Talk:Blitzball

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article or template was once part of WikiProject Final Fantasy, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Final Fantasy on Wikipedia. It has since been removed. If you think it should be added again, discuss it on the project talk page.
Removal reason: split elsewhere		 controller

Contents

[edit] Expansion request

Does someone feel up to fleshing this article out a bit? I'm thinking of something along the lines of the excellent Triple Triad article. In other words, more about blitzball as a minigame. This would also make it easier to move some of the images in the image gallery inline. If no one else wants to take a crack at it, I'll see if I can come up with something, but there are probably more qualified editors out there. Template:Grin – Seancdaug 05:25, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Lots of new stuff, check it out Renmiri 14:56, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed deletion

Why? --24.247.126.44 02:25, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Those dreaded Mergists again ;-) Renmiri 14:55, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Screenshots

Do we really need all the pictures? This is supposed to be a text article, not WikiMedia. Finduilas09 03:19, 24 April 2006

Also, I believe the "Ode to Sports" section can be largely eliminated, and its relevant points merged into other sections of the article. Will try to get around to this when I get a chance. Finduilas09
i have never read anywhere where it says that the articles should be text only, in fact, they encourage pictures, it helps to clarify. i also believe that the ode to sports should either be merged into the other parts, or expanded, somehow. -Xornok 14:39, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Gallery was removed by User:Flooch. This will cause deletion of all pictures in 7 days by Wikipedia's bot Roomba. Restoring it until the issue is debated Renmiri 14:44, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

The way you want to include these pictures in the article is hardly "fair use". I think, at most, one *good* image from this gallery could be left as a thumbnail. There are already five other images in the article. Having all thirteen images remain (when the article is only a couple of hundred words) seems a bit excessive, don't you agree? ~ Flooch 14:58, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
The rule of thumb is 15 images max. And 13 is not remotely near the top offenders even on our FF section. I have not had any complaints from Sherol or other Fair Use "cops", which believe me, have been always on my case when they think I'm overstepping FU. Where did you get the idea that it is not Fair Use ? Renmiri 15:02, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Also, do we necessarily need two images of Mick Gleissner's photoshoot? ~ Flooch 15:04, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Regarding the image captioned "Blitzball pool": this is a poor picture. It's also already covered by the first image in the article. There's also no licensing tag on the image. ~ Flooch 15:08, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Ooops! My bad, I had a typo on the template name w/ the licensing info. Fixed Renmiri 15:21, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Okay, the fair use rationale on these images need to be reviewed. "Rationale for the fair use of this image in the article Spira (Final Fantasy X)"? "The image is used to illustrate important locations mentioned in the article which permits to the reader to have an idea of how it looks like."? ~ Flooch 15:11, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
As I said before, 13 is well below plenty of other Final Fantasy pages that violate the 15 images rule. I fail to see the problem. How do you propose illustrate how the sport looks like without picture of gameplay ? It will be a pretty lame page. Gallery is a command from Wiki, it wouldn't be there if it wasn't to be used. Renmiri 15:14, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
I guess my point is that the gallery doesn't necessarily add any value to the article — anyone who would has played the game would already be quite familiar with the images in the gallery; and those not familiar would benefit from clearer, more informative shots than these. These reasons, as well as the insufficient/omitted fair use rationale on some of these gallery images, as well as the apparent copy-pasting of text on the images that *do* have fair use rationale (to illustrate "Spira (Final Fantasy X)"?) makes this gallery conflict with me. ~ Flooch 15:20, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
You are very welcome to replace them with better quality, more informative pictures, if you have them. In my experience, very few can compare with the high definition DVD I took them from, but if you can find better, please do show us those! Renmiri 15:24, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
[Edit conflict] I am going to assume by your last comment that you are agreeing that the images and their content are sub-par, and that they have deficient fair use rationale. I'll remove them for now. ~ Flooch 15:34, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Hold your horses! I said IF you can find better ones, which I very much doubt it. Show me a better one and we can debate replacing mine Renmiri 15:48, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
  • In the interest of achieving consensus, how about we just leave the Duggles / Abes pics and nix the Auron one ? Any other you have your heart set against ? Renmiri 15:28, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
That would be a start, though I'd like to see at least some real fair use rationale for the rest. Shame we can't upload videos to Wikipedia. Or maybe... I could upload the video of the opening FMV off-site. That would illustrate the content in the images much better. :) ~ Flooch 15:34, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia accepts ogg video. Upload one and we can talk bout replacing the pics. Replacing them with external site SPAM or figments of your imagination don't sound good to me Renmiri 15:48, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Page is looking better now, thanks for doing those edits. ~ Flooch 15:55, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
That is what we both wanted Flooch, a better Blitz page. I loaded the best pics I had, but if you had better ones, I was open for those. Same for video. I myself have a blitz video at YouTube, but I don't have the codec to convert it to Wikipedia's OGG video. Renmiri 16:12, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Well, assuming you still have that DVD, I could help you go through the process of converting VOB files to MPEG, then to OGG. Or we could just link to YouTube in an External links section. ~ Flooch 16:39, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Yep still have it, I own it. I have it on MPEG but not on OGG. See if you like my Blitzball video at Youtube click on play, if not there are many others to choose, but I don't feel a Youtube link is appropriate, except perhaps for the external link section Renmiri 17:23, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Did you edit that yourself? Anyway, here's a possible entry for the External links section:
Yes I did edit it myself. I prefer mine, as it is 100% blitz and much better graphics, but meh, we shouldn't show favoritism Image:Grin.gif. Go ahead and add yours Renmiri 13:01, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay Renmiri, time for more discussion. I am not going to revert your second restoration of the gallery out of respect for the fact that Roomba will delete them in seven days, and out of my belief in 1RR. Please, tell me why you think they deserve to be left in the article. ~ Flooch 15:38, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I believe you are taking this much too personally Flooch. I have already stated the reason the pictures belong in the article: To describe a sport it is very useful to have pictures of game play. The fact that many other sites in the web have movies and pictures of Blitzball as the one you added to the External Links section is irrelevant. This is Wikipedia's article about Blitzball, if we want to make it a complete and informative article we should have those pictures. That is and always was my goal: To have a good and informative article. What is your goal ? Enforce copvio rules that ARE NOT being violated ? I fail to understand why you oppose the addition of informative material to this Wki page. Help me understand what exactly is your problem please. In my efforts to assume good fayth I have asked you for better pictures and none was forthcoming. What, pray tell, is your rationale for erasing informative pictures that again are well withing established guidelines for a wiki article ? Renmiri 16:23, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
What bothers me is that for the past month Xornok and I have been putting a lot of work on this page, which was pretty much abandoned and almost got put for deletion. I don't feel you are respecting any of our work. That table of team players was a beast to code, you deleted it with something that you yourself admitted later was subpar, but didn't revert it to what me and Xornok had worked hard to make. Attitudes like that really bother me, as they show a lack of basic respect for other peoples contribution, and a lack of attention to the fact that edits are supposed to make the article better. I definitely don't feel you are being respectful to the efforts we have been putting on this page
As for the Youtube link, it susrprises me that you advocate Wikipedia uses it as content, instead of the few screencaps I suggestd. If you are so worried about copvio, you should note that that movie is most ceartinly copvio, being longer than 30 seconds, with entire scenes ripped from the game. I am against the inclusion of ripped videos on a wikipedia page as I stated above, and one of the reasons is the dubious nature of the source. I'm not sure you realize it, but it is one thing for a private citizen to post a video on Youtube and a completely different thing for Wikipedia to endorse it as content. When we edit pages here we are spokespersons for Wikipedia and we have to behave as such. Again, we do need some screen caps to properly show the game, but that is all we need. There is no need to include external links. Renmiri 17:48, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm actually in agreement with Renmiri on this. A few screenshots are not only well within copyviolation limits, but are the expected form of display material. If you check out the Soccer page, you will see pictures that offer detailed displays of the game being played and how it is played, rather than actual video footage. Same thing with American football, and Baseball too. Just because we have video footage available doesn't mean we should be using it, especially in this manner. The editors of those pages probably have access to countless videos of those sports in play, but they aren't using them.
Furthermore, it's not exactly bettering this article to link to things from off-site. An article should serve to be as comprehensive as possible within itself alone. Also, if there was ever an issue of copyviolation involved, putting up the entire opening FMV of Final Fantasy X (which features a lot more than just blitzball in play) would be it. For that matter, the video itself would qualify as irrelevant in that the viewer has to sit through more than enough non-blitzball stuff just to watch the parts that are relevant to this article. In this respect, Renmiri's video is better, but even it should be -- and is -- trumped by screenshots.
As far as the issue of the table goes, I don't know what would necessarily be the best template for presentation, but I am sure that screenshots would be the best way to go. Also, remember this: if those other sports I mentioned don't require a screenshot of everything relevant within the game itself or a video depicting them in order to convey an idea of how the game is played, this article shouldn't either. Ryu Kaze 23:50, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
By the way, finding screenshots everyone agrees are useful would be a good first step. Ryu Kaze 23:59, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blitzball teams table

