Talk:Kingdom Hearts (series)/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Upcoming Installments Trailer

Does anyone think its worth while to add a section to the article about the Kingdom Hearts II: Final Mix + teaser? The Article mentions it, but it doesnt really tell people about its content. Other game pages on wiki would have mentioned a list of characters, or rumurs regarding the characters names. If one was to be writen, would we refer to it as a teaser for a prequel, or a teaser for a sequel or would it be best to hold off till its confirmed by Square Enix as to the story of the game. Reasons for thinking it might be a sequel - Villain looks like older version of Xehanort's Heartless. Baaleos 09:51, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Detailing the teaser is pointless. None of it has context and would only serve to confuse and bore a general audience. "Lists of characters" would be terrible prose and overstating the relevance in the real world. Rumors? Absolutely not. Not only does it fail WP:ATT, it's not "rumor". It's full-blown speculation by bored people on message boards; nobody cares. ' 10:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Mention of the trailer has been made in the discussion archives, would it be relevent to mention in the article about upcoming kingdom hearts titles, or related titles? Also, on another note, and this probably needs a separate discussion point, but somone else suggested a kingdom hearts keyblade section, would this be worth while adding to the article, or having a separate article to prevent crowding? Baaleos 17:48, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
The teaser is already mentioned. ' 22:08, 6 May 2007 (UTC)


Regarding the Music section

Does "Hand in Hand" deserve to be mentioned as a theme for the series as a whole, like Dearly Beloved? I mean, it appears in the end of KH and KH2, and the "Memories in Pieces" track of RE:CoM uses it as its foundation.HadesDragon 00:16, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


Vandalism

It has become apparent to me that someone has blanked the article. Why that would be, I don't know, I didn't really see why someone would do something like that, vandalism excluded.

So, can someone rewrite the article, please? I'm new and wouldn't have any idea on how to begin...HadesDragon 20:49, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

You don't need too, all you need to do it go into History, go to the page that was saved before, click edit, copy the HTML, and then go to the current page, click edit and paste it in there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.4.94.69 (talk)

Regarding Kingdom Hearts (series)#Upcoming installments

Please stop the edit war going on in this section. While personally I can say that I would like to hear about news regarding a new installment, I would much rather read about it in some reputable magazine or article on the internet. If it has been announced, please add a source that other people can verify. Something that a normal person can click on or look up with relative ease. That way the information can be moved into a development section once the game has been released. This article already has enough information that is unverified and it's going to take a while to go through it and find appropriate sources. Like I said, personally I think that's exciting news and I hope it's true, but without any reliable source, I, and others, don't know if it is true or just the wishfully thinking of fans. (Guyinblack25 20:13, 13 May 2007 (UTC))

Merger proposal

The V-CAST game is a stub, and will probably remain one. Here is an example, Chrono (series), where a stubby game was made part of the main series article to great benefit to the series article. It would bolster the topic immensely on its way to Featured Topic status. Judgesurreal777 02:53, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Future Installments

The KHIII notes are missing concerning the interview with Nomura. When he stated that the KHIII installment would be a new series.

Sorry my bad...I had accidently unplugged my internet cable on my PC. Rgoodermote 20:56 June 10, 2007 UTC

Revisions

I've begun to rewrite the entire page to be a more general reference and not give so much detail on the individual games since they already have their own pages. I have already revised the Kingdom Hearts section. If it looks good I will continue with the rest. (ZookPS3 21:58, 13 June 2007 (UTC))

I reverted because there was little difference in the information, and you wrote things in a very strange and subjective tone, like "It became an instant hit and thus was released to the American consumer on September 17th, 2002." (It was released in America because it as an instant hit?) and "The new American version included all new voice actors" ("all new voice actors" makes no sense). You also included completely unsupported assertions, like "Due to the overwelming demand for the bosses in Japan, Squaresoft released a new exclusive Japanese updated version of Kingdom Hearts".

Rewrite

Ok, this thing is starting to get on my nerves. Every time I look at this article it fries my brain trying to think of how to organize all this info. Here are some ideas that I'm thinking of, maybe some collaborative feedback between the editors can help get this article in better shape. In no particular order.

