancdaug July 8, 2005 21:36 (UTC)
Ah sorry about all my stupid errors in the past few minutes, all the coding and template making must have pushed my brain to far. Sounds like a good idea to me, and it would add to the nice neat style of infoboxes that are being put into the Final Fantasy articles. If you don't mind, I'm gonna work on some ideas in my sandboxes too — Cuahl File:Black ribbon.gif 8 July 2005 22:06 (UTC)
While I think a "...terms" article would be a reasonably good idea, I really, really don't like the name. "Terms" is a really vague word, and I think it's a holdover when the List of Final Fantasy VII terms article was literally a dictionary-like list of words and phrases that appeared in the game (including characters and places, which I deleted from that article when List of Final Fantasy VII characters and List of Final Fantasy VII locations were created. I would suggest something a little more concrete, like List of important Final Fantasy VII items or something along those lines. – Seancdaug July 8, 2005 21:50 (UTC)
Well, "Items" doesn't really encompass everything, especially not in a game as broad as FF7, i.e. you can't call Cetra, Lifestream, and Shin-Ra "items." Then again, a title like "Concepts" doesn't include tangible objects, like the White Materia or Bronco. Hmmm...maybe "Definitions?" ~ Hibana
True. I dunno. It just seems like such a catch-all article is problematic to begin with. Some of these things we could probably merger into other articles entirely: White, Black, and Huge Materia could be included as part of a new paragraph at Materia, and the Tiny Bronco could probably be part of the work-in-progress Final Fantasy airships article. Shin-Ra, SOLDIER, the Turks et al. could be described at either the Shin-Ra article, or perhaps even in the List of Final Fantasy VII characters article (as a descriptive introduction below each section header, or something). Such a glossary-like list seems awfully kludgy to begin with, and I can't help but feel that it would be better to try to seperate things out and find some clearer way of organizing things. – Seancdaug 00:42, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
I think you're right, so here's a thought...Ancients/Cetra, Shin-Ra, SOLDIER, AVALANCHE, and Turks can all go on the characters page with a little bit better of a description than is already on there. We might should include, Huge Materia, Black Materia (with Meteor as a note), White Materia (with Holy as a note), Lifestream, Mako, and maybe Mako poisoning in the materia article with redirects. Tiny Bronco and Highwind (which already has its own article) can up on the airships article. WEAPONS already has a nice article and can be linked from FFVII. I know some of those pages have images as well, so we could try fleshing out the characters page with headshots and sprites. That leaves Keystone and Knights of the Round... What do you think, Seacdaug? ~ Hibana
Well, we might make an exception to the "must appear in multiple games" rule over at the Summon magic (Final Fantasy) page for KOTR: it's probably one of the most famous summons of the whole series. And we could probably describe the keystone under the Temple of the Ancients subheading in List of Final Fantasy VII locations. – Seancdaug 02:12, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, I guess if Omnislash got its own paragraph on Cloud's page, KOTR deserves equal credit. I think we've got it. ~ Hibana

List of Locations on Spira[edit]

I was looking at the articles that list places in Spira, and I believe that the majority of the articles outside of the planet itself should be merged with the spira article. I have put the merge template in a few of them, but like List of Final Fantasy VI locations, I believe that these places should be encompassed under 1 large article unless they have enough information to be in an article on their own. From what i see, most of them do not have enough information to be on their own. --ZeWrestler 16:37, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Agreed. The only Final Fantasy X location, I think, that can potentially hold its own is Zanarkand, even though the information in the current article is limited. — Warpedmirror 01:04, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Location article updates[edit]