Is there a prettier way to do this? I'm tempted to convert it to a bulleted list. :/ ~ Flooch 15:45, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

do it, see the result in preview and if better, then replace it Renmiri 15:49, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Ewww! I like the table better, can we restore it ? Renmiri 19:45, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I agree. Ewww. How's the current one? ~ Flooch 04:39, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Much better. Leave it as it is then, I can't decide... Renmiri 13:03, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
eww, what happened to the table me and renmiri made? it was so much better, and well organized. -Xornok 19:00, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Aye, I prefer it too, but I was trying to compromise, to zero results it seems. Renmiri 20:01, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
I find that insulting to my efforts, Renmiri. I wouldn't say it's zero. See how you like the new one. ~ Flooch 02:27, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Let me rephrase it then. I was trying to compromise on the table, even though I disliked your "C" attempt, and preferred the table Xornok and I had. The zero results refer to my compromising, as you haven't really budged an inch in your quest to erase pictures you have nothing else to replace them with but a copyvio FMV on an external site . "C" is actually quite an improvement over your first attempt, as even you have admitted. Renmiri 06:00, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
*points to the heading* I assumed you were talking about the table formatting, not the pictures. ~ Flooch 11:09, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reasoning behind recent changes

The Blitzball team lineup table was reformatted as the table borders were distracting; and it was converted into a horizontal format to flow with the rest of the article. I was under the impression that layout C had been satisfactory — until Renmiri did a backflip and posted his last comments. Your patience in this matter was very much appreciated, and we'll keep changing it until all are satisfied, but I wholeheartedly believe the original formatting can be improved with everyone's approval. Please do have a look at a new proposal, layout D. (One thought, we wouldn't have this problem if the names of all the team members were left out. Are they notable enough to be kept in the article?)

I insist on removing the "FMV gallery" for five reasons.

