Talk:Shadow of the Colossus/Archive 4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.

Alright then. Let's talk about the large and small section.

I thought it was nonsense and removed it, but apparently it deserves to stay in. That was the first edit I've made to the article, so I apologise if there was a discussion about this in the past where you agreed to keep it in. Having said that, I'd like to know what makes it significant. -- Steel 11:46, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

I personally think large-and-small is a big concept of the game. Considering that the Shrine of Worship is basically a huge version of the Save Shrines, and that there are lizards and birds around, which have Colossi analogs, and that Wander and Agro even have Colossi analogs, it's rather interesting. Add to that the fact that there's a humongous, colossal tree, to analog with the ordinary-sized ones that can be seen, I'm almost certain this large-and-small comparison is intentional.
However, I can't confirm that; does any of the making-of or design web sites or so on suggest that this relationship was intentional, or important? It might be good to cite at least some kind of verifiable source. I'm a big fan of including whatever is appropriate to the article, and I do think this is perfectly viable to include, but it does need something to stand on... -JC 18:28, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Just because there's big versions and small versions of things in a game doesn't make "Large and Small" a theme. For example, the player travels across many different types of terrain in SotC (desert, forest, etc). But that doesn't mean that "contrast" is a theme. To take another example: in Zelda, there are large and small gorons. Oh my God, Large and Small must be a theme in that game too! I hope you see what I'm getting at.
Like you said yourself - none of this has been confirmed, so even if it is a theme, it should be killed per Wikipedia:Verifiability until there's evidence from the developers. -- Steel 18:46, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

It's been three days, and no-one has given any more reasons why this should stay. I'm removing it on the basis that it's unintentional and made up by fans - which it is until the developers say otherwise. -- Steel 18:00, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I think you may have missed the point of the verifiability thing. It need not be that the developers have said that the large and small theme was intentional. There need only be a published (electronic or paper) source for it, examining the matter. Use this. The large and small theme is -- regardless of whether or not it was intentional -- something that is most obviously there, and is certainly notable. I think this section should be restored. Ryu Kaze 22:34, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, it already was. Well, nevermind. Ryu Kaze 23:01, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

For anyone else following this, take a look at my talk page and Schicksal's talk page for further discussion. Anyway, I still think the Large and Small section cannot stay as it is. Saying "The birds and Avion are both flying creatures, and both can carry Wander through the air." is not evidence for a large and small theme. A few vague relationships between the small animals and the colossi does not make large and small a theme. To take Zelda as an example again, there are fish in the sea of Majora's Mask, and there's also a fish boss. That does not make large and small a theme in that game. It is not "obviously there". And the FAQ that you provided essentially confirms that it's made up by fans. Also, regarding the FAQ, please read WP:RS, specifically, the following:

"A self-published source is a published source that has not been subject to any form of independent fact-checking, or where no one stands between the writer and the act of publication. It includes personal websites, and books published by vanity presses.

Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, and then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published books, personal websites, and blogs are largely not acceptable as sources."

Summary: There is no significance in the relationship between the fish and the fish colossus, and that information does not belong in the article.-- Steel 16:37, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I apologise if I came across a bit confrontational. It was not my intention. -- Steel 18:01, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Steel's right, while there are large and small objects in the game, it doesnt make it a prevelant theme.--Awesome Username 21:42, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I haven't really been paying attention to the article recently. I'll give you my input(yes/no) on each entry in this section to help cut it down/rewrite it.

Agro and Phaedra both have an equine configuration. questionable, i'd have to play again to see how similar looking they really are, but i'm going to say no
The birds and Avion are both flying creatures, and both can carry Wander through the air. this is interesting, because you wouldn't think the small birds could carry a man, although they can in the game. should probably be rewritten.
The fish and Hydrus are both aquatic animals, and both can drag Wander around underwater. see above
The lizards and Kuromori are both reptilian in nature, and both land on their backs and struggle to right themselves when dislodged from walls. yes, their animations/behavior are very similar, which helps to support a theme
The tortoises and Basaran also share physiologies. would have to look again
Wander has many counterparts among the colossi: Valus, Gaius, Barba, Argus, and Malus are all humanoid, although Malus, with its huge stone 'skirt', is more likely a counterpart to Mono. Valus, Gaius, and Argus carry weapons in their right hands. should be rewritten and merged into some kind of "general similarities"
Just south of Dirge's cave is a mesa featuring a dead tree the size of a colossus: a stark contrast to the smaller fruit-bearing trees found throughout the land. yes, the tree is seriously huge, it's one of my favorite sights in the game
Also in that cave tiny Bats can be found which could be seen as small versions of Dormin* would have to play again
The save points around the world are miniature versions of the Shrine of Worship. yes

Schicksal 13:51, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

What you are doing here is original research, which is not what Wikipedia is for. I'd still like to see a reliable external source which says that large and small is a theme. Unfortunately, FAQs don't qualify due to, as it says on WP:RS, "no one stands between the writer and the act of publication". -- Steel 13:57, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Uh, no, what I am doing is giving you my input on revising the section, as you said you wanted to do. We've been over this. That section does not need to be cited. It's a theme. Do you honestly think it's required by the developers that they say "yes, we do this and we meant it to mean exactly this" for a Wikipedia article to be published? A theme is not something that the developers necessarily even need to have intended. You are going to wait a long time before a reputable publication puts out an article based on the (mind-numbingly obvious) theme of Large and Small in Shadow of the Colossus. Either rewrite it like you said you were going to do or just leave it alone. Don't harm this article due to wanting to follow the letter of the Wikipedia law. There's a lot of articles about things that are impossible to cite - go file AFDs on them instead of trying to remove a section about the relationship between large and small in a game where a little man fights a bunch of huge giants. Schicksal 18:47, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Due to the fact that anyone can edit a Wikipedia article, it is imperative that we source the information we add to articles. This so called theme is not mind numbingly obvious, and even if it was, we would still need an external source. Please read WP:V:

"Information on Wikipedia must be reliable. Facts, viewpoints, theories, and arguments may only be included in articles if they have already been published by reliable and reputable sources. Articles should cite these sources whenever possible. Any unsourced material may be challenged and removed."

I am doing just that. Challenging and trying to remove unsourced fan speculation based on a few vague relationships between animals and colossi. Please understand, this is rule is absolutely crucial for Wikipedia's reputation as an encycopedia. -- Steel 19:00, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

What of the other gameplay info in the article, then? The plot summary, character analyses, and other gameplay info? I don't see citations for them. The problem with no original research is that people tend to take it to extremes, such as you have here - when it's a rule meant to protect clearly false and damaging information from being spread. That guideline was not written with a video game article in mind. I don't appreciate your quoting of that guideline to delete this section when other sections in the same article could also be perceived to be in violation of it. The section is not even well written - you could have made an excellent point to delete it due to the fact that many of the correlations are obvious and a relationship between large and small in a game about colossi is to be expected - but instead you want to delete it based on perceived violation of a rule. This makes me think that you aren't really deleting it because you want to improve the article, you just don't like the section. That is OK, but it is really preferable to rewrite or somehow integrate the info with the rest of the article rather than obliterating it.

