Talk:Characters of 8-Bit Theater

message: Can we discuss a consensus for how exactly to explain this reference? I've seen it linking to at least three different articles, and right now there's just an explanation in brackets. I don't mind either way, but maybe there's a best way to do it? --R. Wolff 09:18, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Wizard did it 

message: :Image:Bikkes.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 01:14, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Bikkes.JPG

message: :Image:Blackbelt.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 14:37, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Blackbelt.gif

message: :Image:Sara.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:20, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Sara.JPG

message: :Image:Swordopolis.GIF is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 05:02, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Swordopolis.GIF

message: I've been wondering, is Jeff really significant enough for this article? He's not really a running gag (2 appearances compared to Akbar's appearances in most of the arcs, even appearing more than once at times), nor is he as important as, say, Bahamut. He's on about the same rank of importance as the Mob Boss. Maybe a minor mention in Akbar's description, like "There is also Jeff, whose business is just as shoddy, but tends to be honest about his services and has helped the Light Warriors travel to their destinations." --Jopasopa 01:00, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jeff 

message: Anyone have an objection to me archiving some of the older discussion on this page? It's pretty long now. bahamut0013♠♣ 21:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Since nobody objected, I have gone ahead and done it. bahamut0013♠♣ 20:53, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archive 

message: I'm thinking we should come up with a criterion for which characters have images. We could upload fair-use images for just about everyone on the list, but do we need to? My first thought is to include major characters only, but then it might also be beneficial to a reader to see a face to match to the name (it took me a bit of memory searching to remember who Akbar was). My final conclusion was that we can justify a small image of any character notable to make it on the list.
Thoughts? bahamut0013♠♣ 21:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have begun the process of uploading fair-use images of the major characters. bahamut0013♠♣ 20:54, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: I was searching the "Help me find a comic" thread on the NP forums and found something interesting:  Good enough proof that his name is just Messenger? It fits the naming scheme found in the Light Warriors, Other Warriors, White Mage, Black Belt, Dragoon, King Elf, Mob Boss and maybe something else I forgot. --Jopasopa (talk) 20:23, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The messenger's name 

message: I understand that the current convention for what order a character appears in is chronologically, but I think we might explore a few other options. Today, I noticed that LHM Gary wound up pretty distant from King Steve, with whom he shares an image, and Princess Sara. It occurred to me that the three are pretty much exclusively seen in each other's company since around episode 100 or so. It made more sense to group them (if only for the image). Then I realized that Dr Swordopolis, Darko, and Megahedron would all have to be grouped as well for consistancy. Matoya and Bahamut would make sense together, since they have seen similar levels of import and "screen time" in the comic. The Raven and Dr. Malpractice have seen so little significance, they could be toward the bottom...
Am I appealing to anyone's sense? Or should we leave it as is? At least the chronological order would be incontrevertable and unarguable, while we could bicker for days who is more significant to the plot to go on top.... bahamut0013♠♣ 00:45, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That makes sense to me. I know the order is chronological, but I think the casual reader who has not read the comic would think the current order is rather haphazard. --Eruhildo (talk) 18:23, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  character order 

message: I don't see the proxy war aspect at all. You could certainly interpret it from the current situation, but it's not immediately obvious and a different outcome is entirely possible. They should probably remain separate until something definite has been said. As for Megahedron, I believe we discussed him in the past and agreed not to mention him in the article until there's proof he actually exists outside of Red Mage's head. --R. Wolff (talk) 14:04, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine, I suppose I got a little ahead of myself. bahamut0013wordsdeeds  15:36, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh hey look who's in the latest comic. Still doesn't clear things up entirely but it's good enough source material to finally properly include Megahedron. --R. Wolff (talk) 16:00, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You see? It's not that implausible! :P bahamut0013wordsdeeds  16:30, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grouping the gods together/Proxy war 