  • Games section - Should it be rewritten into a of couple condensed paragraphs and have the games listed in a chronological table of some sorts? Or should it be kept in its current format and copy edited.
  • Design section - I think the first paragraph in there is out of place, not sure where it should go though. I do think that the various common gameplay elements should be organized though into subsection here.
  • Audio section - I organized the Music section into a subsection of a new Audio one and added voice acting since it is notable. I think this format is good, but the current content needs to be rewritten. I tried edited it some, but I feel it has a while to go.
  • Development section - I noticed that a lot of game series article don't have a development section, so I'm not sure what to do with this section. I got rid of the info there that wasn't cited since it had been up there and unsourced for a long time.

I'm sure this is the tip of the ice berg with this article but we got to start somewhere right. Let me know what you guys think. The Kingdom Hearts game articles have made a lot of progress lately and I'd hate to see all that momentum end with this article. (Guyinblack25 22:41, 19 June 2007 (UTC))

You can take the Chrono (series) article as a model perhaps, it is at Good Article status currently. :) Judgesurreal777 22:53, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I was trying to look at other series articles to create the layout for this one, but each is so different I kept hitting a wall on what to do for this one. The ones I looked at are, Devil May Cry (series), The Legend of Zelda (series), Chrono (series), Resident Evil (series), and Final Fantasy (series). They all have different types of sections and sometimes the sections that are similarly named have different content. That's why I was hoping we could nail down some of that here for this article. Any thoughts? (Guyinblack25 15:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC))

Hmmm...I suggest using the Chrono series as a model. If it has good article status, it's good enough to use. I guess each series is different, so they each require a different article structure. For now, let's try the Chrono series. As for the games section, I feel the current format is good.HadesDragon 16:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Not trying to argue, just want to clarify the direction we're heading. All the series articles I listed, except for Final Fantasy, are at good article status. Do we still want to emulate the Chronos series article? (Guyinblack25 17:45, 20 June 2007 (UTC))

Oh, ALL of them are at good article status? Silly me, I hadn't noticed. If such is the case, I'm at a loss. I think it would be best if we heard other people's opinions...HadesDragon 19:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I've always had a problem with the series articles. The problem is that there has never been a "series" type featured article to base the others off of. I'll try to help but I start work soon... Axem Titanium 20:38, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, question. What does everybody think about the "Reception" section? The only series that have it are the Zelda and Resident Evil ones, and even then they mainly only mention specific games in the series. Should the "Reception" section be removed? The only information I've ever seen regarding the reception of the series is the "10 million shipped worldwide" and that can go in the lead paragraph. Any thoughts? (Guyinblack25 22:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC))


Personally, I have no problem with the Reception section, but I think other might feel differently...HadesDragon 22:22, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I also think it's fine as is. It is not so small that it definitely should be merged, but we could grow it a sentence or too... By the by, I think this article is very close to GA article candidacy :) Judgesurreal777 23:05, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

To do list

Ok, it feels like it's starting to make some progress. Here's what I think needs to be done, let me know what you guys think.

  • Rewrite/expand the "Design" section. I guess something that emulates the Chrono (series) article. What do you guys think?
  • Expand and copy edit the "Common gameplay elements" section.
  • Do a copy edit of the "Games" section.
  • Copy edit the "Audio" section. I personally think the middle paragraph in the "Musical score" can be removed. What does everyone else think?
  • Rewrite/expand the "Reception" section.
  • Copy edit "Manga" section.
  • Write the "Novels" section. I don't know if the other games had novels, but I know KHII did.
  • Properly cite article.

If there are any other ideas or thoughts of how we should go about this please let me know, cause I'm flying blind on this one. (Guyinblack25 16:45, 21 June 2007 (UTC))

I nominated the article for GA status, its already very good. Also, we will still have some time, the que seems somewhat long. Judgesurreal777 06:57, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm kind of at a loss at what to do with the "Reception" section. While gathering info for the game articles, I don't remember coming across references that could be used to cite what's currently there. If the I've got a few ideas of what to replace it with but I think it will only be enough for a short paragraph. Any thoughts? (Guyinblack25 15:30, 28 June 2007 (UTC))
The Mana (series) article was reformatted for GA status, maybe take a look at that one... Judgesurreal777 19:09, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Reception Section

Can someone please edit the Reception section because the only thing in the whole section supported by statistics was the last sentence. If i were to edit it the last sentence would be the only one but I'm still new to the Major editing so I would wish someone with more experience handle it.Sun Li 08:18, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