Please understand, this is rule is absolutely crucial for Wikipedia's reputation as an encycopedia. If Wikipedia's reputation hinges on this one rule, then we are really in trouble, because click the random article button a few times and you'll end up with a few articles that are mostly uncited, and feature user-written descriptions of their subjects. Wikipedia does however have a reputation as a site where you can find relevant/useful info on just about anything, and please don't take away from that by removing this section rather than trying to improve it/integrate it. Thanks. Schicksal 19:40, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, it's Summer and I have a lot of free time. Let's find a source for everything in this article and remove the bits we can't verify. As it says on my user page, I've been looking for something to do here. You're welcome to help, Schicksal. We could even get this to be a featured article if we all pitch in. -- Steel 19:51, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't here to publish unverified original research. I don't quite agree with the lenghty plot summary, but that's more of a style choice for the WikiProject, not me. Character analysis is pushing it, as there's no analysis. As for other gameplay info, the list of Save Points probably should get cut, and the list of Colossi is nice, but not necesarilly appropriate for an encyclopedia article. At least all of that is based on evidence from the game, and manuals, not personal interpretations.

Sadly, the relationship between large and small isn't based on anything concrete in the games. It's more or less the personal analyses and research of people who had nothing to do with the creation of the game. WP:NOR and WP:V both apply here. The claim has not been verified, and while if it is verified, unless the cretors specifically go into depth listing these relationships, that list is also original research. That'll have to go.--Toffile 19:58, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

As I said, I never disagreed with that list being original research. I merely don't feel it's right to kill the list when so many other things in the article suffer from the same problem. That is all, I have no problem with that list getting deleted, as long as other items in the article are also heavily revised/deleted by the same yardstick. Schicksal 20:03, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Also, asking you to examine the entire article for violations is hardly a strawman. A strawman refers to setting up a weak argument and then attributing that argument to the opponent. That is not the case here. Don't patronize my efforts by attributing logical fallacies to me. Steel's argument was perfectly valid, however it applies just as much to the rest of the article as it does to that one section. Anyway, I would be glad to help once we get started on thoughts to improve this article rather than cut it up. Schicksal 20:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Outlining the plot of a game is using the game as an implicitly cited primary source. So is listing or noting the appearance of things in the game. Neither of these are defined as original research. Anyone else can buy the game, play it, and support or refute the text on the page; in this manner, they're no different than citing e.g. books. You can't click on a URL to confirm a book reference, yet books are one of the strongest reference types available.

But when you start "introduc[ing] an analysis or synthesis of established facts, ideas, opinions, or arguments in a way that builds a particular case favored by the editor, without attributing that analysis or synthesis to a reputable source" (WP:NOR) — that's when you get into original research. — Wisq (talk) 21:12, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup

Yeah, so now we're all best friends I think it's time we took a look at the article to see what can go. I also want to get everything referenced, possibly up to featured article standard depending on whether I get any assistance. Anyway, my suggestions,

Description. This can be cut down and added to the introductory paragraphs.
Story. Possibly cut down depending on the response here.
Characters. Not sure what to do about this.
Colossi. I quite like that table, though I'm open to suggestions.
Extras. Instruction manual/strategy guide stuff. Got to go.
Connections to Ico. I think this section is important. In fact, it's the reason I first came to this article. Must be sourced though.
Large and Small. Is that going now?
European version. Staying.
Wander vs Wanda. Cut down to one sentence and added to European version
Japanese packaging. At the moment that's just stuck on the bottom of the article with no real purpose. Maybe European version could be changed to Regional differences and stick the Japanese packaging there.
Early development as Nico. Possibly cut down to one or two sentences and moved elsewhere.
Viral marketing campaign. Random website spreads false rumours. This can go.
External links. Cut down per WP:EL

Comments? -- Steel 21:57, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

The description is alright, but should be cut down. Story is way too long. Characters section seems unencyclopedic. Colossi table is pretty good information, and its easily verifiable. Not really unnecessary gameplay info, as the names of the colossi aren't in the game, they were released by the media. Extras should be removed. Connections to Ico should be sourced a little better but yeah. Delete L+S, compress WvW into european version section. Japanese packaging is out of place where it is. Nico section is relevant but there is probably too much info on it in the article. Viral marketing campaign will have to be discussed. External links, there's too many, currently.

I mostly think the article has too many unencyclopedic parts, and elaborates far too much on them. Care should be taken to not cut down the article to stub length, but it's way too bloated as is. Schicksal 22:12, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I pretty much agree with everything you've said there. I'll remove the Extras and L+S sections then, you OK with that? I'm currently looking for a reliable website which dictates the story, though all I'm finding are reviews. I'll find a site with that colossi table on it too. -- Steel 22:21, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Also, check out the Final Fantasy X article. The story section in that is only slightly longer than the one here, yet FFX has much more story than this game. The plot summary here is definitely too long. -- Steel 22:25, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Referencing

I've added a load of websites to my sandbox. At some point I'll sift through it all and reference that description section, unless someone else does it first. Also, the Connections to Ico are proving hard to find a source for, so I'd appreciate assistence on that. -- Steel 11:38, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, another quick note. The Final Fantasy X people have used lines from the game to source their story info. We could easily do the same. The game script is easy enough to find. -- Steel 11:42, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Characters Section

After doing some revision with the "Story" section (mostly shortening it and making it more concise), the Characters section is starting to bug me more and more, as it contains a lot of redundant information. It's hard to figure out what to do with it. I've often considered just cutting it down into a very short "voice actors only" section on several occasions, but then we'd lose some information (particularly for Dormin) that really needs to be in the article.

Any way you look at it, the Characters section needs a complete overhaul. That, plus we could really use a section discussing interesting points and examples of Dormin's mysterious dual nature. Any ideas? Comments? (Constructive) criticism? Onlynameicanget 00:30, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

The story section can be cut down dramatically. See the Final Fantasy X article - the story section there is only slightly longer than ours, but FFX has masses more story than this game. Indeed, this point was also raised in this game's (not very active) peer review. After the story section's shorter, the characters section should end up not repeating what's already been said... if you get me?
I've been working on getting everything in the article sourced by reliable sources, and I have an alergy to far fetched fan theories, so try and avoid adding stuff which could be seen as original research.
When I have the time, I'll go through the game script and the various reviews/previews for this game to get the story section referenced. -- Steel 17:29, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and a lot of games also have a Gameplay section. I guess I'll get round to that sometime too. -- Steel 17:35, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

The chars section is hugely overblown, especially in comparison to the FFX article, which is on a game with vastly more backstory than this one has. Nuking it down to voice actors only and integrating Dormin into Story is probably best. Schicksal 22:38, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

More about the cleanup

I removed two images from the story section, as it was a bit cluttered. The one of Wander holding his sword can be added to the Gameplay section when it gets written. The map was nice, and could well be included, just not in the story section because I think one image is enough for that. -- Steel 20:31, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Giant Names

Why is the information on the table that shows information about the Colossi constantly changing? I remember Gaius was known as the "Earth Knight" now it states it was known as the "Earth Truth" and also Malus was at first called "Grand Gigas" and is now "Grand Superior", why does someone keep changing the names? I know that this information came from an instruction booklet or something but why is the information constantly changing?