Well, I went and moved the template that's been sitting in the sandbox to Template:Final Fantasy locations, and split the List of Final Fantasy locations article like I suggested a while back. There's still a lot of work that needs to be done, as most of the new pages are incomplete, and there's differing localization problems in several examples thereof, but it's a start, at least. The biggest problem I encountered was related to Final Fantasy X: the Spira article, among other things, includes the sort of content that would otherwise go in List of Final Fantasy X locations. I've modified the template (temporarily, at least) so that the FFX entry simply points to the Spira article, but part of my thinks that this is a little jarring, since it's a different format title from every other article. I was considering splitting the history of Spira and the list of locations into seperate articles, but I'm not sure that's the right solution, either. Any thoughts from the peanut gallery? ;-) – Seancdaug 06:04, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

  • I think for starters a list of Locations in Spira would be a better title because Spira is used in FFX and FFX2. A history of spira article sounds like a good idea. My only question is when you seperate the two articles into seperate sections, what will be left for the main Spira article. Would that just turn into a cover article that will link to the sub articles? --ZeWrestler 12:20, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • I was thinking the main Spira article could consist of the sections currently entitled "The beginning" and "Yuna's pilgrimage and the Eternal Calm," while the "Locations in..." article would consist of the "Locations" section, much like is done for the other games. But I'm not entirely sure I'm happy with that solution, for the reasons I've stated above.... :-/ – Seancdaug 17:45, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

I feel like List of Final Fantasy IV locations has too many subheadings and just clutters the menu. Does anyone agree?--John Lynch 00:13, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly think it's better to have too many subheadings than too few. If nothing else, it allows us to link a specific location via anchor linking. Since the menu can be hidden, I don't really see a problem with it, but we could also throw together a manual menu in place of the automatic one, and leave out second level subheadings (though I'd prefer not to do that, I think it's better than eliminating the subheadings altogether...). – Seancdaug 17:33, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Side note (IRC)[edit]

Just as a side note, if anyone uses mIRC and wants to idle or talk about the project - click here — Cuahl 16:23, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Featured Article[edit]

Goal 3 states "Work on perfecting existing articles and getting them accepted as featured articles." Therefore, I think we should pick a front runner to work on and make into a Featured Artical. As when this project started, I personally recommend Final Fantasy VI. I believe that that artical has got potential to be FA status. All it needs is some touchups. We should do what we can to get this into FA status. What do you guys think? -ZeWrestler 00:24, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree completely. In fact, I believe all Final Fantasy articles should be FA standard, and we should assess how each could be improved. At the moment I'm going around creating articles (Triple Triad, Tetra Master) and perfecting old ones so they soon might compare to FA standard. I also mentioned on Seancdaug's talk page about this — Cuahl 00:48, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Article Drive[edit]

Come vote for the first article that we are going to focus on making into a Featured article. --ZeWrestler 20:35, 12 July 2005 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Final Fantasy/Featued Article Drive[reply]

Only 4 people voted. We need more votes for the featured article. so go to the link above, if you haven't voted already and vote! --ZeWrestler 12:22, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Article Drive Winner[edit]

The winner of the Featured Article Drive is Final Fantasy VI. I have written a blub of what i have in mind that we should do to get the article to become FA. Suggestions welcome, and needed. Its only a start. Use [[*Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Final Fantasy/Featued Article Drive]] As a discussion page. The old votes there have been archived. That page can now be used to come up with an idea of what we need to work on with the article. Furthermore, i have gone ahead and created a [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Computer and video games/Peer review|CVG peer review for the game. Thats about all i can think about for now. So, feel free to comment and start working on the article. --ZeWrestler 03:27, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Good work on improving the FFVI article so far. I'm sorry i haven't been around the last couple days, but I'm back now, and I'll be contributing again. If anyone has anything else they can do to help out in the FA drive, by all means do so. The more people from here who help out, the more successful this will be. --ZeWrestler Talk 13:07, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

new cat[edit]

created a new category for games that exist within the final fantasy series. these include the games like Tetra Master and blitzball. the cat is Category:Final Fantasy subgames. --ZeWrestler 01:06, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Decent idea, probably, provided we can accrue a few more articles for it. But why "subgames"? I thought they were generally called "minigames"? – Seancdaug 02:09, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

Deletion of RPG characters.[edit]

As part of the present proposal to expand the criteria for speedy deletion, it has been suggested that all RPG characters that do not have a basis for existence in a book or other offline medium should be deleted. I suspect this was well-intentioned effort but seems unreasonably broad. Since this would seem to call for the elimination of all or nearly all articles in Category:Final Fantasy characters, I figure that this community needs to be made aware of the impact of this proposal.

