Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Final Fantasy/Archive/19

message: == Clean-up Suggestions ==
I'm assigning a few tasks to keep the articles under the project umbrella nice and tidy. Several of you practice these on a regular basis, but since it's difficult to keep watch on every single article, please take initiative and fix these problems as they cross your path. ~ Hibana 17:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Housekeeping

message: I'm assigning a few tasks to keep the articles under the project umbrella nice and tidy. Several of you practice these on a regular basis, but since it's difficult to keep watch on every single article, please take initiative and fix these problems as they cross your path. ~ Hibana 17:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clean-up Suggestions 

message: What should be the flagship article of this entire project is in dire need or some organization and serious need of citation. I know pretty much everyone's started back to school and busy as ever, but try to lend a hand if you get time. We've focused on our favorite games, gotten many featured, and watch over them like hawks, but this article needs help. ~ Hibana 02:09, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Main Final Fantasy article

message: == Mid-November roll call ==
Hi all, don't forget to add your name to this, and what you're up to. At the end of the month I'll update the participants list to anyone who puts their name here.
* Cuahl - I'm back after a long time away and really hope to revive the project and our original ideas. — CuaHL 15:41, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Everyone's still burned out from the 5-6 Featured Article summer run and/or have moved discussions to Wikipedia:WikiProject Square Enix, which is essensially where this project is right now (or so I hear). — Deckiller 18:07, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What about those only interested in the Final Fantasy series specifically? There are more than enough articles to merit an independent Wikiproject — CuaHL 18:46, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what I said, but I seemed to be in the minority. I'm in for a revival. -RaCha'ar 15:38, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Community

message: Hi all, don't forget to add your name to this, and what you're up to. At the end of the month I'll update the participants list to anyone who puts their name here.
* Cuahl - I'm back after a long time away and really hope to revive the project and our original ideas. — CuaHL 15:41, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mid-November roll call 

message: Hey, I've been away for a while, but it seems this project has died a bit. I'm going to do a bit on the housecleaning side of things, much like I've seen Seancdaug do lately (good to see you again :)) like tidying the archives and updating the index for example. Has anyone got any ideas how we can patch this up again? — CuaHL 15:41, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Everyone's still burned out from the 5-6 Featured Article summer run and/or have moved discussions to Wikipedia:WikiProject Square Enix, which is essensially where this project is right now (or so I hear). — Deckiller 18:07, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What about those only interested in the Final Fantasy series specifically? There are more than enough articles to merit an independent Wikiproject — CuaHL 18:46, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what I said, but I seemed to be in the minority. I'm in for a revival. -RaCha'ar 15:38, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project revival 

message: Hi all, don't forget to add your name to this, and what you're up to. At the end of the month I'll update the participants list to anyone who puts their name here.
* Renmiri - Just archived the project page. Will be working on FFXII for the next couple of weeks Renmiri 01:10, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Late December roll call 

message: Someone please help, all the work I have done on Link (Legend of Zelda) has been reverted and I don't want to break to 3 revert rule, so someone please stop them from reverting everything I did. Judgesurreal777 03:51, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Err... shouldn't you discuss this at WP:CVG or WP:ZELDA?--TBCTaLk?!? 05:12, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems the matter was taken care off. Renmiri 00:37, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, situation cleared up. I thought to ask here because people know me here :) Judgesurreal777 00:17, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Link (Legend of Zelda)]]

message: I don't understand why a video game character takes precedence over a large number of other uses (listed at Yuna (disambiguation)).  I propose moving the article to Yuna (Final Fantasy), per precedent for Pauline (Nintendo) and King Bowser.  I would be bold do it myeslf, but I don't want to incur divine wrath (i.e. spoiler tags question), so I thought I'd ask you guys. Hbdragon88 08:23, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll be happy to hit anyone who objects with a cluestick, unless the other uses are really obscure. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 08:39, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, take a look at the other ones. Galaxy Fraulein Yuna has its own name and it doesn't seem too notable. Yuna River is a one-line stub. Hibiscus tiliaceus (which redirects to Hau (tree)) is a technical name which only translates to Yuna in one language. The only possibly notable other use would be Yuna Ito, but naming conventions dictate the inclusion of her last name. With Pauline and Bowser, there are plenty of more notable uses which would impress the need to have them not be the main page but that doesn't really apply here. Axem Titanium 19:28, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Article length shouldn't be an issue here - many CVG users argued that Bowser (tanker) was a two-paragraph stub while the Nintendo character was a nice long article.  JzG countered that it was due to systematic bias because there were more CVG editors than Bowser tanker editors. Hbdragon88 19:41, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is "what links here" considered a factor? I count 107 pages linking to Yuna. Even discounting the userspace links, that's a significant number. --Roninbk t c  # 04:31, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think so.  At least, for JzG he used AWB or soemthing and went around fixing all of the Bowser links - twice, once for Bowser (Nintendo) and again for King Bowser Hbdragon88 05:09, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Mario holds the prime spot and he's a video game character. Frankly, I don't really care either way but I think that Yuna the character is probably the most prevalent usage of the word in the English speaking world. Axem Titanium 20:28, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Mario is...Mario. Yuna isn't exactly mentioned in the same breath as Mickey Mouse. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:31, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps, but if someone was searching for the other Yunas, they wouldn't type in just "Yuna?" Sir Crazyswordsman 03:58, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Which is what we're trying to get at.  As Yuna isn't the most prevalent usage, we want to move Yuna to Yuna (Final Fantasy), so people looking for other Yuna uses will go to a disambiguation page, instead of having to go to the FF page and click the (disambiguation) link. Hbdragon88 05:09, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, it's one click versus two clicks. If we want to be that considerate to the decidedly few number of people who are searching for other Yunas, we can be. I don't think anyone will get arthritis from clicking an extra link. Axem Titanium 17:44, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I wouldn't say Yuna's that popular anyway.  Most people I speak to speak to, including myself, like Rydia a helluva lot more. Sir Crazyswordsman 15:41, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Yuna]]