Those are simply translations of the Latin names, and people are coming up with better translations. :) -JC 03:54, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, someone is changing the names and needs to cut it out! Can someone please cite a source here to end this whole ordeal Kara Umi 08:54, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree. That table needs to be sourced or it has to go. As it is, it's basically original research. -- Steel 09:53, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the latin names have been sourced at one point. The rest is original research. The table itself isn't really appropriate, but I can't think of how else to have info on the colossi. Schicksal 17:58, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Me neither. -- Steel 19:03, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Spoiler Tags

Do we really need one of these for every section that contains a spoiler? Seems to me like we only really need the one in Story. Schicksal 18:43, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

They're having a massive discussion about spoiler tags down at the CVG talk page. May as well wait and see what decision they come to. -- Steel 19:31, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Disc Cover images

Something needs to be done there. Either a frame that separates them somehow (an individual frame for each image), or resize them and make them go down in a row, or kill the extra images. Right now, the three of them mushed together look like, well, crap. I would do it myself but we need consensus on the final look, and I don't really know if the options I listed above are doable with wiki's code. Thoughts please Tani unit 20:53, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure, but the JP art is gorgeous and should remain on the page. Schicksal 21:56, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps following Ico article's example we should select just one cover art and drop the rest. I see no need to have all three of them considering how minimal the differences are. I would also like to see the japanese original art as the one selected. Tani unit 22:00, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Although I have the PAL copy and think the US cover is the worst of the three, I think the US cover is best suited for the infobox. I'll check with the WP:CVG and see if they have recommended guidelines on this. -- Steel 22:05, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. I kind of thought you guys would like that change a bit more. I based the cover art pictures off of the way they are arranged on Final Fantasy X, a featured article that I look to as a really good example of how a video game article should be done. This time around I structured the images in order of the game's release (US, Japan, Europe), but we can easily change that. It seems that the most-liked cover is the Japanese cover, so I guess I'll make that one predominant. -- Onlynameicanget 00:43, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Edit: Okay, I did that. I also realised that having the Japanese cover as the biggest is probably best, because it's the only cover showing a possible scenario in the game. Not only is Agro present with Colossus #1 in the US and PAL covers, both aforentioned covers show the entrance to the Forbidden Lands right next to #1. Plus, I think the US and PAL covers compliment each other nicely together. What do you guys think? -- Onlynameicanget 00:50, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I guess Final Fantasy article is a good example to go by. Although having a white background with centered graphics (in FF's case) certainly helps the covers not to look as crowded :), but I think in this current form the infobox looks fine. Besides, having the cover image from the country of origin as the predominant one seems fitting. Me like. Tani unit 00:57, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I still think having the Japanese cover as the main image is unsuitable for the English Wikipedia. Indeed, the CVG suggested using the US cover. Having said that, I'm not going to make a huge fuss about this. I've fussed enough already over this article. -- Steel 09:42, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

News

Any news on a sequel/other iteration of the story? 68.225.240.87 03:11, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Uhh, no.

And there are game sites for this sort of questions. Tani unit 03:35, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Reception/Crticial response

Along with the Gameplay section which has now been added, this is an area which we do need to cover. I'm currently gathering sources, though I could use suggestions on what could be included here. So far:

Review scores + media opinion
Sales figures (Both in comparision with ICO and other similar games)
Awards
Issues with the game (Many reviews comment on the annoying camera, for example)

If all goes well we could really beef out the article with this section. On an unrelated note, has anyone found a source for the Connections to Ico? I haven't managed to :( -- Steel 19:35, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Looks good to me, I thinks sales figures for both games would be especially interesting.

As far as connections to Ico I haven't had any luck either. Will keep looking though.

edit: i was trying for a while to find a source for the bit about Ico being the descendenat of Wanda, but the best I can do is this interview, where this confirmation is hardly as definitive:

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,70286-0.html?tw=rss.culture

Wired News: Is there any connection between the worlds of Ico and Shadow of the Colossus?

Fumito Ueda: There's no specific connection as far as a timeline. But, both games exist in the same world.

WN: But you've said the baby we see at the end of Colossus is the first 'baby born with horns' referred to in the backstory of Ico.

FU: Yes. I wanted to give some idea to the player, after you complete the game, that there was a connection to Ico. That's why I put in the baby with the horns. If somebody goes all the way through the game, I wanted them to be rewarded.

I'm starting to think that this definitive confirmation about the descendent may have been a rumor. Will keep looking though.

Tani unit 22:49, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

What's annoying is that everything in this section is highly speculative. Internet forums have had huge discussions about all of this. It's all open to interpretation making it hard to source, if what is in the article is even correct. -- Steel 23:50, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

I found an IGN article where they talk to some guy from SCEA about the connections to Ico. Bad news? It's for IGN insiders only, and you need to subscribe to see it. -- Steel 18:57, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

"Roar of the Earth" merge

We should merge Roar of the Earth into the article. The RotE article is very stubby, and we can easily fit the track listing back into Shadow's article without taking up a lot of space; just look at what these guys did, as an example. Besides, the soundtrack really needs to have a significant place in the article anyway; it is arguably one of the game's strongest elements, and it just doesn't deserve the footnote-like mentioning it has currently. What do you guys think? -- Onlynameicanget 23:54, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Lots of people like the soundtrack so I guess it wouldn't be hard to find some GameSpot/IGN coverage on it. I was initially sceptical about listing the tracks, since it doesn't really add anything to the article, but since the Half Life article is featured, I guess it couldn't hurt to do what they did. -- Steel 23:59, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

We could, but the reason the soundtrack has it's own article in the first place is because people complained that the Colossus article was too big hence the separation. I have no problem with rejoining them though, seeing as Half-Life and Ico articles have done it. Tani unit 00:05, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

This article won't be too big when we cut down the characters section and get rid of the Colossi table. -- Steel 00:08, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Ico connections

Allright, the unsourced parts are as follows:

* At the end of Shadow of the Colossus, Wander/Dormin is shown to have become a baby with horns. Ueda has confirmed this to indicate that Wander/Dormin sires the line of horned boys, of which Ico is a descendant.

- Nothing definitive on this, interviews I found confirm they exist in the same world, and Shadow is a prequel with now specific timeframe mentioned, but we can safely assume that they don't immediately follow one another. Ico being Wanda's descendant is confirmed, sort of.