See: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/7.

Dragons flight 01:08, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the heads up, i already voted against this. --ZeWrestler 01:22, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ok, so if this thing goes through we'll have to junk all the templates and links to the characters. Which could be a good thing, only because it will allow more cover for the actual game articles without giving time and energy to a more broader score that could be considered redundant anyway. EreinionFile:RAHSymbol.JPG 05:32, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • I voted against it, too. Others need to be aware of it, as well. Would this proposal get rid of all the Pokemon articles? Perhaps the members of the Pokemon project need to be told about this. --Dalkaen 06:26, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • I'm wondering if they really can delete the Final Fantasy VII characters since they do appear in media outside the game, like Advent Children. Opposing it will still save the other FF characters, though. ~ Hibana

Some problems I've noticed in FF articles[edit]

I just found out about this project, and I'm probably joining in, but for a slightly different reason than most of you. One of my biggest pet peeves on Wikipedia is when fans take control over articles about anime and games and add unnecessary fluff (I even made a wikiproject dealing with it yesterday). One of the worst offenders is consistently the Final Fantasy articles (the games are all very popular). The controversial titles often have long "criticism" sections (there were ones for FFIX, FFX and FFX-2, another user deleted the one for X, I deleted the other two), consisting of deeply subjective commentary on the games which does not belong in a Wikipedia article. Discussions on the internet is not "controversy" on a level that means it should be mentioned in an encyclopedia, however widespread the opinion is (I agree that the voice-acting in FFX was terrible, but that's still my opinion and nothing more).

On the other side of the spectrum, the good titles (FFVII, FFVI) frequently get more subjective sections added, this time dealing with why the games are so fantastic. Both problems undermine the credibility of the articles and those who edit them. If you have room for it, I'd suggest that you add another point: that the articles are conformed to a neutral and unbiased viewpoint, to better turn them into proper encyclopedia articles. When I have time, I usually clean up writing and delete unnecessary cruft, but it'd be nice to see someone else helping out.

I think the best example of how a FF article should not be done is the one for FFVIII. The character descriptions are overly long, there is a subjective "place in the series" section, a subjective "allegory" section with an extremely dodgy analysis of the story, and the icing on the cake: a self-aggrandizing "fanbase" section, as if this were of importance to someone not in it.