message: Just a heads up; a redname slapped  on List of Final Fantasy VI characters again. I'll give you three guesses on which character (and don't mind the section title ¬_¬). Someone want to explain to them why it isn't happening? I took care of the tag. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 05:26, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice job nipping that one in the bud. It has been discussed at length, especially at Talk:Kefka Palazzo and when all the playable characters were at risk for merging. I was the one who requested page protection all those months ago because it kept getting reverted back into article form. One question though AMIB, why do you want to merge in Gogo (Final Fantasy)? I mean he is playable, quite popular, and does appear in more than one game, albeit as a boss villain in Final Fantasy V. ~ Hibana 14:20, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Gogo is already merged into a generic article.  Personally, I think Kefka should have his own article (at least more than Seymour...), but I know consensus is against me so I don't make it.  If we are to merge player character articles, we shouldn't just do it by game.  We should do it by importance to the game.  For example, I'd consider keeping at least two characters from each non-job system game, preferably the main character and one who contributes a lot to the story.  FFVII should keep all player characters regardless due to Square's insistance on making crap sequels.  But let's not go on a merge crusade right now. Sir Crazyswordsman 15:46, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

text: I see. The same could probably be said for Umaro, who has no controversial connection to a real-life politician. :) ~ Hibana 00:47, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, that "controversy" is one of those forum-only phenomena anyway. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:50, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, remember the Gogo/Adlai Stevenson controversey?  That actually got mainstream press coverage! (Well, it did, but the articles I found on it may have gotten deleted).  I do remember seeing them though. Sir Crazyswordsman 03:34, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kefka split proposal AGAIN 

message: Midgar, AVALANCHE, Materia the FF7 term list, and the FF7 timeline belong in a single article similar to Spira (Final Fantasy X)....perhaps Backstory of Final Fantasy VII or something like that. This needs to be done :) I'd be willing to help. — Deckiller 23:09, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps Terminology of Final Fantasy VII would be better, as to be similar to my Terminology of Final Fantasy VI, which I have been slacking on lately. Sir Crazyswordsman 04:05, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, that might work. Something to compress the cruft into an GA-worthy overview. — Deckiller 05:39, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Speaking of GA, how come most of the current work on my article is being done by non-WPFF/WPSE regulars?  I personally think the FFVI version of this article (which has existed since April) needs to be brought up to GA standards.  I'd like some ideas for additional material. Sir Crazyswordsman 16:50, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

text: The point of this is to compress all those articles that would easily survive AfD anyway into one succinct article. — Deckiller 18:09, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess they'd pass AFD, I just don't see the great value in having separate articles also describing the plot of FFVII, be it a half-dozen or just one. Forced to choose between those, though, I'd choose the latter. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:52, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Compromise was the basis behind the idea. — Deckiller 01:36, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: For the sake of argument, compromise between what and what? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 01:41, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I suppose he means compromise between not having this stuff at all and having a million articles about them. Personally, I like the idea of either shoving it all into one easily manageable article or having it completely gone. Axem Titanium 02:21, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I was trying to make the point that we already have a compromise; that we cover fictional subjects and plot summary as support for real-world content. I don't see how Backstory of Final Fantasy VII could be anything but plot summary/description of a fictional world. That said, I'm not going to oppose the merge (it's better than the status quo), simply question whether it's the best solution. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:01, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

text: That said, you're probably right. It would be difficult to justify an article like that considering the requirements at WP:FICT about needing to have outside references and not be entirely in-universe (even though it would be easier to justify than the myriad articles that currently exist). On the other hand, I don't really know of a better way to quell the inclusionist camps who demand these articles' existence. Axem Titanium 03:18, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It would probably be no different than Spira (Final Fantasy X), which is a good article. Plus, FF7 probably has more out of universe material (since it's so "popular"), so it can include even more out of universe issues than Spira. The key is not to just throw the information in; it's to refine it into a description and out of universe analysis of the setting elements of FFVII, since complete comprehensiveness can't be attained on the main page (not to mention a compromise between 80 articles and one). The merge is our best option regardless, since we can look at this article when it's all said and done and see if there is a way to compress it into the main article (doubtful, but possible). It's merely a step in the right (or perhaps only available) direction - we should do what we can and not overshoot. — Deckiller 03:24, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As usual, you're right. Even if a merge is less than ideal (still an open question, and I know I'm falling into the trap of thinking about the article I'm worried about rather than the article we're likely to end up with), it's the most practical solution at this point. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:36, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Backstory of [[Final Fantasy VII]] 

message: I won't be able to this week or next, due to heavy exams and lab report loads, but the week after I plan to turn my attention back to this article, which I wrote earlier this year.  My first plan will be to submit it for a peer review for purposes of getting new ideas, then expand the article, then get a formatting peer review, and finally, submit it to GA.  Sir Crazyswordsman 05:48, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: On a related note, I should probably bring up [[Terminology of Final Fantasy VI]]

message: I suggest we merge the airship list (much, much compressed - perhaps into two paragraphs and one or two sample images of final fantasy airships), item article (slightly compressed). armor/weapons lists (not used as lists; instead, a few paragraphs describing the systems and their evolution, with some examples cited (I.E. buster sword, pinwheel) for sourced analysis), a brief section on magic with a main article template, sections on classes, etc (main templates). In essense, we will axe the potentially endless lists of armor and weapons into sections on this page, merge the item page into this article, and so on. I think it's possible, and a great way to take the project to the next level. — Deckiller 00:39, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I could hug you Deckiller. --Tristam 00:42, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ^_^. I'm starting a skeleton at User:Deckiller/Gameplay of Final Fantasy. — Deckiller 00:43, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Awww, gwoup hug!!! --Roninbk t c  # 00:45, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