  • Firstly, as the pictures have debatable fair use rationale embedded in their pages, and are not being used in the way the rationale says they are being used. They still have not been fixed since the beginning of the previous discussion.
  • Secondly, why have multiple images when one good one would suffice?
  • Third, I removed the "FMV gallery" as it was felt that the images, being blurry close-ups of screen-captured video, did not contribute much in the way of "illustration and discussion purposes" (as quoted from the article). Allow me to remind us that in spirit of Wikipedia, each image ought to be notable in itself.
  • Fourth, seeing as the gallery is in essence a storyboard of the opening FMV, I had thought that if a link to the actual opening FMV be made available, it would nullify the inclusion of the "FMV gallery".
  • Lastly, I am currently protesting the re-inclusion of the "FMV gallery", as there is currently a screencapture (as well as the link to the actual opening FMV) of the FMV in question elsewhere in the article.

Please understand that I have been acting in good faith, and I acknowledge the good work that has been done on the article in the past, Xornok and Renmiri included. Do consider the possibility that I am geniunely working to improve the formatting and aesthetics of this article from the state it was in before I arrived. All that needs doing now is expanding the text of the article. ~ Flooch 01:36, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

ok, i like the way it looks now, lets leave it like that for now... and, i kinda agree on the pictures, they are basically storyboarding the intro... now, if they were varied pictures, say in game play like scoring or passing, then that would be a different story... but i do think the pictures should stay until we can get in game pictures, if people agree... -Xornok 02:53, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
There is an ingame screenshot of the minigame in the article, I added it a couple of hours ago. ~ Flooch 03:04, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
As I said, Roomba will delete unused images in 7 days. So they should stay until they are replaced by existing, actual pictures, not a vague reference. As for the rationale, I have them all using the same template because I have aded more than 140 pictures to the FF pages and it got just too much to do a fair use reasoning for each image. People on the project have been adjusting the FU rationale on each picture as needed without pointing fingers, you are the first one to complain and do nothing to fix it. This kind of attitude from you is what makes me feel disrespected by your comments and makes me suspect you are making this picture thing in a personal turf war. It would take a lot less time for you to just fix the rationale for each picture than it has taken for you to complain about said rationale.
And Flooch, pray tell, how can you call the pictures blurry ? Again I feel you are not being fair in your comparisson, as the pictures are from high definition DVD, digitally enhanced. The picture you added is even blurrier, just look at the writing. As I said, my only goal is to get a better blitzball article, the goal I have been working for on off for the last month. If that is your goal too, then fix the fair use rationale for the pictures you feel have the wrong one and post some good game play pictures. I'm not married to my pictures, all I want is a good article for Wikipedia. Renmiri 05:52, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Using the exact same template for 140 images because you were too lazy trying to save time is not a good enough excuse. Each image that you upload must be carefully considered for its worth and potential contribution to the article.
I haven't added any rationale because I can't conceive of any rationale for them at all. Please do it for me. You'd probably accuse me of vandalism if I corrected them myself.
I'll concede that the pictures are not blurry. But they are, in some cases, unclear as to their subject matter, and their current captions too. What are they meant to be illustrating, for the alleged "discussion purposes"? And now for a bit of light-hearted humour:
  • Image:Blitzballffx_7.jpg|Siamese twins in possession of the ball during a match of Blitzball. Amazingly, they play on opposite teams.
  • Image:Grabbed_Frame_17.jpg|Blitzball players will, on occasion, celebrate a goal with a high five. This picture illustrates two Abes players doing just this.
  • Image:Grabbed Frame 18.jpg|Tidus in the midst of executing a "Sphere Shot", or in football terms, a bicycle kick. Notice how he grabs onto two poles for support while he does this.
fair use not allowed on talk pages ed g2s • talk 16:15, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Anyway, thanks for replying so promptly, I'd appreciate it if you'd address my other three and a half points too. ~ Flooch 11:05, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
haha, just to let you know, in the last picture, he isnt grabing onto two poles, his hands are open and it just so happens that the lines are there... i think theyre stairs from the stadium behind him... -Xornok
"Using the exact same template for 140 images because you were too lazy is not a good enough excuse." OK, now you are definitely being offensive and personal. I don't have to be exposed to this. Reporting you to Mediation Renmiri 13:34, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
"I haven't added any rationale because I can't conceive of any rationale for them at all. Please do it for me. You'd probably accuse me of vandalism if I corrected them myself." Again unfounded accusations. You are trying to make a turf war out of a Wiki article Renmiri 13:34, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
"I'll concede that the pictures are not blurry." Admitting you dissed the pictures based on baseless accusations. It is hard to find a good fayth in this attitude Flooch Renmiri 13:34, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Image:Blitzballffx_7.jpg|AKA disputing a ball on several games
  • Image:Grabbed_Frame_17.jpg|Floating in mid air, illustrating how the game takes place in a huge, special water sphere
  • Image:Grabbed Frame 18.jpg|bycicle kick / sphere shot illustrates one of the major scoring techniques in Blitz
fair use not allowed on talk pages