*The shadowy figures that surround Wander after he defeats a colossus are of a similar design to certain ghosts that rise to challenge Ico; this may be a hint that these spirits have the same origins.

- They look similar enough, but I have seen no mention of that in the interviews, and haven't looked for any reviews stating that. Will have to look further.

*In Ico, immediately after releasing Yorda from her cage, the player comes to a long bridge with a statue at the nearest end. The statue is of a man with horns (one is broken off), who is wearing a tunic and has a hair-cut similar to Wander's. Some in-game features may simply be hints to Ico and not story related.

- Seems self-evident enough, does it really need a reference?

*The way the Shadows stand around Wander in a circle after he defeats a Colossus is also similar to how the shadows encircled Yorda during Ico's ending.

- Far too POV and incidental. Doubt it should be even mentioned.

*Clothing, and designs on those clothes, are of a similar style. This includes Ico and Wander's tunics looking very similar and Yorda and Mono's dress looking very similar. Some fans have found a beach that looks very similar to the one shown in Ico's ending.

- Reinforces Ueda's point about the design team unintentionally giving the games the same feel and look. Alos reinforces the connection as far as the setting goes. Confirmed by the same interview as the very first point.

What do you guys think? Tani unit 00:15, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

A lot of it, although it seems obvious, is original research at the moment. ~~Also, I've heard that Wander doesn't father a line of boys, as in Ico each boy is sent to that castle place before he can reproduce.~~ I am reluctant to say this, but the whole section may need to be significantly cut down. -- Steel 00:18, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Wait, ignore some of that. -- Steel 00:21, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Put "Citation needed" tags on anything that you think needs to be referenced, and I'll try to dig up some dirt on it. Actually, that applies to the whole article! :P -- Onlynameicanget 01:11, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Everything. -- Steel 01:17, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Done for connections section. I will look through the rest of the article tomorrow, hopefully. Tani unit 01:39, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Does anyone know if any (paper) strategy guides have been made for this game (by Nintendo Power or whatnot)? Those things usually have "secrets" chapters which might list some of the connections to Ico. -- Steel 11:09, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

There was the BradyGames guide. I don't own it though. Schicksal 20:03, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I asked around on GameFAQs and apparently it doesn't have anything about the connections in it. Pain. -- Steel 20:22, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps one of us, as a wikipedia user, could inquire directly with team Ico or Fumito Ueda himself. Small chance but who knows. Shure would get some things cleared up. Tani unit 21:38, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I would be willing to do that if I knew how to get in touch with them. -- Steel 21:43, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

His article lists http://fumi.to/ as his semi-defunct personal website, with ued@fumi.to

as his email. Could be worth a shot. Tani unit 18:46, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Viral Marketing Campaign

This has been bugging me for a while. Do one non notable website's bogus claims deserve such a large section in the article? I'm in favour of getting rid of the entire section myself. -- Steel 18:42, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I think we could keep it as a short one paragraph summary, with no pics.

For instance something like this:

In October 2005, a viral marketing campaign was launched to promote the game. A website called Giantology.net posted links to several websites claiming that remains of five giants resembling certain colossi had been unearthed or discovered in various parts of the world.

We could also mention that compared to Ico the game received a lot more promotion and advertising. I'm pretty sure I could even find the article to source that.

edit: - got it Tani unit

I think this should go into the Reception paragraph after the sales figures. How's this;

The game, unlike Ico, received far more exposure, due to Sony putting it's weight behind a massive advertising campaign. (ref the kikizo article here). It was advertized in game magazines, on TV and on the internet, including a viral marketing campaign that was launched in October 2005. A website called Giantology.net posted links to several websites claiming that remains of five giants resembling certain colossi had been unearthed or discovered in various parts of the world.

Some speculate that Ico's sales figures could have been much better if similar advertizing effort was made before it's release. (http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=59445). Tani unit 01:13, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Reverts unexplained

Is there an explanation why my edits to this article this morning were reverted? They were fairly careless, as both grammatical errors and prose polishing were undone along with the changes to the infobox and the removal of the review table.

I'd be willing to better explain any edit, but I'd appreciate it if someone would ask instead of blindly reverting. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:45, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

The changes you made to the genre paragraph are poorly worded and do nothing to improve the meaning. The image use was discussed earlier on this talk page (see Cover Images section). Also, I would like you to explain the removal of the ranking section. While your efforst to improve this article are certainly appreciated, but you'd be better for reading the entire talk page, and mentioning it in the talk page before removing sections from the article. Tani unit 02:08, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

It's hardly my problem that you don't see the reason for reverts. Like I said, the changes you made are poorly worded, the removal of the table is unexplained, and the image use was addressed earlier. Further reverts to your own edit from you will probably be considered vandalism at this point, so I suggest you explain yourself on this talk page. Tani unit 02:14, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

First off, please knock off the blind reverting to an older version. You've removed uncontroversial grammatical corrections further down the article twice now.

As for the cover image, I am raising a fuss, and I'm raising it now. There's no need to have three fair-use images illustrating one game, and in this case the NA release is even the first release, making things simple. It's the best-selling version, it's the first version, and it's the first English-language version.

As for the genre thing, let me take another crack at it. I'm not happy with either version right now, and I think something closer to the original would be better, you're right. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:18, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I've removed the review scores sections because this isn't GameRankings, and repeatedly the CVG project has decided not to add lists of review scores or links to Gamerankings, favoring instead descriptive prose quoting from cited reviews. This article already does the latter, but really doesn't need to do the former. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:19, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Finally, dialogue. I can see the logic behind removing the scores, so I have no problem there. As far as the images - there are no strict guidelines to the cover use with international releases, and there are articles (such as FFX) that use multiples. Also, it could also be argued that the game's country of origin is Japan hence the Japanese cover is most appropriate. But we'll discusss that later. Why exactly are you dissatisfied with genre paragraph? Tani unit 02:28, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

It can be argued that the game's country of origin is Japan. However, the NA release is still the first release, and this is still the English-language Wikipedia. The Final Fantasy WikiProject (and their ugly FFX table, ew)'s style doesn't really trump WP:FUC; you may want to read WP:FUC #3 in particular, which counsels the use of as few fair-use images as possible, and to a lesser extent #8, which counsels against decorative use of fair-use images.

My objections to the genre paragraph are strictly grammatical. "Because of this (what "this" is is a bit vague), Shadow of the Colossus is regarded (by whom?) as both ("is regarded as" feels terribly awkward) an action-adventure game and a puzzle game."

I filled in some of the gaps on that sentence, and came up with "Because of this mix of different genres, Shadow of the Colossus has been described as both an action-adventure game and a puzzle game." - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:37, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not certain release date tramples the country of origin. Is there a a guidile that specifies this? Also, English-language wikipedia does not equal NA wikipedia, so that logic is not without a fault either.

