Talk:Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: My Life as a King

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: My Life as a King was a nominee for good article, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
June 6, 2008 Good article nominee Not listed
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
To-do list for Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: My Life as a King: edit · history · watch · refresh
  • Add more to the development section
  • reference the characters section
  • copyedit the whole thing
  • pass GA
  • peer review
  • FA!

Contents

[edit] English name

I think that "The Little King and the Promised Country: Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles" is not a official name of the game. In this moment, "Chiisa Na Osama To Yakusoku No Kuni: Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles" is the only official name... or not? --Sinh 00:29, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Good observation. Unless there is an official English name, the Japanese game title takes precedence. — Blue。 00:42, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
"The Japanese game title takes precedence" -> What is the policy or guideline in which you base this claim? Chrono'99 13:38, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject_Video_games/Article_guidelines/Naming#Games 1 says: Always use the original official title of the game, and prefer English titles over foreign ones. Unofficial titles (e.g. "Command & Conquer: Tiberian Dawn") are not allowed. As of now, Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: The Little King and the Promised Country is not an official English title for the game, unless you can give a source. — Blue。 13:57, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Obviously, if the official English title does not exist, the title of this article can't be in English. It's logical. In this moment, the only official name for this game is the Japanese name. --Sinh 08:25, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Has "The Little King and the Promised Land" been used by Nintendo. The Official Nintendo Magazine calls it "The Small King And The Promised Country". --Super Shy Guy Bros.Not shy? 23:40, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
It's what Square Enix calls the game that counts. — Blue。 08:59, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I moved the entry to FFCC: the little king, here is the source: [1] Fumiaki Shiraishi (Square-Enix) and Toshiro Tsuchida (Producer, Square-Enix) are giving a presentation during GDC about the development of the game, and that name is used. Tehw1k1 (talk) 05:01, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

That's great! But since it is a move, I would recommend another official or reliable source to support it because we might have to change a lot of wikilinks later. But good job anyway! — Blue。 06:19, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I found the official English title hereMmark089 (talk) 04:29, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

OK here is the final final name: FFCC: MY life as a king [2]Tehw1k1 (talk) 14:11, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Here's Nintendo's press release that mentions it: http://press.nintendo.com/articles.jsp?id=14682 Misterkillboy (talk) 14:30, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I wish we could have wait for at least a press release from Square Enix on the official title. Oh well. — Blue。 15:59, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, here is a screenshot [3]Tehw1k1 (talk) 14:45, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

This is why I love Wikipedia! Thanks! — Blue。 15:03, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blocks

According to IGN, the game may take up to 200 blocks (25 MB), I think this is an important information

http://wii.ign.com/articles/861/861745p1.html

That seems notable to this article, please, go ahead and add it.Kuro Woof 22:29, 5 April 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kurowoofwoof111 (talk • contribs)

[edit] DLC

Castle Update (100 Points) is listed as one of the pieces of DLC available, at least in the Japanese version of the game, but I have not been able to find any sources for this information. Is this update really available? It's not available in today's North American release, so I'm thinking about deleting this, along with cleaning up the DLC part of the article altogether. Josh7289 (talk) 03:35, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

North America doesn't have the Tower of Eternity or the Library either. -- VederJuda (talk) 14:06, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
Both the Tower of Eternity and the Library will be downloadable from June 2008 so it´s logical they aren´t available yet. Neo, 08:22, 14 May 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.153.120.74 (talk)

[edit] GAN

A second opinion has been requested, and I am here to offer an assessment.

  • NoNIs it well written - No. The prose isn't horrible, but it definitely doesn't fit GA criteria. The only good section is the gameplay, and I have a vague feeling that the text there is copyrighted by the source provided. Anyways, the entire article needs a prose check.
  • YesYIs it factually accurate and verifiable - Good job. IGN and Gamespot are all verifiable. I see some unknown ones, but they seem verifiable nonetheless. "The Characters" section needs cites.
  • NoNIs it broad in its coverage - There isn't enough text to be "broad in its coverage". The only thing it talks about is its uniqueness as a Final Fantasy game (WiiWare, sending other people to battle for you), but not saying what's actually important: Reception, Development (especially), and more factors of Gameplay.
  • YesYIs it neutral - Nothing wrong with this. Everything seems great and neutral. If you can find a single good review, put it in the review box to balance it out. The text, however, is perfect.
  • YesY Is it stable - I see nothing wrong.
  • YesYIs it illustrated, if possible, by images - that image in the plot needs lower-resolution to comply with fair use as well as better placement.
  • NoN There is no fancruft - This is especially important in video games. Downloadable content is 90% fancruft; only a few of that can stay. The characters section seems like it now, but can be brushed up. Development section needs serious expansion. --haha169 (talk) 00:16, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