That's currently on the to-do list. To be honest, I'm still on the fence on whether there's enough to fill a "Reception" section. All the other game series articles don't really have a section like that. The ones that do only really mention a few games in the series. I know I've brought this up before, but what does everyone think about removing the "Reception" section altogether? If someone else has any ideas to expand it, go for it, but I keep hitting walls. Any thoughts? (Guyinblack25 17:23, 1 July 2007 (UTC))

Meh, I don't really know, maybe we should remove it...HadesDragon 18:10, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I think the article would be better off without it. It belongs in the individual game articles, and it calls up too much personal synthesis to have it for the entire series. ' 19:42, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Since it was more original research then actual facts, I went ahead and deleted it. Lionheart08 20:47, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Are there any objections to removing the content. Because if we can't improve it, I think it'll end up keeping the article from progressing to GA status. If someone can find enough referenced content, we can keep it. Thoughts? (Guyinblack25 15:10, 2 July 2007 (UTC))
I guess move it if it can't stand on its own. Judgesurreal777 17:02, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Incidentally, the reception section in Mana (series) actually had to be deleted for the article to pass GA (see Talk:Mana (series)#GAC). See if it's a relevant similarity. Kariteh 17:13, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
The article is mainly about the whole series; receptions for each of the games can go in their separate articles. I believe the question is not only if there is enough referenced content, but if it overlooks on the series as a whole, since the rest of the article follows suit. DiamondDragon contact 08:55, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Common gameplay elements section

What does everybody think should be in this section? The Keyblade info and Heartless section were recently removed, and rightfully so, since they do deal more with plot. But then again, so does the "Disney and Final Fantasy cameos" section. I added in the Heartless and keyblade info after looking at the Mana (series) article. Looking back I also see that they have their section labeled as "Common elements". Should we expand the section to encompass all common elements in the series or keep it at simply the gameplay elements? Thoughts? (Guyinblack25 18:39, 3 July 2007 (UTC))

My feelings are that we should keep the gameplay in this article, and use Universe of Kingdom Hearts for plot-related stuff. I'm not sure what to do about the character section, since it's not really plot, nor is it gameplay. ' 21:11, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

KH3

Founf this: http://img154.imageshack.us/img154/4255/kingdomhearts3mv1.jpg

Anyone confirm any info? 76.223.111.148 04:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)Artistthatneverwas

Do I honestly need to say anything? ' 06:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Don't worry, I'll say it. To all the users that are very excited about future Kingdom Hearts games, please read the section in the article, Kingdom Hearts (series)#Future installments. If that doesn't help clear things up, then please read the source material for that section as well. The development team is currently working on other non-Kingdom Hearts projects, and has stated that the next game is not "Kingdom Hearts III". Given that information, it can be deduced that this image is a fan creation.
For further information regarding the constant edits which have added "KHIII: Keyblade Wars" into the article, please read the section above, Talk:Kingdom Hearts (series)#Regarding Kingdom Hearts (series)#Upcoming_installments. Information like that needs to be sourced so that it can used for a "Development" section later after a game has been released. Right now, between interviews from the series' director which say "the next title will not be KHIII" and a single image that is floating around the internet, we have to go with the interviews because they are the more reliable source of information.
I can understand everyone's excitement toward future titles in this series which I personally think is a great series. I may not speak for everyone, but I'm sure the editors here that have been trying to improve the articles agree. Because we think it's a great series, we want it to be a great article. But to do that we have to stick to Wikipedia's guidelines and policies, and that means we have to keep unproven rumors and unsourced statements off of the article. We appreciate everyone's eagerness to help, but please stay within Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. (Guyinblack25 16:14, 4 July 2007 (UTC))
It's fake. Just look at the side: it says "Kingdom Hearts II." Kikiluvscheese 19:54, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Good article nomination on hold

This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of July 4, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Pass A few gramatical points here and there, but overall pretty good.
2. Factually accurate?: Fail Needs more sources. There are many statements made within the article that need sources. Looking at Kingdom Hearts and Kingdom Hearts II, they both have over 70 sources each. I would suggest looking in those articles to get more places you can source.
3. Broad in coverage?: Pass Very thorough. Great work.
4. Neutral point of view?: Pass Great work.
5. Article stability? Pass Many recent edits, but most of them minor.
6. Images?: Fail The first image in the article and the CD cover image do not have fair use rationale. See Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria.
  • Y Done Fair use rationales have been added for the images. (Guyinblack25 16:14, 4 July 2007 (UTC))

Overall: It is a great article that just needs a little more work. That is why I am going to put this on hold. The first thing that needs to be done is rationale for those pictures. After that, I would advise sourcing this article as much as possible. Overall, great work and I know that if the changes are made, this article will be a GA in no time.

