Talk:Bit Cloud
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Can we get somone to edit the "Zoids" Section? It needs to be "Wardick" not "Warshark", but whenever I try to change it, that damned Anti-Vandal Bot decides I'm being purile and switches it back.
Thanks --170.65.188.1 01:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
- Since this is an article for the english dub's version of the character I think calling it a "War Shark" would be more prudent/accurate anyway. This isn't the Japanese wikipedia. K00bine 08:05, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Battle statistics
I've removed the "Battle statistics" for the following reasons:
- Wikipedia is not a game guilde. This has been made clear in numerous other articles; please do not post video game statistics/data here. The article is for a discussion of the chracter, not his statistics in video games. In past, Video Game Specific infrmation has been deleted from other Zoids articles (See the history of the König Wolf article for an example)
- The statistics themselves have no context; they're numbers but their meanings are not explained. Are they a percentage, a value or a comparsion? How do they compare? Are they good or bad? These things need to be explained. Furthermore, it's not been explained which Zoids game they're taken from; what is true for one game (eg Zoids Saga) may not be true of another (eg Zoids Versus) or even a subsequent game in-series (Zoids Saga II). Do not put game data in unless you are willing to qualify all of these points and add comparisons from each game featuring this chracter.
The same points should apply to the other chracters in these articles.
In summary, I would ask you to please stop re-adding these sections. If they are truly vital, then I am sure that Saberwyn will re-add them afterwards.
I would also ask you to refrain form using terms like "non-bullshit" in future. Thank you.
--170.65.188.1 00:05, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
And I have put back the information for the following reasons:
- They don't contradict what we see in the anime. For example, Raven's numbers depict him as being skilled at close combat, which meshes with what's been shown, and even a *statement* that he prefers to fight up close. The game designers aren't just assigning arbirtrary numbers, they clearly have an idea of what the character is like in the anime.
- They back up what amount to mere assertions made in the article pertaining to combat style. Saying something like "Bit Cloud is skilled at close combat" is mere conjecture, and we could cite, say, the tooth and claw fight against the Berserk Fury as an example. However, someone else could watch the exact same scene, interpret it differently and say something like "Oh, that's just the Liger Zero doing the work for him, he's a crappy pilot lol", or whatever. Similarly, one could watch Van or Raven fighting someone and say that he's skilled at close combat as well, but someone else, watching the same scene, could say something like "Oh, that's just character shielding, his opponent didn't even try to get out of the way." The numbers provide *statistics* that cannot be refuted.
- The stats work very effectively to kill semantics and quibbling, should an edit-war ever come to light arguing the capabilities of a character. The recently deleted, bias laden, incompetently written "criticism" section in Raven's article is a good example of such. It was very POV, full of weasle words and practically amounted to vandalism; the truth hurts, but Raven IS a good pilot, and the stats prove it. The section was clearly written by someone who doesn't like Raven, who only had a very sketchy memory of what was shown in the anime or deliberately made stuff up to downplay his acheivements. The character stats are meant to debunk that kind of crap.
- They also depict how certain characters' abilities have improved over the series; both Van and Raven are provided with seperate stats for their CC and GF incarnations. It's nice and all if we merely say that Van became more skilled between CC and GF, but wouldn't it be even better to *show* exactly how he improved?
- Game information HAS been used in other articles to correct misconceptions. For example, the Gun Sniper page cites Zoids Battle Legends to refute the fanon misconception that Leena's Gun Sniper can't use its tail sniper rifle. Including game stats here in the character articles to back up assertions on character capability does the exact same thing; it kills biases and edit-wars over fanon.
To answer your questions...
The stats are taken from the "Zoids VS" series, and only the Zoids VS series. The saga games obviously can not and should not be taken into account because they're turn based RPGs, so as the characters "level up" their stats change. The Zoids VS series was chosen because the stats remain consistent.
As for the context... a higher number means the character is skilled in that category. Obviously. Bit scores a 60 in close combat, for example; comparing that number to another character (such as Vega, Raven, or even Van) shows that he's damn good at it. It doesn't take a genuis to figure that out.
If the info is there, and it expands what is known about the character, and doesn't contradict, why not use it? All up, these "reasons" for supressing this perfectly valid and useful information is merely striking me as some form of anti-game snobbery/elitism. The info deleted from the K-Woof article was actually pretty well written, aside from the unverifiable claims of it being a "fan favourite" and "one of the most well rounded Zoids in the game". It is true that wikipedia is "not a game guide", this is an extension of their "wikipedia is not a how-to-do" policy, and thus the assertion has zero weight here; it's not like I wrote a section in the article featuring Bit's game stats, then wrote a tutorial on how to match Bit's stats with Liger Zero Schneider and how this combination is very useful for beating the NC/0 storyline in ZBL's Battle Mode. *That's* what they don't want, wikipedia's policy clearly has nothing against game stats, otherwise there'd be 403 Pokemon articles in need of a rewrite. :P
Like I said, if you can give a *valid* reason not to include the stats, I'd really like to hear it.
K00bine 08:05, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Bit Jager.jpg
Image:Bit Jager.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 05:01, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Bit Panzer.jpg
Image:Bit Panzer.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 05:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Bit Schneider.jpg
Image:Bit Schneider.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 05:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