As far as the paragraph - how about this; Each colossus has a weakness, which must be found and exploited in order to win the battle. This type of gameplay does not fit any particluar existing genre, hence Shadow of the Colossus is regarded as both an action-adventure game and a puzzle game. Tani unit 02:52, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Custom is to use an English-language cover. When there's some debate over which English-language cover to use, generally the first-release cover or the best-selling cover is used. The Japanese cover flunks all three standards, there.

"Is regarded as" is the annoying bit of grammar. I'd be happy ditching the genre nonsense entirely; I think they're arbitrary categories with little meaning, but I'm also aware that not everyone feels the same. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:57, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Why not just say "Since each colossus has a weakness which must be found and exploited in order to win the battle, the gameplay of Shadow of the Colossus blends both action-adventure elements and puzzle elements." ? -JC 08:29, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm deliberately trying to stay neutral here, so this post isn't aimed at anyone in particular. I'm just going to explain my viewpoint.
The changes to the intro paragraphs were good, I think. I liked the wording: "Shadow incorporates both puzzle and action-adventure elements, as the player must both figure", etc. I wasn't happy with the wording before and that change was definitely an improvement.
As for that review table thing, I think it was Onlynameicanget who created that, and because featured articles The Wind Waker and Majora's Mask use them, so it can't be a bad thing.
Onto the boxarts, I personally want the EU cover to be used. Not just because it's the cover of my game, but because I think the green is nicer aesthetically than the red/brown of the NA version. Incidentally, featured article Final Fantasy X uses all 4 different covers in the infobox. -- Steel 10:14, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure why we're ignoring the fair use criteria here; they are binding policy. These images are so close that separate images aren't needed for identification, and these are fair-use images. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:52, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Infobox changes

Steel and I have recently decided that the best change to make to the infobox are as follows: to show the PAL cover predominantly (satisfying the requirement of having an English cover for the English Wikipedia) and having the two covers underneath it. We also felt that the caption was largely unnecessary, and that it pointed out what could be plainly seen before.

Just a heads-up. We don't want any offense to be taken for anything we're doing, and apologies in advance if this reverts an edit made recently to the infobox, but we're about to submit the article for a formal peer review, and would appreciate it if the article remains as stable as possible during that time. Thanks in advance. --Onlynameicanget 20:46, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

With three images, it violates WP:FUC #3 and #8. The fair-use rules are not subject to compromise. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:57, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Then, why has the FFX article not been corrected? And why is there suddenly a ridiculous caption there? Schicksal 01:13, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

How is the caption ridiculous? (The caption is a new feature recently added to {{Infobox VG}}, and we really should have a caption for any fair-use images whenever possible.)

It was ridiculous in that it read horribly; the new wording is a big improvement, though. Schicksal 02:26, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

The FFX article will be corrected; I've brought it up at the FFX featured article review to see if there are any extenuating issues. Rest assured that that article will also be changing. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:19, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Image caption

The caption feature is a brand new feature of {{Infobox VG}}, which is why you don't see it in other articles yet. We really should be using captions for fair-use images whenever possible. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

You know, the old caption was waaay too long, you're right. I shortened it. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

How about this one?;

The cover of all major releases shows the protagonist along with the first colossus, emphasizing the immensity of the creature.

Tani unit 01:33, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

So the minor releases don't? ;D

Jokes aside, are you suggesting that instead of the current wording, which is "The Shadow of the Colossus cover emphasizes the hugeness of the colossus compared to the protagonist"? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:35, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I actually prefer the current wording. -- Steel 01:36, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Nevermind, I replied while you shortened it. Although I would still rather replace "hugeness" with a less clunky synonym. Tani unit 01:38, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Mekka lekka hai, your wish is my command. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:50, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Sugoi! Tani unit 02:00, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Peer review time?

We seem to have settled the few remaining issues, and nobody's edited this article for a bit, so I take it that nobody can see anything majorly wrong with it. I think it's time for a proper peer review prior to its FA nomination. -- Steel 18:44, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I'd say ideally we should settle the colossi table issue (stays/changes/goes) before then.

I'll look through the article and see if there is anything else.

edit: Yep, I think the rest of it looks good.

Tani unit 18:59, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

You actually may be right about discussing the colossi table beforehand. Just when I thought everyone was happy with it, we get this. What might be best is if we get rid of the table and write a paragraph or so on the colossi and add it to the characters section (But then that section would need renaming to "significant biological organisms" or something) -- Steel 23:19, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

In fact, I think that may well be the best option. -- Steel 23:28, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, the fact that of all four parts of the table only one is actually from a cited source is reason enough to get rid of it imo. I think we can leave the section as "Characters" and add the colossi in it. If Dormin can be considered a character, I don't see why colossi couldn't. Tani unit 23:36, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Come to think of it, I don't see why we couldn't just leave colossi separate as they are right now anyway. Tani unit 23:39, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

At the moment we have 3 lines of text on the colossi, most of which is already mentioned elsewhere. Suggestions on what to write about them anyone? -- Steel 23:50, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

The colossi are armored - and often enormous - creatures that seem invincible, but each has its hidden weaknesses and habits. Each colossus has remarkably different anatomies and affinities, ranging from simple giant humanoids to fierce predatory animals, and each is located in a unique lair.

(for a bit of a description, I'm trying to find citable sources for this) Their bodies are a fusion of organic shapes and architectural elements, always having fur somewhere on them, which the protagonist can use to his advantage in order to scale them. Most colossi lay dormant and ignore the protagonist when he trespasses on their territory, but some will attack on sight.

Often, the environments in which the colossi are fought must be fully utilized to the player's advantage to reach or reveal a colossus's weakness.

Tani unit 00:11, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

That sounds good. We should be able to get a good beefy paragraph out of this after all. -- Steel 00:18, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Final version;

Their bodies are a fusion of organic shapes and architectural elements, reminiscent of Mayan, with some of the parts weathered or crumbling, giving them an ancient appearance (ref http://newyorkmetro.com/nymetro/arts/games/reviews/15173/). All of them, even those that are aquatic or aerial, have areas covered with fur which the protagonist can use to scale them.

Often, the environments in which the colossi are fought must be fully utilized to the player's advantage to reach or reveal a colossus's weakness.

"Most colossi lay dormant and ignore the protagonist when he trespasses on their territory, but some will attack on sight."

