Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Final Fantasy/Archive/10

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This discussion page is an archived page of a WikiProject Final Fantasy page, so its contents should be preserved in their current form. Please direct comments to the main discussion page.

Contents 1 Housekeeping 1.1 Clean-up Suggestions 1.2 Categories for deletion 2 Issues 2.1 Final Fantasy IV Peer Review 2.2 Infobox boxart montages 2.3 Final Fantasy Magic Pages 2.4 The Summon magic article 2.5 Disagree 2.6 Final Fantasy (video game) Peer Review in Progress 2.7 Tactics Character Template 2.8 Category for deletion 2.9 Final Fantasy VIII references needed 2.10 Final Fantasy IV FAC In progress 2.11 Link Farm on FFXII Character List 2.12 Final Fantasy albums 2.13 White Mages 2.14 Media reorganization 2.15 Little present for the WPFF community

WPFF Archives Key topics · 2005 · 2006 · 2007 · 2008: January 2008 - March 2008 March 2008 - April 2008

[edit] Housekeeping

[edit] Clean-up Suggestions

Hey. I've made a few suggestions on condensing all the random FF pages out there. Feel free to check them out and offer input on the Final Fantasy VII Talk Page and the Final Fantasy X Talk Page. Ryu Kaze 12:15, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Hm. I think I see what you mean but I haven't had time to cast a critical eye over it all yet. I understand where you're coming from - we do have a lot of useless and abandoned pages. A couple of things I disagree on though. I believe the Cloud Strife article should be a biography as this is a person (of sorts) we have written an article for, and it's an article for an encyclopaedia after all. Link (Legend of Zelda) and Wario are even featured articles! The other problem I have is I'm an inclusionist. That means I believe articles have potential for expanding and valued information to be in place one day, and one man's trash and all that. However I do think it's a good idea overall, and definately worth a discussion, and maybe even make it into a sub-project? Please consider the latter. ☺ — CuaHL 12:59, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, we can consider this matter settled. All of the excess FFX pages have been merged into logical places, Nibelheim -- which I wasn't aware existed at the time I started this cleanup project -- has been merged into the List of Final Fantasy VII Locations page, and Mako has been merged into the Materia page. I still can't reason a really good point that warrants Midgar having its own page, but I do agree with others that if any FF city warranted its own page, it would be this one, and it will remain. On the whole, I call this project a success. Ryu Kaze 13:05, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

I'd call it rushed and not very well discussed to be fair... — CuaHL 01:13, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Which aspects? There was extensive discussion on the FFX pages, and a fairly good amount concerning the FFVII pages (which, sadly, didn't all occur on one or two talk pages like it did with X). In the end, only suggestions that received positive feedback were carried out. Midgar and Blitzball, for instance, are still around. Is there a certain protocol that's usually followed that I wasn't aware of? Ryu Kaze 13:59, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Ah, sorry if I seemed a little abrupt.. my time on Wikipedia is limited somedays and that sometimes shows through with my comments. Fair play, though, I hadn't seen the discussion gone into this and should stick my nose out and leave it up to the professionals :D I just feel a bit cheated because you went from a question (17th Feb) to a decision (20th Feb) so quickly, while me and other editors would have no chance to participate in something like that so quickly. — CuaHL 21:44, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

I see. Well, I apologize if you felt excluded. It certainly wasn't my intention. I was simply shooting for productivity. Perhaps I did overdo it a little, and I did hesitate to go ahead with it at one point, but then I just decided that if there was any opposition to a suggestion, it wouldn't be carried out without extensive discussion first and a swaying of opinion. That's why I decided to let Midgar go: There was either too much opposition to the idea of it being merged or too much opposition to the measures that would need to be taken if it were merged, and it was obvious that while everyone acknowledged the fact that it probably didn't warrant its own page, no one felt too comfortable with changing the Locations list for VII.