text: What ? What are they doing that we don't ? I refuse to be second banana! ;-)  (j/k). I can get some great shots of all FFX and X2 ships and weapons, in any position  , . Even better than my DVD ones. I just hope extracting them from the game DVD is fair use! Renmiri 04:32, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think how you get an image is what qualifies or disqualifies an image as Fair Use, except when you get it from the internet (netiquette law means taking images from fansites without sourcing them makes you enemies very quickly), but more how you use it. Sir Crazyswordsman 05:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, we don't want this to turn into a huge list project. Really, we can summarize travel in final fantasy in 5 paragraphs: 2-3 on airships, 1 on chocobos, and 1-2 on others. As for weapons, I'd say 3 paragraphs would probably be enough to provide a succinct overview. Sure, we'd have no more huge lists of all the weapons, but Cloud's weapons should be described in more depth on his page, if at all. — Deckiller 05:38, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Just FYI, Square Enix, and many other companies, make sometimes extra Weapons and other stuff, but they delete it in the full game and only the data is left on the disk. On the FFX disk there is a Buster sword for Tidus, but I believe getting it in the game is impossible. Renmiri 15:08, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But remember, the Buster Sword isn't an FF invention.  It appeared at least as early as Lufia 2. Sir Crazyswordsman 06:08, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

text: One of my requested articles in the WP:SE To-Do list was Crystal (Final Fantasy). Perhaps this should included in this article as well. ~ Hibana 15:43, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Gameplay of Final Fantasy]] 

message: It might be difficult to compress this enough into a 5 paragraph section on the gameplay article; perhaps we should have a main template and provide a brief summary on the gameplay page instead? — Deckiller 03:39, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems like that page is listy and trivial enough that it can be manageable and prosified into the Gameplay article. --Tristam 01:21, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know if I'd call it "trivial", as it encompasses over 20 works (thus, it has to be wordy to describe the progression and whatnot). We'll see how it turns out. — Deckiller 01:48, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I honestly don't see how we can compress all of this.  Why don't we just leave things the way they are?  They're fine enough as is (ie not stubby, and provide basically a general overview of everything).  Our goal shouldn't be "how few articles can we write?"  Frankly, we shouldn't be trying to cut down on encyclopedic material just to merge something.  I am a mergist, but mergism for mergism's sake is not the way to be a mergist. Sir Crazyswordsman 01:56, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the items, weapons, armor, and airships pages can probably be easily compressed, but the magic page will have to stay IMO (and, of course, the class list and so on). — Deckiller 02:04, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Final Fantasy magic?

message: What do you guys think about this? Is it really necessary to devote a section to enemies, since everything that needs to be said about them can be summed up in the basics section? — Deckiller 03:39, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Enemies section?

message: *Hank Hill. ^_^. — Deckiller 05:03, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Take a look at...

message: # I support merging.  I always saw WP:SE as just taking this project and expanding it, so I don't see the point of having 2 seperate projects. --PresN 04:22, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Support

message: *Opposing on the minority basis that not all FF fans are SE fans, myself included.  I don't personally want to have to wade through a lot of SE-related stuff to do work on FF games, which is all I came here for.  I don't entirely understand why this project can't exist as well as the SE project; seems to me there's a lot of FF-specific work to be done that might overtake the SE project page anyway.  -RaCha'ar 12:58, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Oppose

message: *Doesn't the fair old logo of our beloved game series deserve a paragraph; no I am specifically saying that i needs a paragraph in the main article. I believe a small section should be dedicated because of how recognisable the logo and typset is and how each game's, for lack of a better word, monogram weaves in and out of it. As well as explaining how the monogram relates to an element of the plot.--Squall1991 10:14, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Final Fantasy Logo

message: I happened to stumble along this 4 line article the other day. Anyone have any ideas what to do with it? -- Steel 11:28, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Job system]]

message: We're featured now.  Special thanks to all who helped out! Sir Crazyswordsman 17:22, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Congratulations. Sorry I wasn't able to help with that effort beyond supporting in FAC. Ryu Kaze 17:27, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Ryu. Sir Crazyswordsman 17:29, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks guys. Sir Crazyswordsman 20:39, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Final Fantasy IV]] update

message: Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory.  These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages: 
*User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory, 
*User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory 2, 
*User:Badbilltucker/Philosophy and religion Directory, 
*User:Badbilltucker/Sports Directory, 
*User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory, 
*User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory/United States, (note: This page will be retitled to more accurately reflect its contents)
*User:Badbilltucker/History and society directory, and
*User:Badbilltucker/Science directory
and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory.
The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. 
It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 21:18, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry if you tried to update it before, and the corrections were gone. I have now put the new draft in the old directory pages, so the links should work better. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused you. B2T2 00:04, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project Directory 

message: :Image:Black mage.svg, used extensively for the Final Fantasy WikiProject, is currently waiting to be deleted as soon as it is replaced/delinked. Although the license tag claims that is released under the GFDL, this claim has been made in error; to quote from commons:Commons:Derivative works:
:Nothing you'll ever do, whether you draw Pikachu with your own crayons or sculpt a giant Sailor Moon figurine, will ever lead to the point where you magically turn copyrighted material into "free" material.
As an infinitely high-resolution image, the SVG cannot ever qualify for "fair use"; please create a .PNG replacement (a direct rendering from the Wikmedia servers, eg. ) at a suitable resolution and replace all usages. You have 7 days before the SVG is deleted. Thanks, [ælfəks] 02:00, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed; also, I found that quote to be insulting, but you didn't start the quote, so I don't have any bones to pick. — Deckiller 02:17, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