There you go. A full assessment. Please fix it up immediately. To the Original Reviewer: It is still your decision to pass/fail. Using my assessment, please provide your own assessment as well. To the Nominator - remember the GA criteria: "not all articles have enough things to cite in order to become a Good Article". --haha169 (talk) 00:13, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the review! I disagree with you about the downloadable content, as a large portion of the game is downloadable and since its a Wiiware game those are crucial elements. If you have a suggestion as to how to trim it, let me know. Also, the image is comparable to the size of images in the Final Fantasy XI featured article, and is only bigger because computers are generally full screen and this game is made for a widescreen television. I'll work on those noted you gave. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 03:59, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
I don’t know. The intro of downloadable content is fine, but all those Wii points and things you can buy seems like fancruft or advertisement to me. If you don’t want to lower the resolution of the image, that’s perfectly fine. It might be brought up again in FAC, but I don’t really care about that at the moment. If you can increase the development section, that would be great! Cheers, --haha169 (talk) 04:42, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
I fail to see how a detailed list of what is available, and the prices thereof, is somehow information that should be kept hidden. If Wikipedia's goal is to be as complete as possible, the content should be returned. There is nothing "fancruft" that I see about listing the "complete" version of the game.75.60.15.32 (talk) 02:48, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry but Wikipedia is not meant to be as complete as possible. It's an encyclopedia, and thus is only meant to include encyclopedic information. Please see WP:NOT for explanations about all the things that Wikipedia are not. Kariteh (talk) 07:38, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Remember That one good review is only to balance out; if you can't find it, I won't fail the article. There are other priorities. But I seriously think this can pass; and you can add it to the Final Fantasy Featured Topic! --haha169 (talk) 04:47, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Don't fail yet, been real busy, should get to this in the next 48 hours. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 05:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
You're lucky. I was just about to fail. See if you can expand the Development and Reception sections, cite the "currently available" DCs, and cite the gameplay section with more than 2 sources. Its a lot to do within 48 hours, but we'll see. --haha169 (talk) 22:53, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[4] shows me that you have done some large improvements to the article. That's great and all, but its lacking references... --haha169 (talk) 22:47, 1 June 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Failed "good article" nomination

This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of June 6, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: It has decent prose, but not amazingly enough that it can pass GAC on its own.
2. Factually accurate?: Can't be sure, due to lack of verifiable references.
3. Broad in coverage?: This is a downloadable game, so there can't be a lot of stuff to mention. Again, unsure due to lack of verifiable references.
4. Neutral point of view?: YesY Pass
5. Article stability? YesY Pass
6. Images?: YesY Pass

I've given FIFTEEN days to fix only a handful of minor issues, as well as adding more references. Certainly a Final Fantasy game has more verifiable references than this? Also, next to none of my concerns (especially those about Downloadable Content) were addressed. I also see that there has been no activity on this article for the past few days, so I’m afraid I’m going to have to fail this article.

When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far.— haha169 (talk) 00:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Now, let me give you guys some suggestions. It should work the next time you apply at the GAN, which I believe will be soon. First of all, the entire Gameplay section (excluding DC) has a grand total of 3 refs, re-used multiple times. There needs to be more, especially considering the size of those 4 paragraphs. Also, I can't believe I'm saying this, but... The plot needs a small bit of expansion (you trimmed too much), and the development section needs huge amounts of expansion, text wise, and ref-adding. (It currently only has 2 refs). Also, add some refs into the lead, since not everything there is mentioned/cited within the article. However, I am proud with the status of the reception section. That is a model section. Keep it. :)--haha169 (talk) 03:41, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks so much for your through review and ample time to fix up the article, I have just been so busy in real life I have had no time to work on it, so I'm sorry about that. It should be an easy article to lift up to GA if someone has the time, and I'm sure it will happen soon. :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 05:39, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Currently available downloads section fixed up

I've gone ahead and fixed this section, as it doesn't contain the right names for the packs, based on the official manual. I also don't agree with the objectivity of calling Chime's costume "Gothic Lolita". I also think calling the King's outfit a pirate's outfit can be debatable, but I'll leave it like that because of the eye patch. Finally, I've changed the order a bit to reflect both the manual and how it appears on the download screen. It's not really that big of an issue really, just a cosmetic change of order. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GaryCXJk (talk • contribs) 12:57, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] FFCC:MLaaK - Everyone's Kingdom

Should there be a section describing the web-browser-based side-game FINAL FANTASY CRYSTAL CHRONICLES: My Life as a King - Everyone's Kingdom? I would think it would be between the direct game info and the out-of-game info — in this case, between "Characters" and "Development".

For the sake of completeness it should, however, I think it would fit more after "Development", but at least before "Reception".--GaryCXJk (talk) 20:59, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Alright, finished a preliminary version of the Everyone's Kingdom section. Hopefully this covers everything concisely enough. If you're wondering how I know what the Lv.4 house is, my Flash Player had asked if I wanted to discontinue runnings scripts on the page (saying my computer might become unresponsive if I didn't), which then caused the page to cycle through assumably all the display options, including house levels (don't remember if it shifted through colors, though I suppose it did), player classes, and Elementite Gauge fill-up. On the side, this occured a night ago on the DMC site. T.J. Fuller, Jr. (talk) 08:34, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and can we get "Everyone's Kingdom"/"everyone's kingdom" to redirect to this? I'm unaware of how to do so. T.J. Fuller, Jr. (talk) 08:38, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] NA official site completely useless for citation: Q&A however not quite

I found that, in comparision to the Japanese FFCCMLAAK site, the North American and European sites are completely useless for citation for mostly the add-on content. In fact, the non-Japanese sites seem less informative as the Japanese site, seeing as they intentionally leave out information to "leave out any spoilers", like information about even the freaking Bakery.

On the other hand, we get more information about the official names for the new add-on content currently not available yet, however, no notion of release dates, although we can assume they're being released in June.

http://member.square-enix.com/na/features/mlaak/01/

However, that's all that can be said. Certain other things can be cited from that site, but they are mostly already discussed. So, until we actually get the information needed, this article will lack some useful information, unless we go by the Japanese naming.

I also feel that even though the Wii points after the DLC could have been removed, removing the rest was kind of unnecessary, and probably even resulted in the removal of some information other articles do have about their DLC. Even just a list of the available DLC would be sufficient. Also, and I'm saying this again, I feel that Wikipedia does hold double standards against certain articles. Whereas some articles do have pricing listed, others don't, because "it's not right" or "feels like fancruft". I feel that you either remove the pricing on all articles, or you leave / add individual pricing on the articles.

I think that you really need to be consistent with everything.--GaryCXJk (talk) 20:56, 30 May 2008 (UTC)