You can take a look at the Wikiproject here. It's still in its infantile stages, but I think it's a good idea. Harp Heaven 13:40, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • That actually sounds like a good idea. I was reading over the FFIV article today and saw someone deleted the crtism section. By all means. Making the articles NPOV very wise for a project like this. Especially if we are going to want to get articles to reach FA status. --ZeWrestler 13:47, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with your broader points, but I think we differ on specifics. Critical reaction is important to note, and deleting those sections en masse is a mistake. The quality of the writing is extremely questionable in a lot of cases, yes, and cleaning it up is definitely something we should spend some time doing, but I don't think writing off the entire concept as NPOV is valid. If there is a significant trend of criticism amongst online communities, chances are fairly good that it represents a broader popular reaction, and there's absolutely no reason we shouldn't offer a summary of such criticism as part of the general overview such articles are intended to provide to the uninitiated. Such summaries need to be properly cited, obviously, and written with extreme care and neutrality, but, looking at your project page, I have to disagree in the strongest possible terms with your stated goal of "removing NPOV criticism and "widely held opinions" unless they can be substantiated by notable journalists or credible sources." A review or other "credible source," even if widely distributed, may not represent anything more than the opinion of one individual, which is, by definition, nn and unencyclopedic. "Widely held opinions" (provided that we can provide sufficient evidence that such opinions are indeed widely held) are much more important in portraying how a title was actually received by the public. – Seancdaug 17:41, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
I see where you are coming from, but realize this: one man writing what he has observed on messageboards and during conversations with friends is still one man writing on behalf of some pretty poor substantiation. If it were possible to get hold of a poll of a decent size or any similar thing that dealt with the controversial stuff (the upbeat tone of FFX-2 or the battle system in FFIX), it'd probably warrant an inclusion. Only then is it possible to gauge the reaction of the "fanbase" (probably the worst of weasel terms) properly. Anything else is guessing and extrapolating, which has no place on wikipedia. A poll like this would in my mind constitute "a credible source" and allow for the addition of a "widely held opinion".
Granted, the opinion of one individual is not notable. But to suggest that one needs to hold some kind of poll to gauge popular reaction to a title is a bit silly: an oft-repeated criticism can be reasonably presented as either a major critical trend, or, alternatively, a vocal and notable reaction, both of which can be encyclopedic, if presented properly. That is, of course, the key, and something all of the articles do indeed need to work on. Passing something off as a typical popular reaction when it's really just the feelings of one editor is a problem. If we're going to present an opinion as a popular trend, we need to be able to cite and support a fairly large number of distinct individuals from a variety of different sources to back up that claim. But I maintain that, under the right circumstances, it's perfectly valid to make claims such as these. To pass over the frequent criticism of games like Final Fantasy VII or Final Fantasy X-2 amongst certain vocal segments of its audience is to present a distorted picture of the game. We shouldn't be mistaken for supporting either a pro- or con- position, but we should recognize that such controversy exists. – Seancdaug 18:53, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
This is where you lose me: how would we be presenting a distorted picture of the game if we did not cover online reaction towards a certain game? Wikipedia is not Amazon.com or GameFAQs. It's not there for readers to make informed purchases, nor is it a soapbox for commentary and discussion. Also, as far as I've observed, online fan communities for Final Fantasy tend to consist of individuals that take the series very seriously and are biased towards the "dark" instalments like FFVII and FFVI. For all we know, we would be presenting the opinion of a minority, where the majority of teenagers who do not post on internet discussion forums enjoyed the lighter, more upbeat tone of FFX-2 (which was positively received by most professional reviewers, I might add, in addition to having a lot of good reviews on GameFAQs). Take the article for Batman Begins. It has a section for "critical reaction" where the score on Rotten Tomatoes is cited, along with quotes from famous reviewers (Roger Ebert) and the IMDb rating. IMO, this is a good way of showing the quality of a title without pandering to a minority or a majority. Game Rankings could be used as a substitute for Rotten Tomatoes. Harp Heaven 13:40, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It's not the "online" reaction that is of concern, per se, and we shouldn't be at all interested in "showing the quality of a title" to begin with (NPOV and all, as I'm sure you know). What is relevant is how people reacted to the game, and while noting the opinions of "famous reviewers" can be part of that, I do not for one second believe that EGM (or whatever we're counting as "famous" for our purposes) more accurately reflects the opinions of the people who have bought and played a particular game than the opinions of a bunch of people on an Internet message board. If anything, the group of amateur online critics is a larger, and very likely more representative, sample than the group of professional magazine reviewers (as far as that goes). Beyond that, there's no reason we cannot present "minority" opinion, provided we can make a reasonable case for its notability. Even if criticism of a particular game is only limited to a comparatively small group of online fans, if that group has been particularly vocal, or illustrates a particular phenomenon well, then it most certainly is notable. Again, that does not mean that all online grousing is encyclopedia-worthy, nor does it excuse us from our fundamental editorial responsibilities of upholding Wikipedia's NPOV policies, but to write off any non-"famous" reaction as NPOV out of hand is misguided in the extreme. – Seancdaug 00:42, July 17, 2005 (UTC)
I think the worst part about the criticism sections is how they force opinions about the games down your throat. Sure, they use the terms "some fans", but they are still very aggressively written and of little use to someone who is not in the FF online mojo. I think a standard we can all agree to is that these articles can be read and enjoyed by people who are not familiar with the games.
Agreed. – Seancdaug 18:53, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
Regarding your opinion on quotations from professional reviewers, I disagree. If a title received mostly positive reviews, a sample positive one will enhance the article and give the subject credibility. If reviews were mixed, cite both positive and negative ones. If reviews were bad, cite a bad one. Maybe I was unclear on my project page; what I meant was not "a notable journalist", but "notable journalists", meaning that the reactions of the entire spectrum of magazines, newspapers and major online sites should be covered. If the majority complained about "Feature A", mention it and provide a quotation. Harp Heaven 18:35, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
But I disagree here. The professional critical reaction to a game is substantially less important to the long term profile and significance of a title than the response of the much larger segment of people who purchase and play that game. Obviously, the two are not mutually exclusive (journalists writing about a game would, I hope, have played it to some degree), and a case can be made for including both. But to restrict our ability to summarize the reception of a title to only that which major magazines (or whatever) have said on the subject is, IMO, frankly ludicrous. If I, as an outsider looking for information on how a game like Final Fantasy IX was received, my interest is not going to be what a journalist, or a group of journalists, wrote about it when it came out, but what sort of things the larger group of FFIX players had to say about it. You can say what you like about making sure we actually are representing a major trend that can be accurately presented as significant within the game's audience, and you'd be right. But suggesting that professional journalism is the only credible source we can go to is a mistake, and an even more egregious example of "guessing and extrapolating" than that which you are railing against, IMO. – Seancdaug 18:53, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
You must be skimming what I'm writing: I never suggested professional journalism from major publications be the only source. What I said was that unless we can back up fanbase or critical reaction with a larger number of reviews or votes from credible sites (GameSpot rankings and Game Ranking), it has no place in an encyclopedia. We might inadvertently be presenting a distorted view based off of a minority. There is a significant vocal minority that thinks Javier Solana is the Anti-Christ (literally), but that doesn't mean it should have a section of its own. Many people think Ann Coulter is a skinny, lying bitch, but that doesn't mean it needs to be mentioned in an online encyclopedia.
Whyever not? You're absolutely right about being able to back up our claims, and, as I've said, this is indeed something we need to focus more attention on. Not just regarding popular reaction, mind you, but in general: very few CVG articles have any references listed, and I can pretty much count the ones with more than one or two on one hand. But if we can in fact back up a claim that "many people think" one thing or another (in other words, prove notability), then I would argue that there's every reason to mention it in an online encyclopedia. Perspective, as you say, is the key element: if we're talking about the views of a minority, we need to be very clear about that. But I hardly think that merely presenting a minority opinion as such presents a distorted picture of a particular subject. – Seancdaug 00:42, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