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far. —

When you have made the changes, please notify me on my talk page so I can re-evaluate it. Thanks! :) Z1720 06:30, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

With the FURs added, the only thing left is that the reviewer did not believe that 50 references is enough. While it would need more references for FAC, it definitely references well enough for GAC. As such, I am going to pass this myself. --PresN 16:38, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:KingdomHeartsIICover.jpg

Image:KingdomHeartsIICover.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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 21:02, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

It is now fixed, no worries. Greg Jones II 16:24, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the Voice acting section

Let's please try to avoid an edit war, they don't help the article and they don't do anybody any good. The reason those three particular names are listed is because they are three of the main protagonists for the series and they were the only three main characters listed in the source that is cited for that sentence. While I would agree that the voice acting section could use some additional info, I don't think that adding more names from the English voice cast will really add that much. I think the current list conveys the idea that it had an all-star cast. This in no way implies that Billy Zane is not an all-star or notable actor. I think the dude rocks, but his name won't really add anything extra to the article. (Guyinblack25 23:34, 11 July 2007 (UTC))

Besides, one can't drop his name in the sentence without providing a source to back up the claim (everybody knows it's true, but it's a Featured Article candidate, so it must be verifiable), as the source currently used for the sentence does not mention Billy Zane. Kariteh 21:57, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Alright, but I thought that Zane was worth mentioning because he's a notable actor who voices the villain of the game. This is Wikipedia, not a replica of Gamepro, and it doesn't mean we should stick strictly to that site's list. But, as you said, this is a Featured Article candidate, so I won't ruin it. But I still think Zane is worth mentioning, especially if he was made famous by the highest-grossing film of all time. Jienum 10:15, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
He's currently listed on this article, "Kingdom Hearts (series)", and I just added him to the first game's article, "Kingdom Hearts", along with a source. It seemed kinda weird that he was on the series page, but not on the one game page he actually was in. It's not that we didn't want him in there, we just didn't really see a need to list him and we need proper sourcing to do so. Anyway, he's in there now, and I think the current list adequately conveys the idea that the game had an all-star cast. (Guyinblack25 talk 14:45, 7 September 2007 (UTC))

Game Glitches

I've been looking through the list of various Kingdom Hearts game glitches, and want to know if anyone thinks there should be an article, or even slightest mention of it. One in perticular: if one manages to jump to an invisable platform at the end of the game on Destiny Island (KH1 to clerify, and it must be done at end of world before you aproch the secret place) one can run on invisable platforms extrymly far from, high above (to a point where part of the sky dissaperes and all that is seen is blackness and water below) and around to the back of the island. It's really very facinateing(sp?) In addition, there have been numerous of strange and random glitches ibn KHII. I'm not sure if it's worth mentoning, but these glitches requier none of the game cheeting things (the only one i know the name of is game shark but im fairly sure it only works on gameboy).Here is a video that shows the glitch i tried to explain: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGn2gFGvVZs

it's probably not worth mentioning, but i thought I'd bring it up anyway. And i don't mean just a random cheet, just a little glitch that lets you reach places you shouldn't, and dosn't really effect game play.Kimitala 08:36, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

No. Definitely not notable enough.HadesDragon 18:27, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Featured Topic nomination

Should we be going for a featured topic already, the first game article looks like it was passed by a bot and not by a consensus. On top of that, we haven't even gotten the other game articles to FA either. Yes all the articles have come a long way, but they're not finished yet. I'm excited about getting it to featured topic as much as the next editor, but doesn't this all seems a bit rushed. Besides, don't we need "several articles of featured class" to make it to FT, as in more than one? (Guyinblack25 16:25, 16 July 2007 (UTC))

OK, so I'm gonna take some risks. igordebraga ≠ 15:49, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Second rewrite

Hey everyone, just thought I'd throw out some ideas for reorganizing the article in hopes of improving it to FA.