Anyway, again, sorry if you felt excluded. I'll try to take it slower from now on in the event that it seems like a controversial merge. Ryu Kaze 01:08, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

With regards the Lunar Cry article, my suggestion (meagre thought it may be) would be that this tidbit on its own is way too small to warrant being isolated as a single document; it reads as part of a larger text and, therefore, should be included as such in the major document. I've been browsing some of the other links too and this same feeling comes through. For the sake of making this a comprehensive entry in Wikipedia, group all FF8 related subjects in one bundle; perhaps group all FF games and related topics (but not sub-topics) into one category also. I don't know how much time/work would be required for this, but it seems a reasonable solution. Thanks. Teq 01:49, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Categories for deletion

I've listed two more categories for deletion (Category:Final Fantasy XI characters and Category:Final Fantasy items). Please follow this link and express your thoughts. ~ Hibana 20:57, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Issues

[edit] Final Fantasy IV Peer Review

I have requested it, and I would be very interested in any Final Fantasy members helping me respond to the critiques with fixes as they come, this could help propel Final Fantasy IV to Featured article status. Thanks much! Judgesurreal777 04:57, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I can't help noticing that the FFIV article doesn't actually conform to the template for game articles featured in our Manual of Style... I'm tempted to update the article to the style guide's example and see how its received by the Peer Review mob - might make a good test case for the style guide. Thoughts? >Gamemaker 11:07, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

That would be totally awesome, I am attempting to deal with all of their critiques at the moment, that would be great to have them site! Judgesurreal777 00:21, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Can you please use WPFF Style as well as Wikipedia's style guide ;) — CuaHL 10:13, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Kickass, some recognition for FFIV is always a good thing. It still looks a little messy though (and cleanup would be easy), as well as doing something about the red link there. Crazyswordsman 00:36, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox boxart montages

The montages/collages/whatever of box art in the infoboxes for FFI, VII, VIII, IX, X, and X-2 is a potentially good idea, but in my opinion is unsightly. I vote we change it to just one of the English language box arts, as this is the English wikipedia. But if we're looking to make these infoboxes uniform with the "name mix-up" FFs, I guess we could use the Japanese. Maybe I'm the only one who's not a fan of the montages, and if so, let's just leave them how it is. — warpedmirror (talk) 23:38, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree that they look unsightly. But I don't think we can't use the japanese boxes only, because of WikiProject C&VG guidelines. Using american box art isn't an ideal solution either, because of confusion with the numbering. If anything, I would support them being replaced with cover-art from the latest enlgish re-releases, at least that way they will have the correct numbering. Personally, I wish we could switch back to logos. --JiFish(^Talk/_Contrib) 23:41, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

If people really don't like the collage approach, I'd suggest going with the Japanese box art for the first six games, and the North American box art for games thereafter. It really seems to be the only clear and unambiguous solution, since details for the rereleases can vary wildly. Final Fantasy II, for instance, was never released outside of Japan in a box with that title (there's Final Fantasy Origins and Final Fantasy I & II: Dawn of Souls, but I wouldn't recomment putting either in the infobox, and the "latest English re-release" of Final Fantasy IV is technically called Final Fantasy IV Advance). The other cover images should be placed inline at appropriate points in the article (though we probably want to avoid the gallery approach, since galleries of fair use images have traditionally been difficult to justify under WP:FUC). – Seancdaug 05:03, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, a month later and nothing's changed, but I really do like Seancdaug's idea. Does anyone have any objections before I change the first six FFs (except my discluding FFI?) to the original Japanese box art (I think most of these probably are like this) for naming confusion, and the rest to the original North American box art (which seems to be the general trend)? – warpedmirror (talk) 22:23, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I'll be honest here. I HATE the current montages. They're hideous. Seancdaug's idea is certainly something to consider. I like the idea of including the original U.S. box art images for Final Fantasy 1, 4, and 6 (this is an English Wikipedia, after all). However, it's been noted that it's pretty confusing when "Final Fantasy IV" links to a page and the first thing the user sees is a fat "FINAL FANTASY II" logo. CERTAINLY there's absolutely no reason that Final Fantasy 7, 8, 9, 10, and X-2 should have these montages. PLEASE, somebody remove them and set in the original U.S. box art covers (I'm a bit busy right now, otherwise I would go ahead and do so). Of course, this may necessitate adding a small gallery about different localizations at the bottom, much like Final Fantasy II's page. Obviously, 2 and 5 should retain their original Japanese covers (no reason to put Origins or Anthology packages, respectively, as those already have their individual pages); this brings me to the Final Fantasy Origins montage as well, which is also really hideous (place the PS version image in the infobox, and put the others at the bottom in some gallery - I think the special release box (the one that included action figures) deserves its own sub-article) on that page. So this leaves us with the problems of FF1, FF4, and FF6 - I think they look perfect right now. The boxes are not ambiguous (their logo corresponds to their title) and are very relevant. In a nutshell, I'm suggesting that we remove the current montages and place the American versions in their place. This includes Final Fantasy 7, 8, 9, 10, X-2, and Origins. Oh, that brings me to one more point, something I just brought up in the Final Fantasy (series) article: PLEASE remove the ancient Final Fantasy I from this portal's main page, the Final Fantasy titles list page, and especially the Final Fantasy (series) page. I really can't see reason for holding it there.--Tristam 03:15, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Final Fantasy Magic Pages

