Template talk:Dragon Quest series

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Square Enix, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Square Enix-related merchandise and video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

This article is part of WikiProject Dragon Quest, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Dragon Quest-related merchandise and video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

Contents 1 Why is it messed up? 2 Other games in the series 3 Dragon Quest 9 4 Character classes

[edit] Why is it messed up?

Why is the format changed into "Dragon Warrior" games then followed by "Dragon Quest" games? Why couldn't they be listed by the order of their Roman Numerals? - Aresmo 10:51, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

The policy on Wikipedia is to use the English titles when available. That's why Dragon Warrior I, II, III, IV, and VII appear. Dragon Quest V and VI were never released outside of Japan so "Dragon Warrior V" and "Dragon Warrior VI" don't exist. As for Dragon Quest VIII, it was released in both Japan and North America as Dragon Quest VIII. Kariteh 08:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

But it just doesn't look good...The numbering system might confuse people who look at it. Why can't it be just the Roman Numerals as before (ie I, II, III, IV, V...)? They don't distinguish between DQ and DW unless one clicks on it, which then is taken to the page under the proper heading (Dragon Warrior, Dragon Quest V, Dragon Warrior VII, etc.) - Aresmo 15:51, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't see any logical reason to put 7 before 5. it only distinguish the names when you select the link, and an unordered number system is just confusing. They should be listed in numerical order. (PS: sorry for editing without looking at the talk page first)El cid the hero 21:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Well I was just stating the logic and choice that was made, it wasn't mine. You might want to ask about this in the DQ Project talk page as they're the ones who did that. Kariteh 22:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and reordered the games in the template. The DQ project is dead anyway. Kariteh 20:19, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Other games in the series

What happened to the other games in the series? There used to be links of Dragon Quest Monsters and Torneko in the template, pretty much the same as the Final Fantasy template does, but it's nowhere to be found now. Why? Anonymous User

I just added other Dragon Quest titles to the template, but only those which have been released. The Dragon Quest/Warrior Monsters games generally link to the same article, Dragon Quest Monsters, but each should be broken into its own article (Dragon Quest Monsters: Joker is already an article on its own). I did not include Torneko, since articles do not yet exist for any of the Torneko games. If you disagree with this edit, please let me know here or on my talk page before deleting or reverting.Zenithian 20:57, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

There's no need to cram the extra content into this template; that's what the category is for. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:23, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

So since the article Dragon Quest only describes the main series, do you propose we create additional templates for each of the spin-off series (Dragon Quest Heroes, Dragon Quest Monsters, Dragon Quest Swords, Torneko - since each type of spin-off has more than one title)? I think it is better to have one template for related titles, as opposed to multiple ones (see Template:Final_Fantasy_series). Zenithian 18:40, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Zenithian, after all, a wiseman once said "A flower is more valuable than a field of scattered petals". I'd wondered about the lack of games in the Dragon Quest template for some time now. I did not imagine someone was actively keeping them out. Icecypher 09:42 CT 14 February 2007

Add another vote of support to having the spinoffs on there. The point of the template is to allow easy accesses to related articles, and as a spinoff like Rocket Slime is the most recently released game in the US it could be quite likely that someone looking at DQ VIII will want to move to Rocket Slime. The only reason to not include the information is a crammed template, but it does not look that cramped. I would even consider modeling this template after the one they use on the Japanese Dragon Quest site. SMimas 17:43, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dragon Quest 9

AMIB, stop removing Dragon Quest 9 from the list. Game that are not reliased can and should be put on templated El cid the hero 04:02, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't have a release date, or a single screenshot, or a playable demo. It exists in hypothetical form only. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:16, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

My attitude is that if it notable enough to have an article (and it is Dragon Quest IX so there’s no debate that it deserves one) than its deserves to be included in the template, despite what little information is available on it El cid the hero 13:15, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Lots of games are noteworthy enough for an article, but aren't so important as to rise to being valuable for navigation. Right now. DQ9 is a title and a release platform, and nothing else. It's not important yet. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:40, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

You know, we actually have a video, a couple of screenshots, the logo and a 2007 realease date for Japan (check IGN.com)... So what else do you need to convince you it is not "in hypothetical form only"?87.203.29.187 10:27, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

It hasn't been shown in playable form, and it has no release date. It's just too far away; there's no need to link to two-paragraph articles in central navigation boxes. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:55, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

but is there any harm to adding it either? pluss, when more info is release, it will make finding the page easier El cid the hero 09:34, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't care about your little edit war here. I feel that the Dragon Quest IX article will be included in the near-future anyway. I suggest someone take this up with the Arbitration Committee to see if the inclusion of IX is truly viable at this time. I think it is, but that's my opinion. --Whatocean 10:39, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

i would agree to that El cid the hero 10:44, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

No playable demos? We saw some of the developers demoing it. We know it's playable. And we know it's coming this year. We know the platform, how it plays, how it looks, and who is developing it. DQIX does not have enough information, the article just isn't informative enough. It needs to blossom into a real article - describing all of the gameplay and various information. - A Link to the Past (talk) 07:37, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

It's not a high standard to have to meet. All a game needs is to have been shown in playable form, have a final name, and have a final release date. That's a really low bar. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:40, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

It's in playable form and has a final name. - A Link to the Past (talk) 08:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Wh has written hands-on impressions? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 08:34, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

No one. The only people who have played it are the creators, who played it on stage. - A Link to the Past (talk) 20:18, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

So it's impossible for the article to have anything but what the creators or the publishers have said. Given that the article is going to be brief and consist only of repeating (future!) claims in primary sources, I think that's an excellent reason to exclude it from the template until there's some encyclopedic content.

Final name because working names are often inconsistent, poorly-promoted, and/or made up on the spot. Final release date so we exclude vaporware. Displayed in playable form so there's some possibility of useful commentary in non-primary sources. It's a reasonable standard, and a very low bar to jump. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

It is not as if they had some small demo level. It was a very complete game that they've been working on for a very long time. - A Link to the Past (talk) 00:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

i don't believe a game need a final release date to be eligible for inclusion into a template El cid the hero 19:05, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

This time I'll have to partly agree with A Man In Black. Final Fantasy XIII is not included in the FF template, and there's even has a list of FF XIII related (unreleased) games. I do agree it'd be nice to see the announced game in the template (perhaps with a note saying it is not out yet), but at least this is consistent with how other games are treated. Icecypher 10:00 CT 14 February 2007

[edit] Character classes

I added Character classes from the Dragon Quest series to the template. If you don't like it then just revert my edit. --The Dark Side 02:25, 1 February 2007 (UTC)