However, I do agree that the reaction of the playerbase is more important than professional journalism. The problem is how to gauge that reaction. Gamespot rankings (with thousands of votes) are a good idea. As are the results from Game Rankings. If someone had the patience to read through the user reviews on various sites and note the frequency of certain key issues, we would also be one step closer to providing a credible source of information for fanbase reaction Harp Heaven 13:40, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My major problem with Gamespot (or any other site with a similar format) is the lack of support. They can give a good idea of whether or not a game whether or not a game was received well by the public, but give a very limited explanation as to why. And saying "the public liked Final Fantasy VII" is valid, but not particularly helpful. But I'm entirely in agreement with you on the rest: reading (and citing) full-length user reviews probably the most effective (if not entirely unflawed) method of getting at some idea of how a game was received by its audience. And it should most definitely be de rigeur for any sort of section on critical reaction to a game. – Seancdaug 00:42, July 17, 2005 (UTC)
Criticism is important in articles, to give a good idea about the game besides from the story, but the problem is that fans criticise the game some way while other fans complain about another aspect of the game. In a forum, you can see on post about how bad the game is and then how good the game is and then how bad it was once again. Different people perceive the game a different way and that, even among professionnals too. If we include a critic, it should be widely accepted that this point in the game is bad or good, depending on the critic. Maybe we should make a special discussion between participants of the project as to which critic we want to keep, maybe come to an understanding like which thing is good or bad in a specific game while keeping a professionnal looking criticism made by us, which means fans for most of us. So it would still be fanmade but professionnal. We should anyway come to an understanding as to what is relevant and what's not relevant and which could make the articles look biased. – DarkEvil 03:17, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