I retract my use of the word "lazy". You were "saving time", how's that? I'll go along with the mediation, though I believe a RfC would have been more appropriate. (My accusations were not baseless, the blurriness is subjective, and I gave you the benefit of the doubt by conceding that point.) ~ Flooch 02:03, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Okay, kids, simmer down (yes, I know I'm younger than at least one of you). This has gotten more personal than it should have. No more personal comments from either of you, ok? Or I'll get bitchy or something.
Anyway, continuing what I said from the other discussion "saga" in here, these are my personal feelings on the issue of relevancy in the screenshots. I think the image of the girl from the Duggles winding up for a pass is very good and should stay. Likewise with Tidus' bicycle kick/sphere shot. The timing of the shot with the goalkeeper is kind of difficult to make out well, so I'm not too sure if it would be helpful to readers or not. Also, I'd say that the image of the members of the Abes giving each other a high-five might be best replaced with something that displays the blitzball sign for victory/prayer of Yevon. Something like this, maybe, but something better if you can get it:
http://img119.imageshack.us/my.php?image=prayervictorysign5nj.jpg
http://img119.imageshack.us/my.php?image=prayervictorysign28pa.jpg
Considering you have that DVD Renmiri, I'm sure you could get something even better. Anyway, that's my take on the whole thing. I think the shot of the goalie missing the save is a great screenshot; again, the shot of the Duggles member is great; the sphere shot picture is great; same thing with the picture of the various teams; I think all of those should remain and would be great material for people who or have not played the game. I would just consider replacing those other two with something like what I've mentioned. Also, they should probably be better distributed within the body of the article if that many are to be present.
Now, on the issue of the teams table, it's a pretty cool table, but I'm not sure how important all the team member names are on the whole, especially since the team rosters can change. I do, however, think that all the teams should be listed for sure. And that'll be all I'll say for now, expect to reiterate once again that I'll be bitchy if there's more personal stuff brought into this. Ryu Kaze 00:13, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
By the way, Flooch, I do think that it was inappropriate to remark that the FU rational on the images was invalid without an attempt at bettering them, regardless of whether you personally approved of the pictures at the time or not. The idea would be to leave them until consensus on something better could be reached. It's pretty simple to establish some fair-use rationale, and even if Renmiri's standard explanation for FU didn't fit the image exactly, a slight tweak of its wording should have sufficed. I personally have used a standard template (hers I believe) for every image I've uploaded, and I've tweaked it as necessary to fit the article. Ryu Kaze 00:17, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Aye, aye captain Ryu! Yes, the personal stuff must be dropped - incidentally Flooch that is why I went through mediation instead of RfC, because to me the personal way you were handling this bothered me a lot more than the actual usage or not of my pictures.
Anyhow, I like Ryu's idea of putting the prayer sign. Your picture is crystal clear Ryu, I doubt I could get a better one, even from my DVD.
So I agree with Ryu on all changes, though I do like the team player names on there, but meh, I'll go with the majority on this. Want to take a crack at it Ryu ? If not, let me know and I'll do the changes Renmiri 01:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Glad I could help. I might give the teams thing a shot, Ren. At the moment, I'm working on something over at AC.net (forgot to mention that I'm a mod there now), so it'll be a little while, but I'll get to it tonight unless you'd prefer to. Ryu Kaze 01:37, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm glad you agree it's a fine table. As I've previously said, I'm also unsure on the inclusion of the individual team member names. Renmiri and Xornok, would you care to contribute your opinion on this issue?
But that's my point: if I had tweaked the FU rationale myself, it'd probably end up more like an unfair use rationale. My tweaks would have gone something along the lines of: "the image is not being used in an informative way because it's subject matter is ambiguous, nor does its inclusion contribute to a better understanding of blitzball (not when we already have perfectly fine images inline with the paragraphs.) The image's only purpose is, really, to aid in the storyboarding of the opening FMV." (Please look at the version here, for your reference.) And that is why, being the bold editor that I am, that I made the decision of excluding them from the article.
If this particular article had been about the significance of the opening FMV, sure, I'd have no problems. But since this is about Blitzball, the sport as it appears in A Separate Peace and Final Fantasy, we should include a variety of images, not limited to a single FMV. Ryu's suggestion of the blitzball sign for victory is an excellent step forward.
P.S. I wasn't intentionally being "bitchy" when I described Renmiri's actions as "lazy". I don't like to euphemise or beat about the bush though. ~ Flooch 01:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Well, respect for others is not euphemism. And this kind of language is offensive and gets onto personal attacks so you best learn not to use it around here. I won't take it lightly as I do not need to be offended or have my work disrespected by a kid half my age. You retracted it. Can we move on now befre we get into a new fight ? Renmiri 02:21, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Well, I think it best that bygones be left bygones if at all possible. I think we all have the same goal here and -- though you two have disagreed with each other really angrily in the past -- I know you're able to get along with one another.
I think we all also agree that all the player names may not be necessary, so I'll probably see about condensing that later on (though, again, it's a nice table and I hate to touch it). I also think we all agree about a variety of images being needed (glad you like those I put up, Ren), so I think -- as you said, Flooch -- this might be a step in the right direction. We'll see how it goes, I guess. Ryu Kaze 01:59, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Outside view