Hey. Over on Talk:Mythology of Final Fantasy X#Cultural references section the FFX Mythology talk page, we've indirectly led ourselves into discussing the formats of both the Final Fantasy magic and Final Fantasy summon magic articles. Between Renmiri, Seancdaug, and myself, we all agree that the articles are bloated far beyond necessity and general interest relevance.

Even among FF fans, a detailed description of the nature of the Osmose and Drain spells is kind of unnecessary, to say nothing of how it'll be viewed by someone who's never played an FF but has an interest. That being the case, I've proposed that we save both pages in their current forms on the FF Wiki (with corrections where needed), drastically shorten both pages here on Wikipedia itself, merge them, offer a brief overview of each type of magic, and then leave mention and description of three of the most well known spells associated with each type:

-Black Magic-

• Fire
• Thunder
• Meteor (I know this one's often associated with Time/Space magic, but it's more well-known as being affiliated with Black Magic in Final Fantasy VII; that, and I often wonder if it was a Time Mage spell in Tactics only because of how long you have to wait for it to come down)

-White Magic-

• Cure
• Regen (incorrectly put with Time/Space Magic on the current FF Magic page)
• Holy

-Time/Space Magic-

• Haste
• Slow
• Demi

-Blue Magic- Here, we would just mention three of the most well-known incarnations of Blue Magic:

• Strago Magus' Lores in Final Fantasy VI
• Enemy Skill materia in Final Fantasy VII
• Quistis Trepe's limit breaks in Final Fantasy VIII

-Summon Magic-

• Shiva
• Ifrit
• Bahamut

Then, at the bottom, we can add cultural references and/or notes of relevance, as well as links to the FF Wiki articles for those with a further interest in FF magic. Any thoughts on this? Ryu Kaze 09:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm =/ I'm unsure. I wouldn't call the magic list bloated; with the exception of a handful of entries each spell has a pretty concise and interesting summary. In addition, while well-intentioned, dropping all but a token 3 examples practically begs editors to add all the others back in again, it'd be a constant struggle to stay on top of the reverts - plus, the most 'well-known' examples is quite a subjective criteria =) Actually, I recall suggesting a split to the magic list a few months ago, Talk:Final Fantasy magic#Time for a split, here. While not well-received at the time it might be worth considering again? >Gamemaker 11:05, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Can't really say I think it would be a good idea to split it up even further than it already is. Seems its plenty spread out now. And I agree that the info's interesting and summarized pretty well (with the exceptions of some misplaced spells), and that's why I recommended saving it all on the FF Wiki and providing links from the main Wikipedia page on the subject to the FF Wiki articles.

And, yeah, I can see your point about three spells being kind of few, and that some folks will see that as an invitation to add more. And on the "well known" thing, I don't think that was so much subjective as an educated guess based on which spells have the most appearances and in what games they made appearances and how they made those appearances (for example, Meteor's extremely well known because of how it was used in FFVII; Bahamut, Shiva, and Ifrit are extremely well known because they've always been there, etc.), but I wasn't suggesting wording it within the article as "the most well known." I was thinking something along the lines of "Some of the more well known etc." and that's not only objectively phrased and true, but it should send a message to any future editors that the key word is "some".

How about taking the examples up to five? We could add these:

• Black Magic: Ice, Bio
• White Magic: Dispel, Protect
• Time/Space Magic: Stop, Warp/Teleport
• Blue Magic: Quina Quen from IX, Gun Mage Dressphere from X-2
• Summon Magic: Alexander, Carbuncle

By the way, while on the subject of the discussion page over there, I have to echo these sentiments Seancdaug had left there back on December 31:

This article isn't exhaustive. We don't, can't, and probably shouldn't list every spell that has ever appeared in any Final Fantasy game. Such a listing is much too detailed for a general interest encyclopedia, and would almost certainly get voted for deletion. That kind of detail is better suited to fan sites, such as GameFAQs or the Final Fantasy wiki. This article is intended to serve only as a representative sampling of some of the most common magic spells that have appeared in the series, and although the guidelines are a bit fluid, "Dia", having appeared in only one game, is not very common.