Tani unit 00:25, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Implemented the changes. Unless there are second opinions, I'd ay the article is ready to be peer reviewd. Tani unit 03:38, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

The page looks a lot nice. You guys have done very good work condensing the information. Something that needs to be addressed, though, is that references are supposed to go after punctuation marks. I'll go ahead and fix that. By the way, would you guys be interested in me doing a copyedit of the page to help tighten the prose up? I'm one of the major contributors to the Final Fantasy X article's FAC, and am currently a main contributor in the FAC of Final Fantasy VI, FAC of Final Fantasy VIII and Chrono Trigger's FAC, so I have experience with game articles and FACs. Just let me know here. Ryu Kaze 17:51, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Upon closer inspection, I really feel like the prose does need a fresh pair of eyes. Other things that should be addressed for the sake of organization are the implementation of citation templates within the references and the removal of the "listing" within the "Characters" section. There typically shouldn't be sub-headers for individual characters, particularly in a situation where we have so few characters. The Colossi should be moved into a sub-header under "Characters", though. If possible, we need some more information on the game's audio (particularly its development, and some info on the fictional language used in the game) and "Roar of the Earth" should become "Audio" with information on both the in-game implementation and the soundtrack itself. I realize that the page isn't in Peer Review yet, but the purpose of my comments is try helping before this article gets to the more formal and harsh processes to come. Ryu Kaze 18:12, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I think this a good idea. By all means work on the prose, meanwhile I'll see what I can find for the sound portion of the article. There's gotta be some info out there. Thanks for helping btw.

Tani unit 18:17, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Alright, glad I've got some consent to help out. I didn't jump straight in to make changes because I realize you guys have put a good bit of effort in here and I didn't want to impose unless you wanted me to, my intentions being in good faith or not. I would certainly like to assist with this page as long as you guys have no objections. You're welcome, by the way.

By the way, some more things I've noticed and will probably be touching on: there's a lot of invisible comments within the sections and we need better illustration with images. If something's suspected of being original research or should be removed, we should address the matter here right away and get it taken care of. If they're forgotten but still imbedded in the page's text, it will affect Peer Review and FAC as a result of lessening the page's overall quality and bloating its size (even invisible text counts toward page size). I see an image set up like that as well. On the matter of images themselves, there should be more examples of gameplay. There's a fairly decent image of using the sword to gather the light, but what about an image of actual combat with a Colossus (preferably preparing to stab a glyph), or an image that serves as an efficient example of scenery, given that there aren't any illustrations of that here? Why an image of Emon, but not the Dormin, by the way?

The "Connections to Ico" section actually is full of a good bit of original research. Where we can't cite something here or where it isn't particularly relevant, we need to exclude it. We've got verifiability for the most important parts anyway (Ico's ancestry and the games being in the same world). The rest is extrinsic and should be removed. I'll go ahead and get started on fixing up. Ryu Kaze 18:30, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Ryu, do whatever you want to the article to make it better. It's best that problems are taken care of now as opposed to the peer review. -- Steel 18:38, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Alright, Steel. Will do, and thanks. Let me know if you have any concerns about anything. Ryu Kaze 18:39, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I've got the references fixed up, but in addition to going over the prose and finding some new images (by the way, Tani, thank you for getting some more audio info) there's some more we need to do. Specifically, we need development info. The "Early development as Nico" section should be part of this new overall "Development" section. I know I've seen tons of information in interviews (most of which we link to from here, I believe) that talks about ideas they implemented, why they chose to implement, and even some of the hows of it all, so there's plenty of info for us to create a thorough development section, which every video game article should have. Ryu Kaze 20:32, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Are you planning on doing that, or is it a task for us? (Note: I have absolutely no problems doing it myself, but I won't be able to get it done for a few days) -- Steel 20:38, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I'll do that, but it'll be a little bit later today. There's a lot still to be done here, but I think it'll go pretty quickly. A day or two of dedicated work should tighten everything up. Ryu Kaze 20:47, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Meanwhile I'll find and post (here) a few articles of relevance, so you guys can go through them and choose whatever is necessary. The article is starting to shape up quite nicely indeed. My only other concern is with one of the screenshots (below) which I feel is not of adequate quality (aesthetically). Mono is hardly visible aside from the mass of her dress, and compositionally it's not very good. I realize that this probably is the least protected image, so ideally it needs to be replaced by another user-made screenshot, so perhaps someone could make one.

Tani unit 21:30, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

While we're on the subject, that pic of the third colossus is also very low quality. -- Steel 21:34, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I think [1] one might work better for Wander and Mono. I am open for suggestions as far as the colossus image goes, although that one I don't really have a problem with. Tani unit 21:57, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I have to agree that the image of the three is pretty terrible. I'll try to get us a better quality version of the same shot so we can include all three characters, but if we can't, then that one of us just Mono and Wander would probably suffice, though I think this one would be even better. I also don't have any issues with the picture of Gaius, by the way. It emphasises that Wander should be screwed well enough. Ryu Kaze 00:51, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Or would you guys prefer this one for the colossus image? Ryu Kaze 00:55, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Both of you think that colossi pic is alright, so I won't kick up a fuss about it. -- Steel 01:01, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Alright. I'm willing to change it, though, as there probably are better ones. This one's pretty good. I got us a good image for showing off the glyph, by the way. Ryu Kaze 01:19, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I think that the colossus image that is there is good because it shows off the scale.

If you look carefully it has a glyph as well btw, on the Gaius's abdomen. As far as the Wander/Mono image this one looks great, I think we should put it in. Tani unit 01:28, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I think that there should be more images of the Colossi, more images of the Colossi should be usedUnknown Dragon 03:16, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

There's alimit to how many images we can get in under fair-use. Ryu Kaze 04:08, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I know but still, I think that at least one or two more pictures of other Colossi would help, and I know the reason why that image of the third Colossus is of poor quality is that that picture is from the "Beta" version of the game, I can tell because Gaius (Colossus #3), has a third stub/horn on the top of his head, it doesn't have that in the final version.Unknown Dragon 16:26, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

This pic is my preferred choice. It shows off the scale pretty well and is higher quality than that other one. Though, like I said, I'm not going to kick up a fuss. -- Steel 16:42, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I definitely like yours better Steel, but the possible issue here is the vertical orientation of the image. What about this one? It doesn't show thw hole colossus, granted, but it's horizontal and it certainly conveys a sence of scale. Either one of those would be fine by me. Tani unit 20:03, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm reluctant to use that one because that colossi doesn't actually exist in the game (At least, not in my game. Did they change #2 for the PAL release?). -- Steel 20:17, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually it's the same one as in your pic, Quadratus from an early build (yours is too btw, compare it's eyes to the ones in other screenshots). It's surprising to me how many people don't realize it's the same colossus. I guess to avoid that sort of confusion we shouldn't use my pic. Tani unit 20:55, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I think Steel's is better for the reasons already mentioned, but because it's a vertical image, it would probably be unsuitable. If we can get something similar that's more balanced, though, it would probably be a better choice than the Gaius image. Ryu Kaze 03:21, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Section break

I'm working on finishing up my copyedit (only two more sections to go, though I need to expand "Development"), but I'm concerned about the list of tracks from the game. I fear it's going to be considered a bit trivia-ish, like the cast list that Final Fantasy X once had, but I'm going to leave it in there and let Peer Review or FAC tell us what they think. Ryu Kaze 14:21, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