The current usage of the screenshots is not acceptable under Wikipedia's guidelines for fair use. The images are not being used to illustrate a point in the text. The article is about what Blitzball is, and picture of two people high-fiving does not add significantly to this article, construction sentences to justify fair use is not how we should be adding images to articles. Fair use images should be used as a last resort when something being described requires and illustration, and there is not free alternative. Please also note that Roomba does not actually delete any images, so this is not a valid reason to keep them. ed g2s • talk 16:10, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I had to restore the gallery. I hope you bear with me on this, the possibility that all images in question could be erased while we discuss the subject is very real. Apparently you are not aware how Roomba works, so let me explain: Removing images from the only page they are in use will cause Roomba to tags images as "orphaned" and this has caused the deletion of quite a few of the images I uploaded as it can be seen here [1] and here [2]. User Gmaxwell can give you the gory technical details on how exactly this happens and which progrma or method does it, but after having more than a dozen images deleted I hope you believe me when I tell you that making images "orphaned" does cause them to be deleted Renmiri 05:12, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
I also don't really understand your removal of the entire gallery, including the sphere shot image and the tackling image, because you disagree with the high five image that was already flagged in this discussion page to be replaced by another. I am really confused on what does and does not constitutes excessive use of the fair use rationale, so I would like to request a Fair use review. It is my understanding we request this by placing a {{fairusedisputed}} template on the page, is that correct ? Thanks and look forward to learning what exactly are the rules for fair use of images on FF articles Renmiri 05:12, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
I understand perfectly how Gmaxwell's bot works. As I stated before it does not delete any images. If you leave a comment on the talk page saying that there is an ongoing debate about their inclusion in a page, any administrator who comes along to delete them will move along. If you are really worried about them being deleted, save them to your computer, then you can re-upload them at a later date should a proper requirement for their use emerge. As it stands there is no (detailed) discussion of:
  1. goal keeper tackling
  2. goal celebrations
  3. the "Sphere Shot"
in the article at all. There is already a picture of the underwater basketball game and multiple fair use images should not be used when one serves the purpose adequately. As such there is no need on the page for these images. Please do not restore them unless there is a valid reason. ed g2s • talk 12:15, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
Huh ? I'm confused. You said above that my reason for keeping images while a discussion is taking place was NOT a valid reason, now you tell me that this is precisely the way to handle them, i.e. leave a tag for admins saying that a discussion is taking place ? Your solution of keeping it on a hard drive to keep reloading them sounds to me like a waste of my time and Wikipedias time if not a violation of 3RR. I am not opposed to doing so but I have done that quite a bit already, to conform to Roomba's limitations and the various fair use licensing demands. I also have had some recent HD failures so I feel relying on me - private citizen - to keep a backup for Wikipedia is a flawed strategy. Please help me understand what exactly am I doing wrong here by requesting that the images be kept "in use" while being discussed. Also, if you pelase tell me which tag to use on the images to get admins to leave them be, that would be appreciated, as 33 of my images were already erased and I cringe to think I will have to load / retag and re-edit even more images Renmiri 15:59, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
The image shouldn't be uploaded unless there is a valid fair use claim to be made. However if the discussion is still ongoing when the seven days elapse, I doubt any admin would delete it if there was a message on the page explaining the situation. That you've had 33 images deleted in this way should make you think twice before you upload copyrighted material. ed g2s • talk 17:06, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
Well, with all due respect, I don't really trust your judgement on this issue. All of the more than 100 images I uploaded,I did it to answering to a request from the WPFF team at the time. If you had taken the effort to ask why loaded so many pictures I would have told you that. I have my own site and even my own Final Fantasy forum I do not need to use Wikipedia to host anything. I uploaded images here for the articles that were listed as needing images, in an effort to contribute to the pages. Since then myself and many others spent quite a large ammount of time improving the Final Fantasy articles, rewriting pages, merging articles and doing all kinds of non-image related work and the net result is clear: 10 pages voted as good article, and 1 page that was just declared Featured Article, including 3 pages that were on the list linked above, listed as "need images". This kind of work is only possible when we all work with good fayth and respect each other. A respect I am not seeing from you Renmiri 19:02, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
I am having a hard time trying to find good fayth on your afirmations that my reason to keep the images was invalid, as "Roomba does not delete any image". I work in IT as well and was hard to me to belive a Sysop would feign not knowing how the Roomba process to delete images works, but I gave you the benefit of doubt. Alas you admitted you know fully well how the process works!! That leads me to believe your first post was not a good fayth post: Had I not known details I would just be intimidated and back out of the dispute, while the fact is that the process initiated by Roomba DOES cause the deletion of images, contrary to what you affirmed on your post. I also notice you have never once mentioned an alternative to keep the images, or even answered my question about what specific tag you were referring to. To me this is another example where you are not trying to nurture and keep an wiki user excited and pumped to work on wikipedia. Which is a shame - I'm sure I don't need to remind you that Wikipedia would not be the wonder it is today if it was just a place for the annointed to contribute. Renmiri
As it stands there is no (detailed) discussion of: #goal keeper tackling, #goal celebrations #the "Sphere Shot" . Actually there is, just read the whole talk page and you will find mention of each one, as Flooch, the guy who solicited your guidance had already raised the same concerns you have (thanks Flooch for getting some more input on this, we can really use a refresher on fair use limitations for all the FF pages). Regardless, if you meant the actual article page, that is precisely the reason those images are needed: to avoid the need of a tedious text based description of Blitzball moves that can be visualized easily by seeing the move on a picture. I trust you see my point here, a picture of a sphere shot is much more compact and conductive to learning the move than a detailed description of a sphere shot. Same for a tackle. The goal celebrations one is one that we here had already agreed was not very demonstrative and we had already agreed to substitute it for a Victory Prayer picture, which is important in the context of the FFX game, as it shows how much the fictional world's religion borrows from the fictional sport.
I trust the reasons above qualify as reasoning for inclusion on the article, please let me know if they don't. I will wait for your answer to restore the pictures. Renmiri 15:59, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
"that is precisely the reason those images are needed: to avoid the need of a tedious text based description of Blitzball moves" This is a clear cut example of what we can't use fair use for. We are supposed to be creating free content, and only using copyright material when there is no other alternative, not creating some free content, and filling in the blanks with copyright material because not one has written it yet. ed g2s • talk 16:58, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