text: PresN, it is often quite difficult to tell that hundreds of uses of an image are resulting from a template; be grateful that I actually notified people that it was going to be deleted before there were dozens of redlinks everywhere. As for the quote I included, Deckiller - about turning copyrighted material into "free" material - if you're insulted by that, I suggest you go and read up on copyright law and how it applies to derivative works. Regards, [ælfəks] 15:12, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Black Mage "logo" about to be deleted 

message: Hello. I would like to request for comment on an ongoing dispute on the Tifa Lockhart talk page. The dispute is on whether or not a certain reverted edit comprises OR, and on what information should be included under the "Love" section in the article.
I considered adding this on WP:RFC, but I figured I would try here first, seeing as to how background knowledge of the FF7 Love Triangle might help in resolving the dispute. Thanks! -ryand 08:27, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Request for comment

message: As with all Final Fantasies, shouldn't the main characters as with the main villain have seperate articles. Can someone create seperate articles for characters like Vaan, Ashe, Basch, Penelo, Balthier, Fran and Vayne only if you feel they are needed. As the game has been released, more information regarding the game is accessible to us, making it easier for us to create these articles. Whaddya say? -- Visual planet 17:59, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd prefer that you didn't in the same way that I'd prefer individual character articles be collapsed for other Final Fantasy games. Why not just work on the Final Fantasy XII page itself? Cover the general roles of the characters in the plot section without "analyzing" any one character; character analysis from the primary source (the game itself) is original research. --Tristam 23:16, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll echo Tristam's response. At this point, I don't see much rationale or benefit for diffusing information about the game throughout more articles than necessary. – Sean Daugherty (talk) 07:52, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seperate articles for the main characters in FFXII? 

message: I don't know how many people here participate actively in the discussion over at the CVG WikiProject (I know I usually don't...), but there's a ongoing drive there to simplify and standardize navboxes (see here). I suppose we've only been spared attention because of professional courtesy, but... well... let's be honest: our navbox is a monster. Going by the proposed guidelines offered in the cited thread, I've come up with a more streamlined approach that matches the CVG standard. In dealing with our specific circumstances, I made the following decisions:
*I removed any links to category listings. I don't think it's good practice to mix and match article and category links, since it winds up being fairly confusing.
*In the case of subseries (Compilation of Final Fantasy VII and Fabula Nova Crystallis Final Fantasy XIII), I've removed links to the individual entries in favor of the main series link. The exceptions are subseries that don't have a series article (Tactics and Crystal Chronicles).
*I put the three Crystal Chronicles games on their own line, solely for aesthetic purposes.
After that, the result is as follows:
Final Fantasy • II • III • IV • V • VI • VII • VIII • IX • X • XI • XII • XIII
X-2 • XII Revenant Wings • Adventure • Mystic Quest • Tactics • Tactics Advance
Crystal Chronicles • CC: Crystal Bearers • CC: Ring of Fates
Compilation of VII • Fabula Nova Crystallis XIII • Other
VII Advent Children • Last Order -VII- • Legend of the Crystals • The Spirits Within • Unlimited
Airships • Armor • Bestiary • Character classes • Designers • Items • Magic • Music • Races • Weapons
I'm still a little concerned by the size, but at least it's smaller than the current one, and lacks the weird spacing issue with the title bar. Does anyone have any suggestions or comments? – Sean Daugherty (talk) 12:58, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In both cases, what concerns me is that we're deviating from the CVG project standard. Less so than the current model, of course, but deviating nonetheless. I like the former (smaller text size) one more than the latter (partially hidden one) one, though. The second one strikes me as a bit confusing. But while the smaller text one saves some screen space, it doesn't really seem to address the deeper issue, which is that an overloaded navbox may be confusing to readers. I was thinking about removing the video links, on the pretense that, a) we don't need to be exhaustive, and b) they're presented as links within List of Final Fantasy titles, which is linked under "other" already. Also, maybe following the advice suggested in WP:CVG thread and removing links to forthcoming titles until they're actually release. So something like this:
Final Fantasy • II • III • IV • V • VI • VII • VIII • IX • X • XI • XII
Compilation of VII • X-2 • Adventure • Crystal Chronicles • Mystic Quest • Tactics • Tactics Advance • Other
Airships • Armor • Bestiary • Character classes • Designers • Items • Magic • Music • Races • Weapons
Thoughts? – Sean Daugherty (talk) 20:11, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Yours is certainly a step above the clutter that it is now, Sean. Well done! --Tristam 01:42, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *I think cutting off related series and parring down the more info would be beneficial.  Only recently was the formatting broken and the box looks broken. I tried slimming it down on the 10th already too. Deusfaux 08:25, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The box simply works as a slight navigation aid anyway - after all, the whole article is wikilinked. So I think the newest version is perfect. People can still find what they want using it, and it's not an eyesore. — CuaHL ☺ 10:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

text: What Cuahl said. I love this one.  -RaCha'ar 06:58, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, Cuahl. It's lookin' good. – Sean Daugherty (talk) 18:47, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

text: What about XIII? --KucamungaCatnip 20:12, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's basically a stub right now so linking there would be little better than having nothing there at all. Anyway, it looks good. Axem Titanium 20:57, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The proposed guidelines over at WP:CVG say to avoid unreleased/forthcoming games. I'm fairly indifferent, either way, but leaving it out does save a little bit of space for the time being. – Sean Daugherty (talk) 03:18, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I would say go with the top one. It's perfect in that it's streamlined, yet still legible. Odin of Trondheim 21:09, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I also think the top one would be better. The current template doesn't even mention  any films or anime, which are also an important part of the series. Jagged 85 13:05, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Honestly, I don't think so. FF has always been a video game series. The films/anime/etc. are all simply spinoffs of the series and are all sufficiently mentioned in the List of FF titles and the main FF page. The function of a navbox is to facilitate navigation to high traffic pages, not to include all aspects of a series in some kind of uber-template. That's what a category is for. Axem Titanium 01:19, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you wish to exclude films and anime from this template, we might as well rename it to Final Fantasy video games instead, since this template clearly doesn't cover the series as a whole. We could also possibly create another template for the film and anime titles instead. 13:26, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Navbox 

