Talk:Kyo Kusanagi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

CVG Portal

Start

This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.

This article is on a subject of no priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.

CVG To-do:

1 Copyright issue?
2 Ignorance
3 Recent edits
4 Clean-up by User:Zero
5 {{General CVG character}}

[edit] Copyright issue?

Does this page copy off this page? http://psychcentral.com/psypsych/Kyo_Kusanagi

No. Vice Versa. That page is mimicing off of this page. That's an copyvio, and it needs to stop. -Zero^Talk 10:49, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually, it's perfectly allowed. They give fair citation to the source, and all of Wikipedia is licensed under the GFDL, one of those hippy granola open-sharing licenses. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:48, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I know. That doesn't make it morally correct, let alone explain why they copied it down to the letter. -Zero^Talk 02:48, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

No, it's clear morally, and encouraged to boot. The "free" in "The Free Encyclopedia" doesn't mean that Wikipedia doesn't cost anything (although it doesn't), but instead that you're free to do whatever you want with the content, as long as you give proper credit to Wikipedia and its contributors. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:34, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't agree. Articles written on wikipedia should stay on wikipedia. -Zero^Talk 03:35, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

As may be, anyone can make duplicate or derivative works of Wikipedia's content, as long as proper credit is given to Wikipedia. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:43, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Nonsense. Why copy information verbatim from the website..? It makes more sense to simply construct an redirect here if they're going to copy the information. Hell, they even copied the template I made for the articles. That is simply not right, licensing or not. -Zero^Talk 04:10, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ignorance

If you didn't know, ignorant, KOF XI is out, and Kyo is in it. He appears from 94 to XI people that know nothing about the subject are the ones that modify profiles of characters -—The preceding unsigned comment was added by TheOrgy (talk • contribs) .

Then by all means, add the information into the article. You obviously know better than the rest of us. -Zero^Talk 06:33, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Recent edits

I've noticed the constant reiteration of this information inserted into the article:

Despite popular belief, Kyo isn't SNK's strongest character. SNK's strongest character is actually Terry Bogard. The reason for Terry's losses in KOFs after Fatal Fury is because Fatal Fury was his story. Terry only enters for fun. The same trend applies to Kyo as once the Orochi saga was finished, K' won all of the KOFs in the NESTS saga. Now with the ASH saga, Ash has been winning. The winners of KOF depend on the main character of the saga.

While this may be possibly true, it is unreferenced and it depicts POV, especially the Despite popular belief, Kyo isn't SNK's strongest character. bit. If it's someone's wish to insert this into the article, I would very much like to see an source for it and some reasoning regarding it. I've also posted this on the Terry Bogard talkpage for anyone interested, as its being blatently inserted into that article as well. -Zero^Talk 14:29, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm...I had a message on my talk about this. Video games players (including me!) often have this kind of opinion, it's a kind of 'tribal knowledge', even when it is disagreed on among players. However, I think to fit it into an encyclopedia is difficult in its present form. It certainly does represent a point-of-view as 'Zero says, and I think it has the tinge of someone's personal evaluation to it (termed original research, even though it isn't what is usually called research). We have to be sure that each fact in an article can be located in good, external sources — and that different views on which characters are better are included so long as some such source has said so. It can be a popular gaming magazine, the vendors, etc, but it needs to have a source. I wonder is the author of the passage above reading this talk page? If they are, can they offer a link (or two, or three) for the claims made? In case they're not, 'Zero, do you think such sources exist at all? If they might, can you find out which parts of the passage can be backed up? I don't know quite where to start looking; SNK characters are not something I have played much. I think the same comments apply at Talk:Terry Bogard, so I won't copypaste there. -Splash^talk 21:25, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

I've searched for sources and found none. Allowing this violation of neutrality is not an option. It is harmful to the proffesional constructiveness of the encyclopedia. It also becomes incresingly difficult to keep up on infactual information such as this as more edits are accumulated. And the boss wants it gone.

Not only has the anonymous editor who has insisted on the insertion on the fancruft neglected to provide sources or verifitable fact, he /she continues to re-add the edits and ignore discussion which the actions clearly indicate. It is clearly within policy to evicirate oringinal research and orher information if it lacks reference. And I am quite done edit warring over what has essentially degarded into vandalism.

People with no interest in editing the encyclopedia to the highest standard avalible become POV producers and advocates- some users, in fact, in addition to their prolific mislead editting activities, made a habit of convincing others on talkpages with deliberately falsified research summaries.