  1. Add a "Series overview" section and placing the "Common gameplay elements" section in there. Since the KH series has one main story that connects the three main games, I figure we should mention that and briefly explain the plot.
  2. Move the "Development" section below the overview and games sections.
  3. Add a reception section, even if we have to scrape together bits of the individual games. I know I was in favor of removing it, but the more I bounced it around my head, the more I began to realize we'd need it for FA.
  4. Create a "Merchandise" section and place the "Literary adaptations" section in there.

Any thoughts or suggestions? (Guyinblack25 talk 16:57, 21 August 2007 (UTC))

Good ideas, also keep track of the Mana (series) Featured article nomination currently in progress for what they say, as it is the first series article up for it. Judgesurreal777 20:19, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
That is a really good idea. Oh, and by the way, I have put this article up for peer review at Wikipedia:Peer review/Kingdom Hearts (series)/archive1. Any comments on improvement on there will be very much apreciated. Greg Jones II 23:59, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
You read my mind Jones. (Guyinblack25 talk 00:16, 22 August 2007 (UTC))
Games Section - What about the cover images in the "Games" section. They had to be removed in the media list, do you guys think they should be removed from this article, except for the VCAST one, and possibly reformat the section? Any thoughts? (Guyinblack25 talk 03:30, 22 August 2007 (UTC))
Here's an example of what we could do with the games section. It would shorten the length by not having to worry about the images and it would shorten the ToC a bit too. The first image could be any one of the games, or one of the ones Axem found. Any thoughts? (Guyinblack25 talk 15:12, 22 August 2007 (UTC))
That looks good. Anything else that might need polishing can be done once it's been inserted into the article. Axem Titanium 15:33, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Story Section - I added in a story section. It's kinda lengthy so someone may want to trim it down some more. If it can't be organized properly we may want to remove it altogether. Let me know what y'all think. (Guyinblack25 talk 05:24, 22 August 2007 (UTC))
Hey hey, everyone. Until now, I've avoid this article like the plague (because series articles are always soo difficult). But anyway, I'm hoping we can get this article to FA also. For the games section, since this isn't a list article, fair use is much easier to defend. However, to be safe, I think we can remove the covers and replace them with a box shot of KH Final Mix ([1]? At the bottom). For story, try to be bare-bones since it's obviously redundant with the game articles' story sections. Like, glaze over everything. Axem Titanium 13:30, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Or the KHFM Ultimate Hits Box, which is more colorful: [2]. Axem Titanium 13:31, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Quick question, should the story section be divided into subsections titled after the main games? Would that help with readability? (Guyinblack25 talk 14:50, 22 August 2007 (UTC))
I think it should be short enough that subsections aren't necessary. I'll help trimming this in a bit. Axem Titanium 15:01, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Woahh, I think the story section should be a broad overview of the arcs and themes of the series, not a detailed description of everything that happens. Kariteh 15:42, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm not married to what is currently there. I mainly just copied and pasted from the stories in the game articles and tried trimming it down. It is in definite need of copy editing, but I'm actually at a loss on how to go about that with this. We're open to better alternatives. Could you elaborate more on what you had in mind? (Guyinblack25 talk 15:55, 22 August 2007 (UTC))
I didn't play any of the 3 games so I don't know exactly, but I think the section should give the broad themes and story arcs, and concentrate on how they evolve in the series, rather than precisely describe every distinct event. Kind of like the character summaries in Characters of Final Fantasy VIII or Squall Leonhart. The Squall article is really interesting in that aspect; look at all the terms of the lexical field of evolution: "as time progresses", "he grows", "throughout the game", "gradually", etc. (see Krelian for the absolute contrary; it's Krelian does this, later Krelian does that, then he does this, then he does that, etc.). With this logic, perhaps it might be easier to write an original summary, starting from scratch, rather than try to trim something which is so detailed that it's difficult to work with. Sorry if it's too theorical or something; it's just my opinion :) Kariteh 16:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
I made a shorter summary of the first two game on my sandbox. Is this more along the lines you were thinking of? I'm not sure how to do the third game, any ideas/suggestions would be apprecited. (Guyinblack25 talk 16:04, 24 August 2007 (UTC))
That's good. I like it. Axem Titanium 01:08, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
Yep, it looks fine. Kariteh 11:09, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
Lead section - Should we try to expand the lead to three paragraphs? Other than that and a couple thorough copy edits, I can't think of what else to do here. After clean up is finished I guess the next logical step is FAC. Anyone else think it's as close as we can get it? (Guyinblack25 talk 15:17, 27 August 2007 (UTC))
I think the peer review is next, followed by FAC. Greg Jones II 15:49, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Oh, almost forgot, the wikilinks need to be fixed up. Also, can you fix up some issues that I have? That would be very much appreciated. Just to clarify, I was the main pusher of all the FACs for the Kingdom Hearts games, so I will be doing some editing as well. Greg Jones II 16:46, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
I have now requested information at Wikipedia:Peer review/Automated to see if this article can be improved. Greg Jones II 16:51, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