message: This is certainly a possibility, and I'm closing in on being confortable enough to start it. — Deckiller 12:41, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Gameplay of Final Fantasy rehash

message: Got it with my FFXII as a bonus DVD, uploaded it to Youtube. Full of details on game design for our FA pages :D   Wish we could post here. Can we ? Renmiri 20:49, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think so... but nice upload. I have the DVD too and I was going to make a transcript but I suppose that works too. Axem Titanium 14:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: First I have dissapproval of how they pronounce Tidus, then I disapprove of how they pronounce Yuffie.  But this is the last straw.  They mispronounce Cecil's name.  My beloved Cecil! Sir Crazyswordsman 02:29, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Aye, what a bunch of know knothings these Japanese translators are! ;-)  Renmiri 17:49, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: History of Final Fantasy Series

message: We're having some fun little mini-edit wars there since Mythsearcher, Axem Titanium and I decided that any "CID HIGHWIND WAS A DRAGOON" type speculative stuff does not belong in the article.  The rule is, if a character is not explicitly defined as a certain character class in the game, it cannot be listed under that character class's entry in the article, since to do so would be original research.  Ever since all the Cait Siths and Cid Highwinds were removed from the article, people - mostly anons - keep adding them back in.  I'm reverting at least one of these adds a day.  Could I please ask the help of the project to keep an eye on this page and to help decide if we're being too draconian with these rules and their enforcement?  Certainly any blatant additions along the lines of the aforementioned Cid (the biggest offender) should be gone but a recent anon added this, which is phrased in such a way that it obviously draws the comparison to the characteristics of the class without outright claiming that Cait Sith is a gambler.  I can't in good conscience just take it out because I don't find it to be offending WP:OR too badly.  It's becoming difficult to figure out what should be left out and what might be allowed in.  Thoughts? -RaCha'ar 21:52, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As I said at that page's talk page, it's still pangs of OR. Also, taken by itself, that edit is simply adding a statement for the reader to evaluate but really doesn't develop it. As such, it probably is too tangential to include in the article anyway. Axem Titanium 22:26, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Final Fantasy character classes]]

message: Beginning cross-post.
:See Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team#Stablepedia. If you wish to comment, please comment there. ★MESSEDROCKER★ 00:08, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stablepedia 

message: Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Final Fantasy X. — Deckiller 11:30, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Some people from this project should expand the article on the Al Bhed language.  As of now it is the only article missing from the FFX featured topic.  --Arctic Gnome 17:44, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I had quite a lot more on there, deleted by some crabby user. Renmiri 00:44, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  FATC 

message: I'm afraid the main article of the series is in terrible shape. This is the first place newcomers will go to when wanting to know about FF, and my guess is that they won't go any further. It should at least be brought to GA status before we can concentrate on anything else.--SidiLemine 11:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you give more specific critiques of the article that we can respond to? -RaCha'ar 16:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, for a start, the article structure is a bit awkward, with all the genesis in the Overview section (and practically nothing else), no description of continuity of staff, and no reception/impact section. Then, the images don't do justice to the franchise. And I'm not saying that we should only insert pictures of FFXIII; FFVI had great graphics for the time. There is a lot of lists, not all relevant. Absolutely no citations or references are provided: don't let the footnotes fool you. The logo on top of the page, if appropriate, is still not very pretty. The sections are poorly balanced and hold no reflection on their respective importance. The whole prose is disconnected and hold no "juice" in it. I'm saying all that before sitting to actually review the article. All I'm saying is, the FF series is one of the very best series of WP, and this article should be at least as good as the game-specific ones. And it's miles away.--SidiLemine 17:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main Article in disarray 

message: The current GCOTW is Tactics Ogre: Let Us Cling Together, by FF Tactics creator Yasumi Matsuno. If anyone here has played the game and could expand the gamplay section that would be great. jaco♫plane 16:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tactics Ogre 

message: An editor has apparently newly created a template, Template:fancruft, for the express purpose of putting it on the Gameplay section of Final Fantasy XI.  I admit I'm taking this personally since I put in many, many hours to removing all the cruft that the article had formerly been laden with, so I can't look at it with an objective eye.  I've asked the editor to come to the talk page of the article and explain his reasoning, but I would appreciate it if people here at the project would take a look, too.  The rest of the article has not been rewritten, mostly because I don't play FFXI anymore and find it hard to get up any passion to do the article (sorry...), but the Gameplay section was extensively rewritten with a lot of input from the talk page.  I'd really love to know what problems it might still have.  Thanks! -RaCha'ar 17:29, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no official policy or guideline on fancruft. Wikipedia:Fancruft is just an essay. As long as WP:NOT#IINFO is followed, there should be no problem. Personally I feel the gameplay section of that article is rather long and probably a little too detailed for an encyclopedia article, but you should feel free to remove that fancruft template. jaco♫plane 17:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I'm looking it over again and trying to figure out what to pull out - the problem is, I keep going to World of Warcraft as an example of an MMO article and it's not helping, heh.  Given that there is no official policy on fancruft, do you think the template should be put up for deletion?  I'm personally of the mind that there's plenty of other templates that cover the same territory and actually refer to existing policies... -RaCha'ar 18:00, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

text: The template was a recreation of deleted content (original Tfd here) so I speedied it. That said, the gameplay section does look incredibly long (12 sections!?). The Servers section can probably be nixed in favor of just mentioning the ability to change servers with a World Pass. The rest with World Migration and stuff doesn't look vital. Interface can probably be put into a System requirements section like the WoW article has. Game environments and Nation allegiance can probably be moved to the Plot area. Missions, Crafting and PvP can probably be merged into a general "what you can do in Vana'diel" section, summary style. Job system can stay but Leveling looks a little too specific and can mostly be removed. For the last two sections, try to limit the original research if you can. Axem Titanium 21:42, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I'll start poking at it to try to deflate it a little.  Would you suggest using an article like World of Warcraft as a model, since it's another MMORPG, or using the other Final Fantasy articles as a model? -RaCha'ar 06:34, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

text: WoW is a good model, but if you strip the gameplay section down that far, you can't really get a feel for what the game is about. Personally, I think the WoW gameplay section is a bit on the short side (ie, it's not "comprehensive"). Axem Titanium 21:42, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Final Fantasy XI]] - fancruft?