As for the track list, I think Onlynameicanget got that idea from featured article Half-Life 2. -- Steel 14:55, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Most likely. The thing is, FACs go through phases, usually changing every other month. Sometimes they demand more and sometimes less. Lately it's been a case of a demand for more, though, thankfully, so I'm not too concerned. As long as we're comprehensive on everything else, we'll be fine, regardless of whether or not we have to lose the track list. I'm going to need to go back and work on the gameplay section a bit more, though, so that we do meet comprehensive standards. Ryu Kaze 15:02, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Just a heads up: someone's probably going to call fair-use #3 on the presence of the PAL version's cover ("The amount of copyrighted work used should be as little as possible... Do not use multiple images or media clips if one will serve the purpose adequately"). Ryu Kaze 16:06, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

"Little as possible" is very subjective, and it is directly related to the section it was added too. But if you think it's a no-no, get rid of it. -- Steel 16:09, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

No, I'll leave it in there until someone suggests that it's unnecessary. Lately, there's been quite a bit of cracking down on more than one image cover, so I just thought you should be expecting it. Personally, I like the use of all the regional covers, but that fair-use stipulation usually is the death of them. Ryu Kaze 16:21, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I'm pretty much done with copyediting the prose. The Reception section was really good before I even touched it, but the Awards needed to be de-listed and turned into prose. While on that subject, we've got a bit of a problem there: the last few have plenty of references, but the first few have none. I've been trying to find some references for that info, but haven't come across any, so if you guys know where that information came from, please add it. If you have the specific magazines in question, that would be even better, and you could make a cite book reference for it. Ryu Kaze 17:10, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I hate to do it, but without a reference for these things, we're going to have to lose three mentions in the awards. Ryu Kaze 18:03, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm pretty much done making adjustments. Unless someone else comes along with more suggestions, I think it's ready for Peer Review. It will probably actually be a good thing to leave a thing or two that we're not totally sure about in there so it's apparent to us and them that Peer Review or FAC is improving or approving the article. Ryu Kaze 18:59, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I just noticed that we now have the Japanese cover art back in. There's no way that all three versions are going to get past Peer Review, mustless FAC, guys. We're definitely going to have to drop at least one of them, if not both the PAL and Japanese versions. Even Final Fantasy X recently had to remove its extra regional covers. An argument could possibly be made for the relevant inclusion of the PAL cover, but I doubt it. While it's relevant to the subject matter, it doesn't exactly convey anything of particular value that the NTSC U/C cover doesn't. I'm going to go ahead and drop the Japanese cover art. I'll leave the PAL version to see if it survives Peer Review, as I mentioned earlier, but I know that all three of them don't have a chance. Ryu Kaze 02:03, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Recent vandalism

Just now there was an image of a penis on the top of the page, but I could not find anything in edit history or in the code, and now it's gone seemingly by itself. Anyone know what exactly happened there? Tani unit 19:50, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

People were adding the pictures to the Nihongo template which is used at the beginning of thousands of articles (inc. this one). See the history to Template:Nihongo. -- Steel 19:56, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Butchering a Colossus

This article has been going through too many drastic changes, it used to be filled with such rich information about the game but as I see it, as more new information is added, other valuable information disappears, such as the description for both the characters and the Colossi are no longer as rich with information as they used to be.Unknown Dragon 02:46, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

The only things disappearing from the article are either fan speculation, OR, or things that cannot be sourced. Overall the article is being brought to wikipedia's standards in accordance with guidelines. I'm not really shure what valuable information you think is missing, but if it's something specific by all means post it here for discussion. Tani unit 03:02, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, for example, I see that the player controls are no longer present, also, the names and locations of the different shrines that are featured in the game are gone too. Why are these being taken out?Unknown Dragon 03:14, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Because this is gameplay information that is reserved for gamesites and walkthroughs. This article serves as an encyclopedic entry about the game, not a gamer's resource for controls or gameplay tips.

All of this was removed months prior to this wave of editing, and is discussed in the archives. Tani unit 03:17, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Why was the information about the different Prayer Shrines taken out? And also, what about the data about the Fruit Trees and lizards? I mean they play an important role. Also, may I ask, is it impossible if we can use the chart again for the Colossi? I mean, it should only feature the basic facts, like the time-trial data, their names, and what kinds of creatures they were meant to be? If it isn't I understand, just asking. Also, just asking but what happened to the viral marketing section? Unknown Dragon 06:30, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

The shrine, fruit tree and lizard information was removed because it was very strategy guide-esque, which is not what Wikipedia is for. The table of the colossi was unsourced and people argued over both their names and what they looked like, so it had to go. The viral marketing campaign section was cut down significantly because one non-notable website's reaction to the game didn't deserve that amount of text.
Hope that's explained everything -- Steel 09:29, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Something I just stumbled upon by accident

Shadow of the Colossus is going to be released as part of a "Greatest Hits" list according to some website. Reliable source? Worth mentioning in the Reception section of the article? -- Steel 18:16, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Certainly worth mentioning. I've been hearing this for the last month or two. Apparently it's supposed to be happening at the beginning of August. I'll see if I can find a better source for it, though. Ryu Kaze 18:22, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Found a mention of it by GamePro, but it links to one of the other less reliable sources. GamePro's own article on the matter is only a few days old, and mentions that they've sent a request to Sony to confirm or deny the matter. I guess we might as well just wait a few days to find out if it's true or not before adding it. Ryu Kaze 18:26, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good. -- Steel 18:30, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Disappearing Content

OK, so I have to disappear for a few months, and everything changes. I suppose that kind of thing happens. I would appreciate it if someone could summarize the rationale behind the recent changes to the article. I am pleased that the gameplay information has been removed, and I'm pleased with the improvement that's taken place in the story sections (I haven't read through every line yet), but I'm frowning at the disappearance of useful things like the names of the colossi. (I've always said the list of save points should disappear, but a previous group of editors kept overriding me. Good work, whoever deleted that stuff.) What would you all consider to be confirmation of the information that once appeared in that table? I can't agree with the notion that it should be considered "original research" because it's not like someone just invented names for them and thought it would be good to put them on the article. They came from somewhere, even if that "somewhere" is an obscure pre-release magazine. This, then, would be reporting what others have discovered, which is very Wikipedian. If this has already been discussed at length on another page, I apologize for not doing enough looking around. Perhaps someone could point me at the previous discussion.
—ZorkFox (ষTalk) 07:32, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

On the other hand, a lot of "stuff" has appeared in the article, notably in the plot section. I'm happy to have this information in the article, but many things that appear in this section are repeated elsewhere (sometimes in exactly the same words). Unless there's an outcry, I'd like to go through and weed out repeated information.

And since I'm still sort of on the topic of cited sources (in my head, at least) I question the validity of citing "the official game site" as a source of information when the official game site is a jumble of Flash presentations and very (very) little informational text. For example, the official site is cited (heh) as a source of information for the speculation(!) that the shadowy creatures from Shadow of the Colossus may(!) be the same as those appearing in Ico. Personally, I think they have only superficial resemblances, and suggest the line be rewritten or cut.
—ZorkFox (ষTalk) 07:57, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah, welcome back Zork, it's been a while.