The "Future Installments" section

I know the knights are mentioned there already, but should we also mention their names? I think it's a relevant piece of information.HadesDragon 02:11, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Sure, as long as there's a source for it. I thought that myself, but didn't know where to find a source :-P (Guyinblack25 talk 03:37, 25 August 2007 (UTC))
Did it. Does that count as a realible source? And if does, did I do it right?HadesDragon 04:29, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, that's just fine. I believe fansites are usable if they are interview translations. I added the publisher (the website) and the date the page was accessed. The more info provided for references the better. Thanks for the addition. (Guyinblack25 talk 05:04, 25 August 2007 (UTC))

FA Push

Hey, everybody. Think we can get this article to FA status before or after the 5th anniversary of the North American release of the first game? After it goes through a peer review, we can push this for FA. All of the games are now FA, but this page is the only one left for FAC. Any comments or objections? I was the main pusher and nominator of the FAs for KH, KH: CoM and KHII. Greg Jones II 22:26, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like a plan, this article and the other KH articles are awesome thanks to Guy. Judgesurreal777 20:59, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
I was also the main editor with Guyinblack25 on the KH articles. Greg Jones II 21:03, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Doesn't matter who did what. It was an excellent group effort and with lots of people doing different things. (Guyinblack25 talk 21:50, 27 August 2007 (UTC))
Yeah. I generally just revert vandalism, I think the knights' names are probably the only somewhat significant contribution. But we really owe you a lot, Guy. Yeah, the article can be pushed to FA.HadesDragon 22:10, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

All I can say is.... "SWWWEEEEETTTTT!!!!!!" We did it guys. I never expected these articles to get this far. All we need now is to get Characters of Kingdom Hearts up to GA and we can round out the FT. Once again, great team effort guys. (Guyinblack25 talk 02:19, 10 September 2007 (UTC))

Mickey's Keyblade

Wasn't sure where to bring this up, so I fugred the series's page would work. Thanks to SQUARE ENIX's North American online store opening up, we now have a name for King MIckey's Keyblade (or at least it's name with its keychain attached): DarkSide or Dark Side. I'd err on the nomanclencuresp? of the names of those big Pureblood Heartless, like the one Riku attracted to the Destiny Islands, or that were seen in the Kingdom Hearts. You guys have any idea where this info would be best put to use, if at all?

http://www.square-enix-shop.com/usa/dsp_product.cfm?product_id=57 —Preceding unsigned comment added by TJF588 (talk • contribs) 00:55, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

It's just some merchandising trivia. It's not notable for Wikipedia. Kariteh 15:31, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Um, the name is "Kingdom Key (DarkSide)". As in, the Kingdom Key from the realm of darkness. "DarkSide" is more of a descriptor than an actual name. ' 16:29, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
...yeah, I'm with Apostrophe and Kariteh on this one...HadesDragon 16:41, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't remember where I heard this at but I remember that somewhere it was called Reqiem. Again I have no clue of where this came from but i thought i would mention it. Kou Nurasaka 14:57, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Just a note, Dark Yojimbo is also called "DarkSide" on that same website, lending credence to the fact that it's just a descriptor. Axem Titanium 21:47, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

New games

Kingdom Hearts 358/2 Days, Kingdom Hearts Birth by Sleep, and Kingdom Hearts Coded are up now. Feel free to modify, merge, whatever. ' 05:02, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

We should monitor and develop these articles closely so that we can add them to the KH Featured Topic as soon as it's physically possible (like, one or two months after their release dates or something). Otherwise the FT will eventually be contested for being incomplete. Kariteh 14:03, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Noted (Guyinblack25 talk 14:13, 21 September 2007 (UTC))