Talk:Chrono Break

message: Nice citations; needs to be broken up into multiple paragraphs and/or subsections, though. -Seventh Holy Scripture 10:28, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, could still use grammatical polish, but it's good enough :) (Sorry for the delay, finals week for summer classes!) -Seventh Holy Scripture 02:28, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Notes

message: Tanaka's recent interviews and the fact that Square is still developing the Mana series (which doesn't sell on such a level) warrant the removal of the Cross section. For those that missed it, it was a proposal that Chrono Cross's sales (over 1.5 million, but low compared to Final Fantasy's) caused the lack of development. However, comments by separate individuals at Square Enix have confirmed that it is a personnel and project planning issue. --Zeality 02:05, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removing Cross notes

message: Chrono Break is notable, having been mentioned in the gaming press and registered as a trademark. Earthbound 64 was also never made, but that does not wound its notability. Should we delete Unfinished work as well? --Zeality 21:27, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Square, Square Enix, and Chrono-related freelance developers have given tons of statements about the game's possibility or non-possibility. Besides, this article has been listed as Good Article, it's not like it's a random stub. Kariteh 21:32, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, compared again to Shenmue III, Yu Suzuki has given plenty of updates about the game's production status but that's not a reason to have an article. Also I don't think Good Article status is a definitive proof of article's notability. Anyone can review and promote the article. I remember one article didn't survive an AFD although it was a GA. --Mika1h 16:19, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to demote the article's GA status if you believe it does not meet the GA criteria. In any case, this title wasn't talked about by the creators only, it also generated fan reactions, as proven by the fan poll stuff (and I'm sure other fan or professional reactions could be added to the article from websites and reliable sources). This asserts its notability. Kariteh 20:57, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Opposing nomination for deletion

message: I say we change the title to Chrono Brake. Chrono Break is outdated and no longer officially trademarked by Square-Enix. 208.101.130.232 21:31, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The fact that it was rendered as "Break" in English lends to the idea that "Brake" was a simple romaji on-the-spot translation with no thought behind it at the time. Zeality 22:33, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But wouldn't "Brake" make more sense? The "Chrono Cross" was an object, "trigger" can be a reference to an object as well... So "Brake" would work pretty well, here. How can you tell which of the two spellings, "Brake" and "Break", is an "on-the-spot" one? You could argue that Japanese people are infamous for their "Engrish", but I could also argue that US teams are known to butcher translations of Japanese games because they don't do their homework... 88.161.129.43 (talk) 12:45, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chrono Break verses Chrono Brake... 

message: So, the chrono team is maintaining FFXI eh? And they can't make a new chrono game until FFXI is done? I think this can offer an explanation of where WotG came from --67.160.118.193 (talk) 21:18, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article sure clears up a few questions all right 

message: Article does not meet Wiki requirements.  A redirect to main Chrono series article is appropriate. Sheeeeeeep (talk) 17:48, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I undid this. You need to come to concensus before you do things like. Especially considering:
#It was a good article.
#It's been around for years, is well sourced and written, etc.
#People clearly oppose this. Myself included.  Sergecross73 msg me  18:01, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:   It's not a good article, doesn't matter what the people want, it doesn't fit Wiki's guidelines, and is best suited with a redirect.  Wiki is not a community where you discuss random copyrights. There has been no discussion on the article itself as it keeps getting deleted by annoying fanboys.Sheeeeeeep (talk) 18:04, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  If it's well sourced and well written, why can't there be an article on a copyright? Not to mention, it's been discussed by a number of reliable sources. I could understand if the page was sloppy or offensive or something, but it's very professional. There's no reason NOT to have it.  Sergecross73 msg me  18:08, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

text: Look, just give it up. At this point, you've been reverted by 4 people, and I would also revert you. There's a well-sourced article about the subject, so it meets the guidelines. It's nice that you feel like you're "defending the wiki" or something but this is a consensus-driven site and no one agrees with you. --PresN 18:10, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, there's nothing about the page that goes against WP guidelines. Unless you can specifically come up with a reason not to keep this, consensus seems to say it stays. If you REALLY think it should go, make an AFD and let 'the community' decide. Being bold is fine, but not in light of being the sole holder of the opinion. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 18:12, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: And "Chrono Break" gets 61,400 results on Google, suggesting notability (in addition to the sources). ZeaLitY [ Talk - Activity ] 05:44, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the notability guideline, notability is not temporary. Under that guideline, if the game was already sufficiently notable before it was cancelled or put on indefinite hiatus, the cancellation / hiatus would not push it below the notability threshold, and press coverage of the cancellation / hiatus would actually increase notability just like any other press coverage related to the game. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 08:48, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well like Duke Nukem Forever, it continues to be brought up periodically by game news magazines and sites as one of the most anticipated sequals that never happened (yet).陣内Jinnai 16:43, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion 

message: A bit late, but RPGamer did an April Fool's joke this year with CB so incase someone starts adding info about its release, check the date.陣内Jinnai 20:57, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  April Fool's joke