to me, there is no alternative to seeing it. you can discribe the victory prayer or sphere shot as much as you want, but people may interpret it differently and see it differently in their mind then whats in the game. with the pictures, they know exactly how to do it and what it looks like. -Xornok 18:41, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

AgreedRenmiri 19:02, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
  • I said to Flooch and I will repeat to Ed, "his daddy" whom he called for help: I am not overly attached to my images. All I want is a good article for Blitzabll. But I do care a lot about Wikipedia and about Final Fantasy so I will fight you on this. Because what you fail to see is how much this heavy handed approach you are using saps the energy and motivation of good editors that have been workig hard to improve Wikipedia. Again, had I been a clueless n00b, you would have intimimidated me right out of Wikipedia. Luckily I had some good experiences here and I have my own Wiki, so I how important nurturing new users and the community building work is important for a living thriving body of work like Wikipedia. And it really bugs me that someone with IT background would be acting like you are. Don't get me wrong, I know the WP:FU is a necessary rule. I worked many years in IT, including in Digital Rights Management. I know Sys Admin is a thankless job, particularly when you have to act as police and restrain users. I will gladly abide by Wikipedia's community Fair Use rules but I need a second opinion as I do not trust you are unbiased in this issue. And being as it is not the first time you are bugging editors with a flimsy case for images not being fair use, I believe it is my duty as wikipedian to fight you. Heaven forbid you get some good wikipedian editors to leave because of your fascination with interpreting the fair use law as court, judge and jury, while hiding evidence from the defense.... Renmiri 19:02, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
I agree with the removal of the gallery. The meat of the matter is summed up in ed_g2s' edit summary — images are only fair use when used to support critical commentary in the article. WP:FUC#8 is quite clear on this matter.
I also agree that the usage of stencil-cut rationale is definitely not the way to be uploading fair use images. Renmiri, it's not a flimsy case, it's a matter of the law. If people continue frivolously uploading copyrighted images with improper (or even questionable) FU rationale, the Wikipedia Foundation will one day get sued for copyright infringement. ~ Flooch 01:45, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
I think this will be a good exercise for all of us then Flooch. IANAL - I Am Not A Lawyer - Neither you, nor I, nor ed are lawyers or specialists in Fair Use law! We all need to learn clear guidelines about WP:FU and how it applies to this matter, wouldn't you agree ? My main contention with the images is I think they are needed, but this is not the reason I'm standing my ground in this. What I said above about ed applies for you too: I don't feel ed's heavy handed approach, deleting images because of his own interpretation of WP:FU is beneficial to keeping a good, polite and fair environment for Wikipedia editors like me and many others he has crossed before. Being so new in Wikipedia, I'm sure you remeber how frustrating it is to have all your work dissapear, only to find out your edits inadvertently fit someone else's interpretation of WP:xx policies. But in your case, when I "dissapeared" with the Sphere Break page I was respectful enough to a) make a copy of the page in question at Wikibooks, b) Inform you what had happened and of your recourses to protest the removal, c) Show you where the page content was. Even then you were still miffed, so after many attempts to make you and Gamemaker "see the light" I just dropped the matter, as to me preserving YOUR enthusiasm for working here at wiki was a lot more imprtant than reinforcing an obscure rule. Had I behaved like ed, I would have just redirected the page, and when protests were made I would have just selectively quote WP:NOT and other wikilawyering nonsense to intimidate you into compliance. I authored the whole page, remember ? I could have just withdrawn my license for your or Wikipedia to use my text, added some scary looking reasoning on top of it and I would get "my way". I didn't act this way because that wasn't fair to you or to Gamemaker, who wanted a good FFX section as much as I do, and it might have scared you - or a less bold newbie - into abandoning Wikipedia all together. You, being new at Wikipedia, have still a lot to learn, and I hope you will take this episode as a learning experience in respect for fellow editors and in ways to foster cooperation and consensus of people who just want a better Wikipedia, not a lesson in crying out to "daddy" when you think you "lost" a turf war. Renmiri 07:56, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Why do you insist on making this a character debate? Please stop.
If you have any uncertainties on wikipedia guidelines or policies, or disagree with the guidelines and policies themselves, please discuss them at the relevant wikipedia spaces, such as WP:FU and WP:FUC. ~ Flooch 10:15, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Flooch, you are the one who need to discuss them FU issues at the relevant wikipedia spaces as you were the one who sought to escalate this issue into a FU guideline review. I was perfectly hapy with the compromise you, me, Ryu and Xornok had worked out, but you felt you needed more guidance so you sought ed's help. It is fine, I don't mind, this will probably save you and me much time lost in future FU issues. All I'm doing is making sure we get a good clarification, being that as you said it yourself above, ed is not exactly the relevant wikipedia space to arbitrate FU cases. Renmiri 14:39, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Renmiri, please remain civil and avoid personal attacks as they do not help the debate in any way. Many of the people who have contributed to Wikipedia's Fair Use policy are lawyers, and I have talked to many of them. I have a pretty good understanding of Wikipedia's policy's interpretation of fair use law. If you have a problem with these, discuss at WP:FU, but as it stands they are quite clear on the matter here. Compare it to the fair use of copyrighted text. In the article on a poet I could quote some lines of his poetry and then analyse them. I could not stick a couple of his poems at the end for the purpose of illustrating his writing style - even though it would serve the purpose very well, and would arguably be "necessary" to show anyone how the poet writes. ed g2s • talk 11:34, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
My apologies if you saw any of my comments as a personal attack, it is definitely not my intention. As a matter of fact, if you read a bit above, you will see that I hate this kind of discussion and won't stand for it, so when Flooch started calling me names I declined to engage on it. And would do so with you or anyone else. I agree wholeheartedly with WP:CIVIL and WP:NPA. I disagree with the way you behaved with ME and I gave you concrete and clear cut examples where you were biting a newcomer (me) and you were not working towards Wikipedia:Consensus. But I have yet to hear any explanation for your assertion that my contention was invalid, i.e. that Roomba did not cause delection of pictures, while you were perfectly familiar with the process and knew very well I was telling the truth. I do not appreciate being called a liar by someone who knows better. I also do not appreciate being kept on the dark about avenues for recourse, by someone who should be guiding new users and good editors, not intimidating and biting them. Renmiri 14:18, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
My intention is exactly to get to talk to the WP:FU people. Again, you having talked with lawyers is not enough reason for me to trust your judgement. It is nothing personal: I myself have worked and talked with lawyers on FU issues but that by no means makes me, or anyone who is not a lawyer, an expert. It was not my idea to escalate this image dispute into a FU policy review: Flooch sought your guidance because he felt we need clarification on this issue, we should respect his wishes. I just want all sides to be evalued. Besides, I'm sure it will help the project overall if we can get a clear guidance on what exactly is FU on the context of the FF pages. How do we proceed about getting an WP:FU review ? I have tagged the images in question with Template:fairusedisputed is that enough ? Please avoid repeating any more FU criteria and just guide me and Flooch on how to get this reviewed. I believe that is all that is needed here Renmiri 14:18, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I think I clarified our policy enough now. You can continue to chase this issue up if you like, at WP:FU or where ever you think is appropriate, but our policy is not going to change. Instead of spending so much time arguing about it, why not just expand the article sufficiently that the images are required to illustrate your points - or better still - so that they are no longer needed at all. ed g2s • talk 16:03, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. I will add the description of the tackles and sphere break shots then. That is all that is needed ? Hopefully we can close this issue without dragging anyone else into this discussion, right Flooch ? Renmiri 19:42, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Glad you saw the light. Thanks everyone for being able to talk it out. ~ Flooch 22:13, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Probably - but try not to see this as "what must I write to use these images", but "what images do I need to illustrate what I have written". ed g2s • talk 22:23, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Never saw it as a matter of keeping pictures, but as a matter of having a complete, informative article. Hopefully this edit will achieve consensus and we can all feel the article is good Renmiri 17:44, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Inclusion of blitzball team player names