message: This should really be compressed to one page, entitled, "Creatures of Final Fantasy" or "Monsters of Final Fantasy". It can still be a list of the 15-20 most common and key monster/monster series throughout the series. A few probably dserve their own articles, as well, but I seriously think this page needs significant compression. How about a rule of three: if the monster has not appeared in more than three games and can not be subject to more than a 4 sentence paragraph of non-crufty information, it should be excluded and/or transwikied. — Deckiller 03:38, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've begun the process at User:Deckiller/Beasts of Final Fantasy. — Deckiller 04:10, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: PLEASE DO NOT TRANSWIKI THIS.  We've our own system going on at Wikia, where each individual monster from each individual game gets an aricle (although the most common monsters get a main article, even as common as Basilisk.  Go ahead and transwiki that if you want, but don't just dump articles on us). But like I said, mergism for mergism's sake is very, very bad, just as inclusionism/deletionism for their sakes is bad. Sir Crazyswordsman 16:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Dammit, I was just about to volunteer to do this.  I'll go help out.  :) -RaCha'ar 16:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Project: Consolidation of the Final Fantasy bestiary

message: Hello. Could someone come up with a standardized format for character articles? The sample article given for character articles is Squall Leonhart, but compare that to articles like Aerith Gainsborough and Zidane Tribal and you'll see a lot of inconsistency. What information should be included in these articles? 
As it stands, the FFVIII and FFX character articles are the most concise, with sections for backstory, appearances, and characteristics. The FFVII articles are generally okay except for the Tifa Lockhart and Aerith Gainsborough articles, which bear clear signs of the Tifa-Aerith fan war (additional sections about love, personality, Aerith's theme, et cetera - while notable, I'm not sure how much information is too much). The FFIX articles are, to put it bluntly, in a mess - Adelbert Steiner for one is completely unstructured.
If anyone could add a section to the manual of style, that would be helpful. -ryand 08:02, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As of right now, we're looking into merging all but the most major characters into characters lists per #This is it - Groundwork for the FINAL FANTASY CAMPAIGN. You're welcome to contribute for now but be aware that some of it may be merged into one of those lists. Axem Titanium 19:58, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, we're in the process of stabilizing things and consolidating, but we should get a clear picture within a couple months. Leonhart mixes a lot of the good ideas, taking a "best of all words" sort of approach. — Deckiller 21:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It'll be a long and tedious process.  I may be able to help next week after I finish exams. Sir Crazyswordsman 20:05, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Character articles

message: Is full of missed translations and little inaccuracies. I tried to improve it a bit but it needs some major work. Unfortunately I'm also busy with my own site so I can't do much. You guys are welcome to get my images from my site though. Renmiri 00:50, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Final Fantasy XII

message: As with all Final Fantasies, shouldn't the main characters as with the main villain have seperate articles. Can someone create seperate articles for characters like Vaan, Ashe, Basch, Penelo, Balthier, Fran and Vayne only if you feel they are needed. As the game has been released, more information regarding the game is accessible to us, making it easier for us to create these articles. Whaddya say? -- Visual planet 17:59, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd prefer that you didn't in the same way that I'd prefer individual character articles be collapsed for other Final Fantasy games. Why not just work on the Final Fantasy XII page itself? Cover the general roles of the characters in the plot section without "analyzing" any one character; character analysis from the primary source (the game itself) is original research. --Tristam 23:16, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll echo Tristam's response. At this point, I don't see much rationale or benefit for diffusing information about the game throughout more articles than necessary. – Sean Daugherty (talk) 07:52, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seperate articles for the main characters in FFXII? 

message: I don't know how many people here participate actively in the discussion over at the CVG WikiProject (I know I usually don't...), but there's a ongoing drive there to simplify and standardize navboxes (see here). I suppose we've only been spared attention because of professional courtesy, but... well... let's be honest: our navbox is a monster. Going by the proposed guidelines offered in the cited thread, I've come up with a more streamlined approach that matches the CVG standard. In dealing with our specific circumstances, I made the following decisions:
*I removed any links to category listings. I don't think it's good practice to mix and match article and category links, since it winds up being fairly confusing.
*In the case of subseries (Compilation of Final Fantasy VII and Fabula Nova Crystallis Final Fantasy XIII), I've removed links to the individual entries in favor of the main series link. The exceptions are subseries that don't have a series article (Tactics and Crystal Chronicles).
*I put the three Crystal Chronicles games on their own line, solely for aesthetic purposes.
After that, the result is as follows:
Final Fantasy • II • III • IV • V • VI • VII • VIII • IX • X • XI • XII • XIII
X-2 • XII Revenant Wings • Adventure • Mystic Quest • Tactics • Tactics Advance
Crystal Chronicles • CC: Crystal Bearers • CC: Ring of Fates
Compilation of VII • Fabula Nova Crystallis XIII • Other
VII Advent Children • Last Order -VII- • Legend of the Crystals • The Spirits Within • Unlimited
Airships • Armor • Bestiary • Character classes • Designers • Items • Magic • Music • Races • Weapons
I'm still a little concerned by the size, but at least it's smaller than the current one, and lacks the weird spacing issue with the title bar. Does anyone have any suggestions or comments? – Sean Daugherty (talk) 12:58, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In both cases, what concerns me is that we're deviating from the CVG project standard. Less so than the current model, of course, but deviating nonetheless. I like the former (smaller text size) one more than the latter (partially hidden one) one, though. The second one strikes me as a bit confusing. But while the smaller text one saves some screen space, it doesn't really seem to address the deeper issue, which is that an overloaded navbox may be confusing to readers. I was thinking about removing the video links, on the pretense that, a) we don't need to be exhaustive, and b) they're presented as links within List of Final Fantasy titles, which is linked under "other" already. Also, maybe following the advice suggested in WP:CVG thread and removing links to forthcoming titles until they're actually release. So something like this:
Final Fantasy • II • III • IV • V • VI • VII • VIII • IX • X • XI • XII
Compilation of VII • X-2 • Adventure • Crystal Chronicles • Mystic Quest • Tactics • Tactics Advance • Other
Airships • Armor • Bestiary • Character classes • Designers • Items • Magic • Music • Races • Weapons
Thoughts? – Sean Daugherty (talk) 20:11, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Yours is certainly a step above the clutter that it is now, Sean. Well done! --Tristam 01:42, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *I think cutting off related series and parring down the more info would be beneficial.  Only recently was the formatting broken and the box looks broken. I tried slimming it down on the 10th already too. Deusfaux 08:25, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The box simply works as a slight navigation aid anyway - after all, the whole article is wikilinked. So I think the newest version is perfect. People can still find what they want using it, and it's not an eyesore. — CuaHL ☺ 10:16, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