So its utter nonsense to say that this type of actions don't damage Wikipedia. It's pie-in-the-sky to imagine that we can get anywhere by talking to the kind of people who come to Wikipedia to produce this trash. And its insulting to equate video game article producers who keep an sense of neutrality with those who revert war over their incorrect viewpoints and frankly nothing else in regards to production.-Zero^Talk 21:40, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Per another editor's inquiry, I will explain why, exactly ,these pharagraphs are harmful. They give the reader of "character superiority" in regards to another, and that is a big no-no. full-stop. Articles are meant to be as neutral as possible, and futhurmore, no official sources back up these claims. In paticular, the statement Despite popular belief, is an opener for an biased point of view. How are we to know what "popular belief" is, and indeed, if it even exsists or is legit..?

Another pharagraph being inserted into the Terry Bogard article is In the Capcom/SNK crossover games, Terry is paired as being SNK's equivalent to Capcom's Ken, who is quite similar in attitude and looks. Kyo Kusanagi is the character paired with Ryu, since, even though he's a younger character, Kyo's by far the more popular one. However, in skill level and sheer power, Terry is more an equal to Ryu than Kyo is. which is extremely unencyclopediac. It suspends one character's attributes in favor of another, it clearly makes an reference to an biased claim, and makes an personal viewpoint on appearence. I really detist page protection, but if the violation of oringinal research continues, I will inquire for it.-Zero^Talk 07:11, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Zero. The only time we should be talking about character superiority is when there are some sources, say with Akuma, Dan, or the various SNK boss characters. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:50, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Clean-up by User:Zero

The article has been decreased in size, and in advance, I apologize.

Per the clean-up tag added, I have completely rewritten this article and its similarly messy counterpart, Iori Yagami. After reading over them, I discovered they both were grossly elaborated, and the writing quality left much to be desired. I removed that gastly personality section as well.-Zero^Talk 14:35, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] {{General CVG character}}

This article is currently a testbed for a unified computer/video game character infobox, {{General CVG character}}. It uses a series-specific subbox, {{SNK characterbox}}.

Input on this infobox would be appreciated; note that the addition of things that would be obvious to readers unfamiliar with King of Fighters (such as what series is involved) is intentional. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 08:52, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I opposed this earlier for the design and formatting which performed poorly on drawn images, paticularly these series. I've made minor changes to the master template and I'm now in full support. I'll assist in implementation soon. -Randall Brackett 23:10, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Care to enlighten us? Drawn images seemed fine to me. o/s/p 00:25, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Its difficult to describe what I observed into words. When the infobox was implmented earlier, the images didn't mesh into the template and looked unnatural against it, as if it didn't belong. It, however, looked fine on most renders. I changed the template, taking away the bolded lines and devisions. It looks suitible across all articles now and I feel its a great comprimise, something AMIB and I can be happy upon. -Randall Brackett 11:03, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Upon earlier inspection of the template, which was derived from the CVG infobox, the original formatting was created with the intent to house box art and the like. With character images being more variable and can be implemented in various manners across the wiki I though this minor change was suitible. I also retained the blue and white design, signifying its relation to the CVG project as this was a note raised by A Man In Black earlier. I'm pleased to say this is a great solution. -Randall Brackett 11:15, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, what is "doting" A man in black. Isn't Kyo dating Yuki? What's "doting" her? that's what you are reverting to. PabloG 00:17, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

"Doting on" someone is showing affection for someone, usually by doing favors or giving gifts. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:22, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok I'd like to say that despite the good intentions, the information that the story part of the article contains is really what's grossly written, since it has misinformation and made up things. I don't know if it comes from the original writing and Zero just rewrote the thing or if Zero is the one that doesn't know the story but there are several things that are wrong and there are others that are important and aren't mentioned at all. Also, I'd like to see a writing style more faithful to the spirit of the series, and with more dynamism and effort put into it, without falling in "in-universe" styles of writing. For starters, Goenitz doesn't say that when he is leaving, and he never lays defeated, he disappears while he's standing, Kyo doesn't have nightmares of a man defeating him in 97, that happens in 96 and the man is Goenitz, Kyo doesn't meet Shingo and doesn't train him because of these nightmares, Iori and Leona's blood doesn't get more and more corrupted, their blood carries a secret riot called the "Riot of the blood" that comes out when Orochi is near to revive or when he commands them to use it, and the new team of Yashiro, Shermie and Chris isn't the New Face Team, it's called the New Faces Team. Corrections, corrections... I'm not going to write the article myself, I want someone else to do it. There must be other competent people that know the story and can write competently. PabloG 00:36, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Dude, I think you're it. MMZ/RandallBrackett is long gone, and I don't really know enough to really fix this. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:46, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

For christ's grace somebody correct the article with the information here, I'm lazy to rewrite the whole thing. If you need to, check the veracity of the things that I've said by yourself, they are all like that and the article is showing wrong information. PabloG 16:53, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Somebody read this and make the corrections PabloG 13:45, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../k/y/o/Talk%7EKyo_Kusanagi_bdb1.html"

Categories: Start-Class video game articles | Low-priority video game articles | WikiProject Video games articles