"its not excessive, its thorough" -Xornok 02:53, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Since Xornok's not yet in agreement on the removal of all the team player names, I'm not going to remove them yet. I'm just going to reword the intro to that section such that -- if the player names are taken out -- all that will need to be done is to remove "... and their starting rosters" from the intro to the table.
Renmiri, what would you really prefer? Personally, I still feel like all those player names are extrinsic and will have little to no value to someone who isn't already familiar with the game. Do you really feel like it contributes something that Flooch and I don't see? I'm certainly willing to hear you out. I'd just like to us to a consensus. Ryu Kaze 03:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
hmm, that is true, but i think that there should be a list of the players, and maybe the free agents. and who knows, maybe some people do want to know the name of the players, you dont know.... there are some very crazy people out there.... -Xornok 03:45, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
oh, and i also think that the 2 zanarkand teams should be taken off the list, they have no playable characters (save for tidus). thats how it was during the first table that me ane renmiri made... -Xornok 03:47, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
If those two teams are taken off the table, I'd wholeheartedly suggest converting the table back into a list, for visual conformity. I'm not that set on removing the player names, it's good either way to me. ~ Flooch 09:08, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
I agree with converting it back into a list if the Zanarkand teams are taken off. Also, I personally still don't see what benefit a list of names for tons of unknown people will convey to readers, but if the majority rules in favor of keeping them, I won't oppose it. Ryu Kaze 12:27, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
how bout this? -Xornok 17:16, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Besaid Aurochs Luca Goers Al Bhed Psyches
  • Wakka
  • Tidus
  • Datto
  • Letty
  • Jassu
  • Botta
  • Keepa
  • Bickson
  • Abus
  • Graav
  • Doram
  • Balgerda
  • Raudy
  • Eigaar
  • Blappa
  • Berrik
  • Judda
  • Lakkam
  • Nimrook
Ronso Fangs Guado Glories Kilika Beasts
  • Basik Ronso
  • Argai Ronso
  • Gazna Ronso
  • Nuvy Ronso
  • Irga Ronso
  • Zamzi Ronso
  • Giera Guado
  • Zazi Guado
  • Navara Guado
  • Auda Guado
  • Pah Guado
  • Noy Guado
  • Larbeight
  • Isken
  • Vuroja
  • Kulukan
  • Deim
  • Nizarut

[edit] Teams with few or no named players


I, like Xornok, think the team roosters bring some value to the article. This page was about to be deleted before Xornok and I got working on it. After all the work, it is so frustrating to see everything we did get erased... Why the request for expansion and the RfD if the page was fine dry and drab as it was then ? Renmiri 21:29, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Since we're not going anywhere with this, like I said earlier, consider my vote to remove the rosters as neutral.
One the separate issue of the formatting: I suggest changing the subheading "Teams with few or no named players" to a paragraph, because firstly, I feel that dedicating a section to such a short list of teams is redundant. Secondly, having a paragraph instead of a list also allows the table to feature alone in the section. (Having a table and a list would have been redundant.) The paragraph would go something along the lines of:
"Teams with few or no named players also appear in Final Fantasy X. They are the Zanarkand Abes and the Zanarkand Duggles, which were featured in the opening full motion video of the game." ~ Flooch 23:58, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
How about in FFX-2? The Zanarkand Abes are named there. -202.8.239.102

[edit] Knowles - FFX connection

In WW2 wasn't there some part in which two opposing armies got together and played a game of football (soccer)? If so, that seems like a connection to me, Blitz in the FFX world being the one situation in which all races come together to play.