text: What Cuahl said. I love this one.  -RaCha'ar 06:58, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, Cuahl. It's lookin' good. – Sean Daugherty (talk) 18:47, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

text: What about XIII? --KucamungaCatnip 20:12, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's basically a stub right now so linking there would be little better than having nothing there at all. Anyway, it looks good. Axem Titanium 20:57, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The proposed guidelines over at WP:CVG say to avoid unreleased/forthcoming games. I'm fairly indifferent, either way, but leaving it out does save a little bit of space for the time being. – Sean Daugherty (talk) 03:18, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I would say go with the top one. It's perfect in that it's streamlined, yet still legible. Odin of Trondheim 21:09, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I also think the top one would be better. The current template doesn't even mention  any films or anime, which are also an important part of the series. Jagged 85 13:05, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Honestly, I don't think so. FF has always been a video game series. The films/anime/etc. are all simply spinoffs of the series and are all sufficiently mentioned in the List of FF titles and the main FF page. The function of a navbox is to facilitate navigation to high traffic pages, not to include all aspects of a series in some kind of uber-template. That's what a category is for. Axem Titanium 01:19, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you wish to exclude films and anime from this template, we might as well rename it to Final Fantasy video games instead, since this template clearly doesn't cover the series as a whole. We could also possibly create another template for the film and anime titles instead. 13:26, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Navbox 

message: This is certainly a possibility, and I'm closing in on being confortable enough to start it. — Deckiller 12:41, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Gameplay of Final Fantasy rehash

message: Got it with my FFXII as a bonus DVD, uploaded it to Youtube. Full of details on game design for our FA pages :D   Wish we could post here. Can we ? Renmiri 20:49, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think so... but nice upload. I have the DVD too and I was going to make a transcript but I suppose that works too. Axem Titanium 14:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: First I have dissapproval of how they pronounce Tidus, then I disapprove of how they pronounce Yuffie.  But this is the last straw.  They mispronounce Cecil's name.  My beloved Cecil! Sir Crazyswordsman 02:29, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Aye, what a bunch of know knothings these Japanese translators are! ;-)  Renmiri 17:49, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: History of Final Fantasy Series

message: We're having some fun little mini-edit wars there since Mythsearcher, Axem Titanium and I decided that any "CID HIGHWIND WAS A DRAGOON" type speculative stuff does not belong in the article.  The rule is, if a character is not explicitly defined as a certain character class in the game, it cannot be listed under that character class's entry in the article, since to do so would be original research.  Ever since all the Cait Siths and Cid Highwinds were removed from the article, people - mostly anons - keep adding them back in.  I'm reverting at least one of these adds a day.  Could I please ask the help of the project to keep an eye on this page and to help decide if we're being too draconian with these rules and their enforcement?  Certainly any blatant additions along the lines of the aforementioned Cid (the biggest offender) should be gone but a recent anon added this, which is phrased in such a way that it obviously draws the comparison to the characteristics of the class without outright claiming that Cait Sith is a gambler.  I can't in good conscience just take it out because I don't find it to be offending WP:OR too badly.  It's becoming difficult to figure out what should be left out and what might be allowed in.  Thoughts? -RaCha'ar 21:52, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As I said at that page's talk page, it's still pangs of OR. Also, taken by itself, that edit is simply adding a statement for the reader to evaluate but really doesn't develop it. As such, it probably is too tangential to include in the article anyway. Axem Titanium 22:26, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Final Fantasy character classes]]

message: Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Final Fantasy X. — Deckiller 11:30, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Some people from this project should expand the article on the Al Bhed language.  As of now it is the only article missing from the FFX featured topic.  --Arctic Gnome 17:44, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I had quite a lot more on there, deleted by some crabby user. Renmiri 00:44, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  FATC 

message: I'm afraid the main article of the series is in terrible shape. This is the first place newcomers will go to when wanting to know about FF, and my guess is that they won't go any further. It should at least be brought to GA status before we can concentrate on anything else.--SidiLemine 11:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you give more specific critiques of the article that we can respond to? -RaCha'ar 16:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, for a start, the article structure is a bit awkward, with all the genesis in the Overview section (and practically nothing else), no description of continuity of staff, and no reception/impact section. Then, the images don't do justice to the franchise. And I'm not saying that we should only insert pictures of FFXIII; FFVI had great graphics for the time. There is a lot of lists, not all relevant. Absolutely no citations or references are provided: don't let the footnotes fool you. The logo on top of the page, if appropriate, is still not very pretty. The sections are poorly balanced and hold no reflection on their respective importance. The whole prose is disconnected and hold no "juice" in it. I'm saying all that before sitting to actually review the article. All I'm saying is, the FF series is one of the very best series of WP, and this article should be at least as good as the game-specific ones. And it's miles away.--SidiLemine 17:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Main Article in disarray 