The subject of that discussion ("Dia", a spell that made only one appearance, and way back in the first Final Fantasy) has nonetheless found its way into the article.

By the way, also consider just how many spells are listed:

• Black Magic (16; Ultima's not really Black Magic or White Magic, but whatever)
• White Magic (12)
• Time/Space Magic (9; again, Meteor's not Time/Space Magic and Regen's not either, but whatever)
• Blue Magic (9 entries)
• Summon Magic (11 games mentioned along with some details on the summons' roles in each one, and a total of 13 summons listed; this one in particular is ridiculus, if only because a simple line like "Summons have made many appearances throughout the Final Fantasy series, and while their role is always that of entities that may be called upon to aid the player in battle, they've had various titles throughout the series, including 'Aeons,' 'Espers,' 'Guardian Forces' and 'Eidolons'" would have compensated for all those game entries. Then, right there we could insert a note in parentheses mentioning how in the japanese versions the summons were almost always called "summon beasts," and then follow that up with a line like "Further, relevance of the summons' role in the storylines has fluctuated throughout the series, as well, ranging from appearances as spells only -- with little to no role in the actual story -- to being major players among the supporting cast." From there, we could simply jump into mentioning the more prominent summons)

As it stands, we've got 50 spells listed and 9 games mentioned for Blue Magic. Like I said before, even among fans that's probably more than most will have an interest or care to read about, but for a general interest audience that's plain overkill. Ryu Kaze 15:36, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Summon magic article

While the Summon magic (Final Fantasy) article could benefit from some trimming, I wouldn't advocate the extensive deletion you suggested above. Summoning is one of the core design elements in the series, going so far as to feature as a major plot element in a number of games. The descriptions of the summoning systems throughout the series history is of valid encyclopedic value, I think. As you say, however, the list of individual summoned creatures has gotten crufty recently, and could be pared down. >Gamemaker 17:23, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Alright, I can see the reasoning in that. Probably wouldn't prevent the two articles from still comfortably fitting together anyway.

What's your opinion of the other magic stuff, though? Disregarding summon magic for a second, we've still got almost 40 spells listed for 3 magic types, and they hardly define the series in the way summons arguably do. Ryu Kaze 18:36, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Disagree

Normally, I would never disagree with something like this, but lately I've been noticing people commending Wikipedia for its coverage of game information. Perhaps we don't want to cut things TOO much, becuase that may divert attention away from Wikipedia. Sure, it's a general interest encyclopedia, but I'm sure people would like to see the range of magic spells in the final fantasy series. Deckiller 21:23, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree that we should definately have an article detailing magic, use of magic, and types of magic, but sometimes the descriptions can get a little bit drawn out and stretched thin. — CuaHL 22:44, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Eh, I hate to question someone's opinion, 'cause it is theirs and all, but this seems a little too open-ended to me. Which kinds of games had info being commended (RPGs, shooters, fighters, etc.)? What was the nature of the info being commended (plot, gameplay, general, etc.)? What was the format and presentation of the information? Are those situations in any way analogous to this situation?

Then there's other questions to ask like "Would we list every materia from Final Fantasy VII on the materia page and describe what they do, or would we mention each type of materia (magic, support, summon, etc.) and offer a description of what they relate to while giving a few examples?" People are offered a range of the magic spells by type and with some notable examples. That's what an encyclopedia does. If anything, plopping the whole darn thing in their lap is off-putting and screams "If you don't have familiarity with this topic, you should probably go somewhere else." Even as a huge fan of the series, I've not bothered to read the entire article word-for-word simply because I don't care to read through lengthy descriptions of everything from Aero to Vanish.

That's not to say that there isn't good information there or that no one would want to read it all, which is, again, why I suggest copying it as it is and putting it on the FF Wiki (where its current format actually makes sense), then giving a link in the Wikipedia page itself that says "For more spell info, visit the Final Fantasy Wiki's page on Final Fantasy Magic" or something along those lines.

To offer an analogy: You don't write a general interest encyclopedia entry on the Battle of the Pelennor Fields from The Lord of the Rings and then mention every named participant in that battle and offer their life stories in the margins on the off-chance that someone among the general interest audience is going to want a 300 page description of it and its participants. You'd mention the battle and the major players. An LotR encyclopedia on the other hand would describe the battle in exhaustive detail, list all of its participants, both major and minor, even if they were only mentioned this one time, and it would probably offer references of where to learn more on each of these characters.