message: Quoting myself from the discussion archive:
"I specifically put the running gag characters under one heading so the list at the top wouldn't get overly long. They are extremely insignificant to the plot (being, well, nothing but running gag characters) and, as such, don't merit their own section (if it was up to me entirely, I'd have removed them altogether months ago). Hardly anyone will want to look for, say, the messenger specifically as much as, say again, King Steve."
This point still stands, the contents list is a terrible mess as it is and having sub-sub-sublinks in there so readers can jump directly to the part about the Lawninja who were in two or three comics out of 1079 isn't helping. I suggest reverting the structure back to grouping the fiends and Other Warriors under one heading respectively; also once again to remove the running gag characters entirely as per the above, or if not that, to group them under one heading likewise. --R. Wolff (talk) 14:10, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I broke them out under thier own subheadings yesterday specifically to link to one of them in another article. Doing that for one didn't seem to make much sense, so I broke everyone else out as well. I'll fix up the TOC. bahamut0013wordsdeeds  15:24, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. That should be satisfactory, no? The links can still work, but the TOC is not cluttered. bahamut0013wordsdeeds  15:35, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Best of two worlds? Excellent! --R. Wolff (talk) 08:11, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Fiends, Other Warriors and running gag characters 

message: Due to the nukclear power site changing its format, all the ref links to the comic are broken and need to be fixed. I know, pain in the ass, but unfortunately its true. The Clawed One (talk) 05:55, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: All links have been updated for the new website, as well as tested... I really should have wrote a script for it, rather than doing it by hand. Primalmoon (talk) 06:24, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  All Comic Links Are Broken 

message: I have to question this, because I've seen it mentioned before. Yes, I know how Brian works with the comics. But to discount events and exclude them from the page because he might pull a fast one on readers is foolish. For all we know, next comic Onion Kid could pop back up and go "BTW, I'm not really Sarda's past self, he was lying", or the Four Fiends could appear and say "Hi, we're not really dead", or something else equally out-there could happen. Point is, excluding information based on the presumption it may not be true is irrational. At any time, something presented as fact on this page (and in the comic) could be disproved on Brian's whim. Should this page not exist then on the principal anything stated here may not be the truth? Brian could turn around and have Black Mage take off his robe to reveal it's actually Garland, we don't know! Presumption of truth or presumption of falsehood, which is it?
In the latest comics. Chaos directly states "Sarda's body has become a portal for me", and identifies himself as Chaos. There's no reason to not mention this except for the rather POV opinion Brian could later change his mind. If a later comic establishes this isn't Chaos, oh well, we'll just change it then. In the meantime there's no real reason to not mention it now. I'll also note nothing has been said about the Chaos section on the page, and it mentioning Chaos possessing Sarda's body. If Chaos' section mentions he possessed Sarda, why shouldn't Sarda's section? The Clawed One (talk) 05:56, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no rush. Brian has shown a predisposition to pulling a fast one like this, and many plot twists that just utterly defy all logic, but these things are usually sorted out within a few weeks. Given that the events you're disputing are from the last two comics, there is no need to get them onto the article ASAP. For now, I would avoid anything that isn't 100% pure undispitable fact, at least until this plot arc develops some. Wikipedia has no deadline, and not including the latest plot twist before it develops isn't going to hurt the article or our readers. Quite the opposite, rushing to judgements have, in the past, lead to posting false information and incorrect assumptions. It's more important to be correct than it is to be up-to-date, which is why we are constantly reverting anons who post good-faith garbage. For example, the joke ending:  and on and on. Sure seemed "official" enough, but cooler heads knew that on the next update, all was well. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 06:29, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Give it some time" 

message: Isn't this incredibly detailed listing of which sprite was used for which character technically original research? --R. Wolff (talk) 14:02, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure, but probably. I wouldn't know for sure, not recognizing any of the ones outside of the FF series. I'm not sure who has added them, but I haven't removed them because of the now-dearth of images. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 18:46, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Original research, and full of errors.  Most of the major characters, enemies and class changes included, use sprites from the original NES Final Fantasy.  I assume whoever edited that part hasn't played the original Final Fantasy for the NES. --  Alyas Grey : talk 05:50, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sprites 

message: Looking through this article, it seems to be based entirely on the primary source. I'd like to suggest redirecting this page to 8-Bit Theater#Characters, which also lists the most important characters of this webcomic. The cast of 8-Bit Theater simply doesn't seem to be notable at all, and this list consists entirely of a certain type of original research that webcomics are prone to. Before boldly turning this in a redirect, however, I figured I'd go and ask other people's opinions on the topic. As a general reader, I for one much prefer the short section on the main article over this huge list of minor characters. ~Mable (chat) 15:23, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redirect discussion