message: The current GCOTW is Tactics Ogre: Let Us Cling Together, by FF Tactics creator Yasumi Matsuno. If anyone here has played the game and could expand the gamplay section that would be great. jaco♫plane 16:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tactics Ogre 

message: An editor has apparently newly created a template, Template:fancruft, for the express purpose of putting it on the Gameplay section of Final Fantasy XI.  I admit I'm taking this personally since I put in many, many hours to removing all the cruft that the article had formerly been laden with, so I can't look at it with an objective eye.  I've asked the editor to come to the talk page of the article and explain his reasoning, but I would appreciate it if people here at the project would take a look, too.  The rest of the article has not been rewritten, mostly because I don't play FFXI anymore and find it hard to get up any passion to do the article (sorry...), but the Gameplay section was extensively rewritten with a lot of input from the talk page.  I'd really love to know what problems it might still have.  Thanks! -RaCha'ar 17:29, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no official policy or guideline on fancruft. Wikipedia:Fancruft is just an essay. As long as WP:NOT#IINFO is followed, there should be no problem. Personally I feel the gameplay section of that article is rather long and probably a little too detailed for an encyclopedia article, but you should feel free to remove that fancruft template. jaco♫plane 17:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I'm looking it over again and trying to figure out what to pull out - the problem is, I keep going to World of Warcraft as an example of an MMO article and it's not helping, heh.  Given that there is no official policy on fancruft, do you think the template should be put up for deletion?  I'm personally of the mind that there's plenty of other templates that cover the same territory and actually refer to existing policies... -RaCha'ar 18:00, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

text: The template was a recreation of deleted content (original Tfd here) so I speedied it. That said, the gameplay section does look incredibly long (12 sections!?). The Servers section can probably be nixed in favor of just mentioning the ability to change servers with a World Pass. The rest with World Migration and stuff doesn't look vital. Interface can probably be put into a System requirements section like the WoW article has. Game environments and Nation allegiance can probably be moved to the Plot area. Missions, Crafting and PvP can probably be merged into a general "what you can do in Vana'diel" section, summary style. Job system can stay but Leveling looks a little too specific and can mostly be removed. For the last two sections, try to limit the original research if you can. Axem Titanium 21:42, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, I'll start poking at it to try to deflate it a little.  Would you suggest using an article like World of Warcraft as a model, since it's another MMORPG, or using the other Final Fantasy articles as a model? -RaCha'ar 06:34, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

text: WoW is a good model, but if you strip the gameplay section down that far, you can't really get a feel for what the game is about. Personally, I think the WoW gameplay section is a bit on the short side (ie, it's not "comprehensive"). Axem Titanium 21:42, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Final Fantasy XI]] - fancruft?

message: This should really be compressed to one page, entitled, "Creatures of Final Fantasy" or "Monsters of Final Fantasy". It can still be a list of the 15-20 most common and key monster/monster series throughout the series. A few probably dserve their own articles, as well, but I seriously think this page needs significant compression. How about a rule of three: if the monster has not appeared in more than three games and can not be subject to more than a 4 sentence paragraph of non-crufty information, it should be excluded and/or transwikied. — Deckiller 03:38, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've begun the process at User:Deckiller/Beasts of Final Fantasy. — Deckiller 04:10, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: PLEASE DO NOT TRANSWIKI THIS.  We've our own system going on at Wikia, where each individual monster from each individual game gets an aricle (although the most common monsters get a main article, even as common as Basilisk.  Go ahead and transwiki that if you want, but don't just dump articles on us). But like I said, mergism for mergism's sake is very, very bad, just as inclusionism/deletionism for their sakes is bad. Sir Crazyswordsman 16:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Dammit, I was just about to volunteer to do this.  I'll go help out.  :) -RaCha'ar 16:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Project: Consolidation of the Final Fantasy bestiary

message: Hello. Could someone come up with a standardized format for character articles? The sample article given for character articles is Squall Leonhart, but compare that to articles like Aerith Gainsborough and Zidane Tribal and you'll see a lot of inconsistency. What information should be included in these articles? 
As it stands, the FFVIII and FFX character articles are the most concise, with sections for backstory, appearances, and characteristics. The FFVII articles are generally okay except for the Tifa Lockhart and Aerith Gainsborough articles, which bear clear signs of the Tifa-Aerith fan war (additional sections about love, personality, Aerith's theme, et cetera - while notable, I'm not sure how much information is too much). The FFIX articles are, to put it bluntly, in a mess - Adelbert Steiner for one is completely unstructured.
If anyone could add a section to the manual of style, that would be helpful. -ryand 08:02, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As of right now, we're looking into merging all but the most major characters into characters lists per #This is it - Groundwork for the FINAL FANTASY CAMPAIGN. You're welcome to contribute for now but be aware that some of it may be merged into one of those lists. Axem Titanium 19:58, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, we're in the process of stabilizing things and consolidating, but we should get a clear picture within a couple months. Leonhart mixes a lot of the good ideas, taking a "best of all words" sort of approach. — Deckiller 21:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It'll be a long and tedious process.  I may be able to help next week after I finish exams. Sir Crazyswordsman 20:05, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Character articles

message: Is full of missed translations and little inaccuracies. I tried to improve it a bit but it needs some major work. Unfortunately I'm also busy with my own site so I can't do much. You guys are welcome to get my images from my site though. Renmiri 00:50, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Final Fantasy XII

message: Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 17:04, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Day Awards