Anyway, yeah, if you can be more specific about those commendations, I'd appreciate it.

Oh, and CuaHL, I'd never suggest taking the magic page away altogether. It just isn't a general interest overview right now is all, and personally, aside from how extrinsic some of the info could be considered (which is, again, not to say that it's not good info), I think it's more off-putting than attention-grabbing in its current form. Ryu Kaze 23:03, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I think you may have misunderstood what I said to a degree. I said we should CHOP it down for sure, and mention examples in prose form and perhaps create a minor list with five or six MAJOR examples (I.E. the four or five major elemental ones, flare, and/or ultima would probably work for black magic). Sort of like the mythology of FFX page, but with a list at the bottom. I wasn't saying include every single magic, but we should definitely strike a balance.

As for those comments, they were for "Video games" in general. I've seen them pop up several times. There was no specifics about it, it was just comparing wikipedia to other encyclopedias. Key word IS 'encyclopedia", but we have to make sure we don't exclude TOO much detail. Deckiller 23:12, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Afterthought: Moreover, we have to be very careful about what we include. When we are selective about certain things, we may create pointless edit wars. Someone may find Odin to be notable, while others find him non notable. That is another reason for my "weak" objection. Deckiller 23:13, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Afterthought two: Another laternative is to merely LIST all forms of magic, but to not describe them. That way, everything is included, key elements are touched upon in the prose and in the mini list(s), and editors will know that the magic not described should not be elaborated. Editors notes will also help. Deckiller 23:15, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but I really dislike the LIST of magic. Maybe mentioning different types and a short sentance describing them would be good. Or maybe you were suggesting it in a way were its like Final Fantasy character classes in which I like the idea — CuaHL 23:24, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

True, listing all the magic not explained in the prose/examples would be sort of excessive. However, I don't think spells like Vanish should have a fleshed out section. But like I said, "prosifying" a lot of the magic discussion will make it easier to read, take away cruft, and allow for all types of magic to be covered without even having to resort to a list format except for some of the major examples. Deckiller 23:27, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, I'd say ditch any lists whatsoever for the magic and say we should expand on what I said about prose. Have a lead section, a black magic section, white magic, and so on. That would allow for flexibility while still containing cruft. Deckiller 23:31, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Prose generally works better than lists in all situations, so I don't object to the idea. It still leaves us with the question of how many spells we're looking to cover, though. By the way, I'm kind of opposed to Ultima being filed away under White Magic or Black Magic. Technically speaking, Ultima's a non-elemental spell that's the combination of all elements, including Holy. Ryu Kaze 23:39, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. It should go under an "other" subheader, probably. I'd be honored to help prosify the magic page if I get some free time. Deckiller 23:40, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

Didn't FFX clearly classify Ultima as black magic, on the sphere grid if nowhere else? >Gamemaker 12:00, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Gamemaker: It may have, but FFVIII made it even more clear Ultima's the combination of all elements, some of which are White Magic and others of which are Black Magic.

Deck: Well, if you really want to, give it a shot. I'd be more than willing to help, though, if you'd like. Ryu Kaze 23:05, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