Chrono Trigger[edit]

Here, I signed myself up as a member the other day, but this WikiProject DOES include the Chrono series, right? If not, take my name off. Chou. Peaceman 01:08, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • We've been a bit coy about what this project does and does not cover, actually. Frankly, I'd be more than happy to include it, given the similarities between the Chrono games and the FF series, and because I think the Chrono articles could benefit from the attention. That being said, the precise focus of the project, as stated, is the FF series, and I can't speak for anyone other than myself. But I'd be more than happy to (formally or informally) include it as part of the effort. – Seancdaug 01:50, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
  • Since we are including this under the project, i went ahead and started a Category:Chrono media category to begin with orginzation of the media. Also, Peaceman, I noticed a lot of your images you uploaded have no copyright tags. If you took the screenshot from the game, remember to add the {{game-screenshot}} copytag. --ZeWrestler 14:01, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

To Do list[edit]

Since we are working on Chrono triger series within this project, so we add sections to the to-do list and the index for Chrono triger related articles? --ZeWrestler 18:42, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I personally think that Chrono Trigger, while having been included in the Final Fantasy Chronicles compilation, doesn't fit well with the main project to-do list. We have a lot of work to do, the main focus should be directed on real Final Fantasy pages or expanding the articles regarding aspects of the Final Fantasy universe. Including Chrono Trigger in the to-do list may slow the project down a bit. I can't think of any way for this to work without losing focus on the main series. This is my personnal opinion, maybe Seancdaug and other regular editors can provide some better thinking about this, a way to make it work. – DarkEvil 03:31, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

Sample Page[edit]

{{SampleWikiProject}}

Quote[edit]

I've noticed a lot of character pages have a lot of quotes on them. (See FFVI characters) would it be a good idea for us to move these quotes to their respective wikiquotes page? --ZeWrestler 13:15, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've always felt a little bit weird about having quotes sections in articles. It just feels... unprofessional... to me. That being said, I think it would be best if we kept the number of quotes to a minimum (two or three per article, maximum), and moved the rest to Wikiquote (which already has a FF quotes section, IIRC, though it's a bit of a mess). I'd also suggest that it might make sense to try and work the quotes that we do keep into other sections, as it pretty much forces us to prove their relevance. Sorry if I'm being a bit vague, here, I'm still formulating my opinion in my own mind. I may come back to this later :-D – Seancdaug 00:47, July 17, 2005 (UTC)
I vote we move the lot to wikiquote. After all, that's what it's there for. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 16:13, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

Template:FinalFantasy series (reprise)[edit]

Is it just me or does someone else think this list is getting a little too extensive? This huge box looks ridiculous on some of the FF pages and out of place with other wiki-coding around it. I dunno, I was just thinking maybe a simple template like one in the sandbox might be more fitting? What do you think? — Cuahl 17:03, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've modified the template slightly, mainly for formatting. It looks a bit better now, but is still fairly bulky. I'd kind of like to keep the spinoffs and errata in the template, as other series templates (like Template:Zelda series) have them, but I'm not deeply tied to that position one way or the other. Anyone else have any thoughts? – Seancdaug 17:54, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
Take out Ehrgeiz (cameo at best) and any unreleased games (mostly on matter of principle). If anything I'd take out the "compilations" section. Nifboy 18:55, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Really? In all honesty, I would consider the compilations list to be more important than either the spinoffs section or the "other media" section. With the last two, we can make the case that they're tangential to the series itself, which can't really be made with the compilations. Plus, it reflects the reality of the way things are categorized here on Wikipedia better: the compilations are placed under Category:Final Fantasy games along with the games themselves, while the spin-offs are not (Category:Final Fantasy spin-offs). – Seancdaug 19:08, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
I like the way the template looks now. It has a more professional feel to it. --ZeWrestler 19:30, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Airship goal[edit]