Why yes! Good catch!!! The movie had Pele if I'm not mistaken... and was based on a true story. Maybe that is where the game designers got the name for it. Renmiri 15:51, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Maybe, but be careful to avoid original research. Sorry to butt in again. ed g2s • talk 22:56, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
No problem, anyone is welcome to give their 2 cents... You are right, we don't have enough basis to affirm that game designers DID get their inspiration from the WWII game. Still, a nice catch and a nice theory that we can debate for ages - not here - but on FF forums like mine Renmiri 00:59, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Liquid Breathing

"One mystery is how the teams manage to hold their breaths underwater for such long periods of time. One theory by fans of the game suggests that it is the result of training on the part of the players — in Eternal Calm, a short film set two years after the conclusion of Final Fantasy X, Yuna notes that after much practice and training from Wakka, she is able to hold her breath for over two minutes. However, the Final Fantasy X Scenario Ultimania guide states that it is the unique properties of the pyrefly-saturated water in the blitzball arena that enables players to breathe liquid for the 5 minutes required for each half-time."

My memory's a bit fuzzy, but that doesn't seem to explain why Tidus, Wakka and Rikku are the only characters who can dive and battle in natural water indefinitely (Sunken Ruins, Sinspawn Echuilles, Via Purifico, Gagazet Cave). I imagine there's technical (such as creating swimming animations for the entire cast being impractical) or design (forcing usage of these characters) reasons, but as far as realism, neither suggestion adequately covers all of the underwater scenes. Rikku further complicates the problem -- she's not a trained blitzball player, though it could be speculated that she uses machina for underwater survival.

Is there any canon information that adequately explains this phenomenon?

~ Eidako 09:28, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Aye it is canon for sure. It doesn't get any more official than Square Enix' Ultimania guides for the game. Renmiri 18:13, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Interestingly enough, this is actually also covered in FFX. If you ask Wakka the first time you're on the beach of Besaid (after being unconscious in the water for a long time), he says you probably survived because you're a blitzball player, and the best can hold their breaths for nearly forever. I guess somebody with the game and an appropriate savegame can dig up the exact citation if they'd like. -~ Sesse 02:01, 14 September 2006 (CEST)
Good catch! Now that you mention it, I remember that scene! I'll see if I can get the old PS2 fired up ;-) Renmiri 02:33, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Ooopsie! It seems I was getting ahead of the quotes... adding Ultimania's statement to the quote from Sesse it seems they don't breathe liquid but somehow are able to not run out of oxygen... Fixing it Renmiri 16:20, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey ill do that to ask Wakka i actually Have asavpoint there!. Vulcanhacker

[edit] New Article for Final Fantasy?

It seems really odd to have two completely different things in one article. I think what we should do is move the FFX blitzball page to Blitzball (Final Fantasy) and leave the other one where it is. I think we should also have the typed in answer for typing in "Blitzball" be a disambiguation page, and/or the Final Fantasy Blitzball page. Anyone agree, hmm? - Raditzu 05:28, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree but.... This page took so looong to get an agreement on (see above) that I'm weary of changing it and starting the edit wars again. Renmiri 15:35, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
The ends justify the means? - Raditzu 00:35, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree, It's a little odd to see a FF Blitzball page with some other stuff thrown into it from something completely unrelated. --PresN 18:26, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll make the edits, then. - Raditzu 20:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I prefer the version with both fictional sports in it, unless of course the one on "a seperate piece" can get more added to it. -Aknorals 08:56, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] woa

wierd redirect of the disambiguation page to here.... and its listed on this page so it redirects to itself... i'm just gonna delete the link, cuz i was going to put a deletion request on the disambiguation page Blueaster 04:48, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

nevermind

[edit] Blitzball as an Ultimate Frisbee variant

Someone affirms that both sports are almost identical. After reading a bit on Ultimate Frisbee I have my doubts. Blitzball is a full contact sport played under water with some very violent tackles and moves, UF is a mild mannered "sports honor" sport played on dry land... Does it even have goals and goalies ? Anyhow, I'm leaving the edit, slightly altered, but just until I see some reference or get more input into this. If no one volunteers more facts it will go bye-bye Renmiri 20:32, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Didn't even have to remove it myself! Image:grin.gif Original research has no place at Wikipedia Renmiri 13:49, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:grin.gif Those edits were pretty funny. However, I wasn't refering to Final Fantasy's blitzball game at all, rather a less violent Ultimate Frisbee variation played on land (also known as Ultimate Ball). 204.49.209.120 17:48, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] YouTube links

This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it. Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed. I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy. In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright. If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed or you would like to help spread this message contact us on this page. Thanks, ---J.S (t|c) 05:13, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Yay!!!!! Finally some common sense! I always disagreed with the Youtube link. (see above) Renmiri 16:23, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ...

In the beggining it says about the two blitzballs, but when you go reading it says mostly rules and stuff about the non-FFX... It should say in trhe header or somewhere near the begining something like 'This article focuses on blitzball BLAHBLAH, for blitball OTHERBLAH see...' or something like that... 189.5.130.102 21:33, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] horriblily written article

this artilce is horriblily written, it is filled with untrue information and confuses a lot of the information in the book. This whole article could use a little work. Slash's snakepit 04:58, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


"Blitzball is unique as it is one of the very few underwater team fictional sports ever described."

Non sequeteur. How can something be unique in being one of few? Removing this line airanui —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.21.149.166 (talk) 17:37, 24 October 2007 (UTC)