With regards to Ultima, when it's been classified by color at all, it's always been black (Final Fantasy VI, Final Fantasy X, etc.), and it has never been shown as white magic. Final Fantasy VIII did not divide its magic into colors, and there's nothing to suggest that the description of the spell in that game has any relevance to others. By and large, "non-elemental" does not mean "a combination of the all the elements": it simply means that it has no inherent elemental strengths or weaknesses (physical attacks are non-elemental, too, for example). Similarly, Flare is frequently non-elemental, and is universally presented as black magic. The division between white and black magic doesn't appear to relate to the specific properties of a given spell, merely a broader categorization of defensive and offensive usage. And even that rule has exceptions: Holy is always white, and in Final Fantasy III, Aero was actually wind-elemental white magic. – Seancdaug 00:31, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I didn't mean to say by virtue of being non-elemental that Ultima's a combination or anything; I meant when broken down into its component elemental properties as, for example, per influence of elemental defense, it was divided into all elements including Holy. But I concede that if it had to be classified as either White or Black Magic (which truly is more convenient), Black Magic would be the obvious choice (appeared that way in VI and X, as you said). Let's just get Meteor and Regen out of Time/Space Magic, please. XD (Meteor was BM in IV, VI, VII, and IX, and only Time/Space in V and Tactics; Regen was Time/Space in V, but has been WM in all games that made the distinction since.) Ryu Kaze 10:10, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Regen I'll grant you, but Meteo(r) is one of the defining time/space spells: time/space magic appears most prominently in FInal Fantasy V and Final Fantasy Tactics, so it's important that it's been classified as part of the school in both games. Anything beyond the basic white/black division is tricky, because the boundaries shift over time, but if we're going to have a section on time/space magic (which we certainly should, I think), I think it's only sensible to list those spells which are frequently classed as part of the school. The obvious candidates are Degeon/X-Zone, Meteor, Slow, Stop, and Haste. There are more than enough black magic spells to populate any section on that particular school: if I had to limit the list to five, I don't think Meteor would make it, anyway, as the three basic elemental spells (Fire, Thunder, and Blizzard), coupled with Flare and Ultima strike me as being of greater notability than Meteor as black magic spells: the first four, at least, have appeared as black magic in more games than Meteor, and Ultima is one of those big boys of notable spells that we can't really make a compelling case for putting anywhere else (it's elemental composition aside, the games always classify it as black when they classify magic at all). – Seancdaug 13:31, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I just now noticed your note about Meteor in Final Fantasy VII in the initial post. To comment directly on that, I'm not sure we should decide the placement of the spell based on its role in that game, as a) it's a plot element and not an actual usable spell, and b) magic isn't technically colored in Final Fantasy VII: the fact that Meteor is cast with the black materia is notable, but if that logic is taken to its logical conclusion, then every other spell in the game is technically green. Template:Grin The reason the spell is usually classified as time/space, of course, is because it fits perfectly into the boundaries of the school as spells that either affect the flow of time (stop, slow, haste, etc.) or space (degeon, meteor, etc.). – Seancdaug 13:46, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't know where to bring this up, but although Ultima is non-elemental (meaning it has no element consisting of it), there ARE multi-Elemental attacks. Mostly in Final Fantasy VI and VII. Tritoch, for example, is a Fire/Ice/Lightining 3-Way Elemental attack. Aqua Rake is a Water/Wind dual-Elemental attack. There is no, and there will never be, an attack that consists of all eight (nine?) elements at once. Crazyswordsman 01:12, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

I can help break the ice, although I've been quite busy as of late with some other wiki issues. I'll try to get something done tonight though. Deckiller 23:56, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I haven't got much time at the moment so I'll keep this short: I think the reason this whole proposal sits uneasily with me is that it seems we're getting caught up in finding new formats and grand solutions for an article that might be better served by simply fixing its current problems. I'd rather see the current Final Fantasy magic article tightened a decrufted first (the overly long spell descriptions and spells that appear in very few titles). This would need to be done anyway, no matter what path is taken, so I'd do that first and then review the article again. >Gamemaker 12:00, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Sounds fine. One thing at a time never hurts. Ryu Kaze 15:05, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Final Fantasy (video game) Peer Review in Progress

• Call me crazy, but as Final Fantasy IV heads toward an FAC, I thought it would be nice to get the original game on a path to at least greatly improving, if not toward FAC. Help out as needed! And remember to vote for Final Fantasy IV as a featured article when it gets posted! Judgesurreal777 22:52, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I honestly think you are underestimating how hard the FAC is going to be. Have you seen Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Final Fantasy VI? --JiFish(^Talk/_Contrib) 23:06, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

FA status will be VERY, VERY, VERY difficult to obtain. HOWEVER, we can get GA status as early as an hour from now if we work on it. Deckiller 23:29, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd just like to echo what everyone else has said about the difficulty of obtaining FA status. I think it would be better if we looked upon these peer reviews not as an effort to raise an article to featured status, but more as an attempt to improve the article all around. With any luck, the latter will eventually lead to the former, anyway, and I think it's important to keep our expectations grounded. – Seancdaug 00:39, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tactics Character Template