Basically you will want to read through the current archive page (if you haven't already), most of the changes are reflected there, colossi table removal included. Essentially only 1/4 of the table was a cited sourse, the rest was translations/people's take on representation, which by definition is original research and people kept making chages to translations as well. Leaving just the cited names would be good, but none of us seem to have any ideas as to how to go about implementing those. As far as the shadowy creatures I belive currently the article states they are "related" to shadows in Ico, either via the storyline or simply as a nod from the creators.

Either way it is not implied that those are the same creatures. Hope that clears up some of your concerns. Tani unit 10:22, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

The majority of the changes that have been made are more in line with the requirements of a Featured Article, which is what we're pushing the page toward. That's why a lot of the trivia, gameplay info and other cruft has been dropped, the list of characters turned into prose, and the Connections to Ico section reduced into a few citable, non-OR bits of information (though I wasn't here for some of it, admittedly).

Long story short, this page is closer to becoming a Featured Article than it's ever been. As for the use of the official site for citing sources, which country's version of that are you looking at? The PAL territories' version is very informative, and that's the one that is being cited (perhaps that should be specified). Also, as Tani said, the article doesn't suggest that the shadow creatures are the same, merely that they're related. Though, in all honesty, I think we could lose the line and the article wouldn't suffer for it. The rest of that paragraph is the only important part.

As for your final inquiry, if there is redundant information, yes, it should probably be fixed. I'm not sure where it is, though, but I'll go back through and give it a look. Ryu Kaze 11:29, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Alright, I've found a few instances of redundancy and fixed them. Ryu Kaze 11:58, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I was looking at the U.S. site, being that's where I live. It's one of those solve-puzzles-to-unlock wallpaper images type sites. Sigh. I'll scope out the PAL version. And, yes, if a particular version of the official site is being referenced, then that's the one that we should link to. Thanks for the welcome!
—ZorkFox (ষTalk) 23:18, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Peer Review time? — part II

The other section is a little further up the page and already has enough discussion under it. Does everyone (including you, ZorkFox) feel that the page is now ready for full Peer Review, rather than CVG Peer Review (which provided few comments at all)? We've been sitting on it for two or three days now, and I think the page is ready to go if everyone else does. While I'm sure there's one or two things we'll be called out on (references won't be one of them, thankfully; those are one of the last things you want to be told is lacking), we'll iron out any other problems a lot sooner when fresh eyes have been inspecting the article. Ryu Kaze 12:12, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Ryu, you're more experienced with peer reviews than the rest of us, is there *anything* in the article which they're likely going to complain about? -- Steel 12:17, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Any article is a good candidate for WP:PR at any point in its life. Go right ahead to PR. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 12:20, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

To answer your question, Steel, the only thing I would say we'll definitely be told to change by PR or FAC is the inclusion of the PAL boxart. There's a variety of other sytlistic comments we might end up receiving before all is said and done, but those are harder to predict. We've got good info here and a solid presentation, but there might be something in the wording that makes sense to us just fine, but that we're told might sound confusing to someone else. That's why PR is so helpful, really. When you're already familiar with the subject matter and have been working on the page for a while yourself, things don't sound complicated at all and it's easy to overlook some things, but a fresh perspective can help tighten sentences, clarify things, etc. Just really simple things that all come together and help strengthen the article. Like AMIB said, a PR can be helpful at any stage in an article's life, but if you're shooting for FA, they're definitely useful to tell you if you're on the right track.

We'll only know what we'll hear once we get there, I guess. I'll leave it to you to decide if you want to get it started since you were working on it first. Ryu Kaze 12:39, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

To be honest, we've been talking about the peer review for ages and I think it's time we just got on with it. I'll set it all up myself in the next half hour or so, if I may. -- Steel 12:42, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Complete agreement. Full speed ahead. Ryu Kaze 12:43, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Colossus image

Finally found us one similar to the other one Steel had, but that isn't vertical: [2] Ryu Kaze 14:55, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

What's wrong with vertically orientated images anyway? -- Steel 14:59, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Copy-paste from the Peer Review discussion for the benefit of those just following the talk page:

"Sometimes nothing, but people are often uneasy with them because of potential layout issues. Personally, I don't mind using them. If they screw up the layout on someone's monitor, usually it can be expected that they'll post on the talk page and say 'That vertical image really screws up the layout on my monitor'." Ryu Kaze 15:36, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Notice: we've decided on this image. Ryu Kaze 20:03, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Colossi

I wanted this info on the main page - why is it being removed? If these are not the proper names then somebody should at least put up the right ones. I found this info on gamefaqs and thought it was correct.

These are the various names for each colossi. The latin names were used in a Japanese gaming magazine.

(1) Proper name: Valus Latin name: Minotaurus Colossus Translation: Minotaur Colossus

(2) Proper name: Quadratus Latin name: Taurus Magnus Translation: Taurus Major

(3) Proper name: Gaius Latin name: Terrestris Veritas Translation: Earth Knight

(4) Proper name: Phaedra Latin name: Equus Bellator Apex Translation: Elite War Horse

(5) Proper name: Avion Latin name: Avis Praeda Translation: Bird of Prey

(6) Proper name: Barba Latin name: Belua Maximus Translation: Great Beast

(7) Proper name: Hydrus Latin name: Draco Marinus Translation: Sea Dragon

(8) Proper name: Kuromori Latin name: Parietinae Umbra Translation: Wall Shadow

(9) Proper name: Basaran Latin name: Nimbus Recanto Translation: Storm Echo

(10) Proper name: Dirge Latin name: Harena Tigris Translation: Sand Tiger

(11) Proper name: Celosia Latin name: Ignis Excubitor Translation: Flame Guardian

(12) Proper name: Pelagia Latin name: Permagnus Pistrix Translation: Great Sea Monster

(13) Proper name: Phalanx Latin name: Aeris Velivolus Translation: Air Sailer

(14) Proper name: Cenobia Latin name: Cladeds Candor Translation: Destruction Luster

(15) Proper name: Argus Latin name: Praesidium Vigilo Translation: Vigilant Sentinel

(16) Proper name: Malus Latin name: Grandis Supernus Translation: Grand Superior

This is trivia, which isn't necessary on Wikipedia — especially in a featured article. — Deckill e r 03:10, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
If the names of the characters in the game are trivia then what is the names of the songs doing on there? I really think that the colossi's names are important information that people would expect to learn on this page. Maybe I'm an idiot. Thanks for telling me why at least. --Ian Alexander 03:20, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

We've had small edit wars over the names and translations of the colossi, and since we have no official source for any of this, there way no way of determining who was right. Without a source is can't be added per WP:V anyway. The colossi's names are most certainly trivial and unimportant. Nowhere in the game are the names given, they have no impact on the story or gameplay and I only realised they had names after seeing this posted on GameFAQs. The song list has actually been removed per concerns raised at FAC. -- Steel 10:29, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Categories: Talk archives