We have an FF airship article. Do we need to leave the airship goal on our goal list? --ZeWrestler 13:53, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • If you feel like removing it, remove it. No point it being there if the job's done — Cuahl 14:29, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ok, its been removed. --ZeWrestler 14:33, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • I restored it and struck it out. I think that it makes sense to leave completed tasks up for a while so we can get an idea of what we've accomplished recently. Not sure how long we should leave it sitting there, but my vote goes for "until the list gets too long" ;-) – Seancdaug 17:43, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

Final Fantasy album infobox[edit]

Hi everybody, I've tried an infobox for Final Fantasy albums on this project's sandbox. This is my first infobox. Seancdaug is the first one who thought about making an infobox for the series and it was a great idea. I'd like to know what you think of it and if it's ready to become an infobox. You can enhance it if you think of a better way to make it work. I am not experienced in making an infobox and I don't know if I did it right. – DarkEvil

Links to albums/other related articles[edit]

I didn't even know there were any articles on the FF soundtrack albums until I went to the WikiProject page and noticed the example link of FFIV: Celtic Moon. I think it would be a good idea for the main articles on the games to contain links to the pages on albums related to the games. --Zilog Jones 20:44, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Some pages already have a link, like Final Fantasy VI and Final Fantasy VII. A link should be included on every page, yes you're correct. – DarkEvil 01:02, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

Just wanted to draw attention to the Final Fantasy airships article.[edit]

The Final Fantasy airships article got strikethrough because it is mainly finished. However, the Final Fantasy XI section never got any text and stayed a stub section, containing only two screenshots uploaded by me. If someone knows about Final Fantasy XI and it's airships, please write something in that section so that the article could be "completed". – DarkEvil 02:12, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

Redirects[edit]

I've noticed that a lot of redirects to some Final Fantasy pages were made, some of them long ago. When some of them were made, it was probably not thought of that the Final Fantasy related pages would grows that much. Some redirects are incorrect, at least for me, like Ultros which redirects to Final Fantasy VI while, no matter how silly he is, could have his own article since he has so many appearance in the game. Gestahl too is a bad redirect since he has his own article at Emperor Gestahl. – DarkEvil 17:41, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

I think a lot of those redirects are automatic: Ultros used to have his own article, which was removed as non-notable and ostensibly merged back into the main Final Fantasy VI article. I'm not sure recreating articles such as these is a very good idea, IMO: appearing multiple times in a single game does not make a character particularly notable. The Gestahl redirect is a mistake, though. – Seancdaug 18:13, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
The Gestahl redirect was corrected on July 23 by Hibana so it's fine for that one. If I clearly understand, I should change the pages redirecting to Ultros which then redirects to Final Fantasy VI. This is OK, but at least, we should maybe include more info somewhere in a Final Fantasy VI page, the main article maybe lost info of Ultros over time as the only place where he is mentioned is there: "They are Cait Sith (called Stray in US release), Midgar Zolom (a snake swimming on the world map of Final Fantasy VII called Terrato in the US release), and Chupon, an ally of Ultros who appears as a summon in Final Fantasy VII under the name Typhoon." Only a simple word about him. Someone searching about information on who this Ultros guy we are talking about is may have a hard time. – DarkEvil 18:50, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Final_Fantasy/archive2&oldid=387075923"