Talk:Garnet (Final Fantasy)

message: The "Love" section of this entry screams of original research.  If the statements are based off of comments from the game developers, they need to be cited.  But really, it smacks of someone passing off their fan-thesis as demonstrable fact. 40.0.40.10 06:21, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree; it should be completely removed and condensed to perhaps a paragraph in an overview of the character (using the script and perhaps developers information, if possible, to back it up). Ideally, this article (and other FF characters), should include a lead, development section, overview section, other appearences (if applicable), and references/see also/external links. — Deckiller 06:24, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Original research concern

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: page moved to Garnet (Final Fantasy). (non-admin closure)  Steel1943 (talk) 20:09, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Garnet Til Alexandros XVII → 
My reasons for the move proposal:
1) A google search for "Garnet Til Alexandros XVII" yield 75,500 results. "Princess Garnet" on the other hand returned 10.5 million hits. Even if one is inclined to argue that there is a percentage of false positives in the search results, which is given with every instance of a search, at least a slim majority of the results appear to directly refer to this character. There is no other notable individual in existence that we know of, fictional or otherwise, who is typically referred to as "Princess Garnet". 
2) Most of the reliable sources cited in this article also refer to her as "Princess Garnet" or by her Dagger pseudonym. Going by the reliable sources, Garnet Til Alexandros XVII is clearly not the common name for the character. 
3) While the character's role does transitions into that of a sovereign monarch later in the game's story, that is still not the role she is best known or remembered for according to reliable sources. Given the context, I find that the arguments presented during two move proposals documented in the archived talk page for Princess Leia are very instructive: []. I note that arguments which request for a change to "Leia Organa" or at least removing the title of "Princess" due to her different role in the Star Wars sequel trilogy as a Republic general were found to be unconvincing. 
4) Even with real life royal figures, we don't usually refer to their full royal names or stylings for the purpose of determining the appropriate title for a Wikipedia page about them. Garnet Til Alexandros XVII simply isn't concise. For example, Elizabeth II's daughter is simply Anne, Princess Royal on Wikipedia, not titled Anne Elizabeth Alice Louise or any other convoluted title that invokes the House of Windsor. Haleth (talk) 13:41, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

text: Oppose As far as I can tell her common name is simply "Garnet", sans the "Princess". I would support an alternate move to Garnet (Final Fantasy) in the absence of an alternate name that is easily recognizable. A similar example is Byleth (Fire Emblem) who could alternately be called "Byleth Eisner" or "Professor Byleth" but neither of these are very recognizable. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:46, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Based on my reading of cited sources, I disagree with your assertion that her common name is Garnet sans the Princess, although Garnet (Final Fantasy) is admittedly still a better title then Garnet Til Alexandros XVII. The  reason why Byleth (Fire Emblem) is not titled or should not be titled  "Byleth Eisner" or "Professor Byleth" is simple, because the cited sources for that topic do not typically refer to the character as such, whereas "Princess Garnet" is in fact quite commonly used in a lot of the sources. Princess Garnet is an extent redirect, and moving this article there serves an optimal purpose within the context of the prescribed article titling criteria at  WP:TITLEDAB: it's natural and descriptive the same way "Princess Leia" is. Per the guideline under WP:TITLEDAB, it recommends using the standard disambiguation technique of parenthetical disambiguation only when no other solutions lead to an optimal article title. That isn't the case here.  Haleth (talk) 04:20, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

text: The subject being a fictional character has no bearing on whether the title Princess should be used in the title of a Wikipedia page though. Just to name a few very well known or widely recognizable examples, Princess Leia, Princess Peach and Prince Hamlet are not titled Leia (Star Wars), Peach (Mario) or Hamlet (character). Haleth (talk) 11:46, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: For real-life nobility, we do actually sometimes include the title even if it's not the common name.  I was merely saying that case does not apply here here.  There's certainly no prohibition on using a title, but it needs to be justified on common name basis: "Princess Leia" is a common name.  (Hamlet's article I actually think is misnamed, but a side note.)  "Princess Garnet" is not; she is routinely referred to as either just "Garnet" or as "Dagger" in sources.  So the common name argument to include "princess" doesn't fly.  SnowFire (talk) 20:45, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 4 April 2021