I have placed a newly created template on Ramza's portion (as a prototype, I will wait to add any more for now) of the FF Tactics character list. I have also opened a discussion thread for that page for comments on that template. Should it stay or go, and if it should stay, does it need modifications? Roy Al Blue 21:28, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Frankly, I'm opposed to introducing any more cruft in the form of individual character articles: speaking as someone who adores Final Fantasy Tactics, I really don't see that Ramza is notable enough to deserve his own article. Looking at the article itself, most of it appears to be extremely detailed plot summary. Beyond duplicating information already available in the Tactics article, it doesn't strike me as general interest material. It's well-written, don't get me wrong, but it seems much better suited to either Wikibooks or the Final Fantasy Wiki. I strongly suggest that it be transwiki'd to one or the other (or both) along with the template. Just my two gil.... – Seancdaug 02:55, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Sean, though it may not hurt to have character templates for a character list. Deckiller 02:58, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Hm, maybe. The only thing is I'm not sure what kind of information needs to be presented in template form: gender and name should be obvious pretty quickly, and zodiac sign and class can be presented easily enough in the first sentence or two of text. I'm not opposed to it in principle, I just worry that, with the images there already, it's going to create something of a formatting issue (there's also the increased server load caused by excessive template use, but that's more of an additional factor than a make-or-break issue, I admit). – Seancdaug 03:05, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't like them either, but I want to make sure we all compromise. The Star Wars lists have templates for every character, which is overboard IMO (that's a future issue for WPSW I'm going to address). It doesn't really shake me greatly, but if a balance is to be reached, I'm fine with that. Deckiller 03:12, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category for deletion

I've nominated Category:Final Fantasy weapons for deletion. Please see that nomination list for my brief reasoning, and please post your own comments. ~ Hibana

[edit] Final Fantasy VIII references needed

Hey, I've been trying to go through and tighten up everything on the Final Fantasy VIII page so we can make it worthy of Good Article status, and I've tried to make the fabled Reception and Criticism section NPOV -- and think I've succeeded -- but there's some sales figures claimed in there that we don't have references for. Does anyone know where these figures came from? Ryu Kaze 20:29, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

By the way, let me know if we can take down the neutrality dispute tag on the Criticism section. Ryu Kaze 21:32, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I had a look for citations for those figures when I added the ref in the introductory para - didn't have much luck at the time though =/ >Gamemaker 22:40, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Hm... if there's no reference for it, we should probably delete it. By the way, is the Criticism thing NPOV to your eyes now? Ryu Kaze 23:57, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, no source = delete. Also, the section reads NPOV to me now. Great work. --JiFish(^Talk/_Contrib) 00:02, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Cool, thanks, JiFish. And I'll go ahead and delete that info. I hate to do it, as it sounds really good, and it would be wonderful to have that kind of information in the article, but if we can't even prove to ourselves that it's true, we shouldn't be putting it out there for everyone else. So... away it goes. Ryu Kaze 04:41, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey, sweet. Someone added a reference for the Japanese sales. We may be able to hang onto that, at least. Since that's verifiable, it may yet be so for the other info. I'm going to look for it one more time before giving up. Ryu Kaze 04:47, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Ha. Using their source, I was able to find a source of other interesting info on the game's sales. We may yet be able to have a decent-sized section for it with references after all. Ryu Kaze 04:51, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

And another. Ryu Kaze 04:54, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

I've found a few refs for sales info, but I can't confirm the eight million sales, the best I can find is six. The ref for six is already in the ref section, so if someone can find updated info to combine with that, feel free. Pagrashtak 05:45, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

I've got it here. Not quite 8 milllion units according to that, and Final Fantasy VII has nearly 2 million more. Guess that answers the question of which is the winner there, huh? Thanks again for your help. Ryu Kaze 06:28, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Okay, guys, I think this one's ready for Good Article status. Ryu Kaze 06:29, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Final Fantasy IV FAC In progress

I just noticed some were uncertain about the move to have Final Fantasy IV and Final Fantasy (video game) peer reviewed, but I truly think that only by putting them up there and letting them get kicked around a little will we be able to get them to featured status. As you may notice, there are already many things to help change, but I strongly urge you all to vote on the articles featured ststus, and equally important, if you can help, PLEASE DO. The work that needs to be done is minimal thus far.... Thanks much everyone! :) Judgesurreal777 19:47, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Link Farm on FFXII Character List

Is it just me, or has the FFXII Character List starting out to look like a directory of fan sites? I think we should remove all the fansite links on External links before it grows any larger. —Mirlen 22:37, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Final Fantasy albums

Hey, long time no see. I'm not really full time right now, but I thought I could do something. I wanna ask about Final Fantasy albums who did not get an english release (most of them), leaving us with fan translated track names by various people, making it difficult to choose which translation to keep. There's also the fact that I might choose a translation that someone else doesn't agree with. Sometimes, they vary as much as Magitek Research Facility to Devil's Lab for track 14, disc two, FFVI OSV. The most official website I can see is http://na.square-enix.com/music/, but there are some errors like Narshe/Narche being called Neshe or the inforgiven which probably means the unforgiven. But they are minor errors easy to spot and correct. So I suggest we trash the fan translations and keep those at this website. --DarkEvil 04:08, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] White Mages

I've been wondering about this for a while now... The white mage page says that the first male ones didn't appear until FFIII. I feel this is untrue, because the white mage in FF seems to be male. While it is true that the white wizard class has long hair, the character still doesn't look exactly female. Also, in FFIII, in which all the characters are obviously male, the white mage has an added white pixel under his eye, which makes the sprite look even more girly! 130.232.131.47 15:01, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I have added a disputed tag to the section in question. I think you are right, though. The 'Light Warriors' from the first game were all male. --JiFish(^Talk/_Contrib) 15:04, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

This confusion is probably because white mage is refered to as female in "8-Bit Theatre". --JiFish(^Talk/_Contrib) 15:08, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Media reorganization

I'm thinking of reorganizing Category:Final Fantasy media so that it's easier to navigate. I was planning on putting all the game and album covers into a subcategory (i.e. Category:Final Fantasy covers), screenshots into their own subcategory (Category:Final Fantasy screenshots), character artwork into its own (Category:Final Fantasy artwork), and music samples into their own (Category:Final Fantasy music samples). I would also have to subcategorize them into the larger (and very messy) categories like Category:Video game covers. I can't seem to find any policies or guidelines concering this type of categorization. Does anyone have any objections? ~ Hibana 18:55, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

None here. Seems logical to me. --JiFish(^Talk/_Contrib) 19:00, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I second that. Ryu Kaze 20:30, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Little present for the WPFF community

Recently, Cuahl had suggested that we try to get the Cloud page up to Good Article standards, and lately, I've been adding a ton of references to the Jenova, Cloud, Sephiroth, Aerith and Vincent pages to try to make them all like that (I've done it for Auron and Rikku too; I'll probably try to do it for all of the VII and X characters, though it'll take a while). Anyway, I thought I might give you all a few of the more notable translations from the Final Fantasy VII Ultimania Omega Guide; these are things that internet forums could have used years ago to settle tons of debates that lasted far longer than they should have. I might put up some more later on, but I just thought you guys might like to have these for reference or something.

Feel free to quote me on these, but be aware that I'm not flawless when it comes to translating from Japanese. So, if I actually did a terrible job of this and someone who is better at Japanese comes along and has translated this stuff too, you (read: me) run the risk of being schooled. XD Anyway, here you go:

(Note: I've put them in a handy little show/hide box so that they won't be stretching the page here.)

Template:Spoiler

Thanks for the translations Ryu Kaze (I wish I could understand Japanese). Anyway, good job on the character pages, especially concerning Cloud and the references section on some ofthe character articles! —Mirlen 03:52, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome, Mirlen, and thanks for the compliments.

P.S. I'm not sure when I'll start on the rest of the character pages, but I think the rest of the ones for VII could probably go pretty quick. Ryu Kaze 04:08, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

This sounds like a good idea, but I'd also like to see Terra and Cecil's pages brought up to that standard as well at some point. In other words, let's get all main characters' pages to become good articles at some point. I'd like a little tutorial of how to do this if at all possible.Crazyswordsman 19:31, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Easiest way to do it is to just copy/paste the particular coding you want to use (book or game quote) and then insert it into the desired spot in the article you're editing; then, replace what was there before with the info specific to that article. That's how I've been doing it. I think it was Seancdaug who first suggested the use of this type of referencing, for use over on the Mythology of Final Fantasy X page. From there, I've been copy/pasting the format and filling it in as appropriate.

I agree with your suggestion, by the way. If we could do this for each character, that would be wonderful. It'll take a little time, but it's doable. Ryu Kaze 19:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I'll join in the effort. But is the section to be named just 'References', like on the character articles, like Cloud's, or 'Notes and References', as it is named in the Mythology of Final Fantasy X page? —Mirlen 22:09, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

"References" is probably the way to go. I meant to shorten that on the mythology page. Ryu Kaze 22:17, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. —Mirlen 23:58, 22 March 2006 (UTC)