Talk:Ivalice/Archive 1

message: Should Vagrant Story be mentioned?  "VG is the same world as Tactics" was mostly conjecture before thanks to AJ Durai and other connectios, but FFXII seems to strengthen the bond considering the nation of Valendia. 216.185.76.77 17:30, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vagrant Story 

message: Bluerfn, I take it you tend to make up a lot of the article, so I don't want to undo anything. However, I feel it's very necessary to mention the "paradox" present in the Ultimania. I myself don't know what actually goes into XII's Ultimania even though published "by Square" etc, yet even so I feel it necessary to mention the issue. 67.142.130.19 17:52, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Noted, thank you. 私はBluerfnです 17:50, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Bluerfn, me again. I don't know who edited my re-edit add-on, But Saint Ajora is never given a gender in FFXII, neither in the bestiary or (to my knowledge) referenced in the Ultimania timeline. I am removing that part of the edit until a citation is provided, as the magic pot bestiary in FFXII does not mention Ajora's gender and (to my knowledge) is the only reference of Ajora in the game. 67.142.130.11 06:13, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not mean to burst your bubble, but the Japanese version of FFXII's Clan Primer Magick Pot entry wrote that St Ajora was a woman. The name St Ajora was written with the kanji for woman. The Ultimania backed this entry up, too. So I'm reverting because we have sources. 私はBluerfnです 08:15, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

text:  Sorry, re edit here, I see what you mean now (But come to think of it, if you are the one who translated the Ultimania and neither of us noticed the difference in the Japanese translation of "Saint" till now...really its hard to understand what is going on with the timeline) I have edited the wiki again to make a footnote of it. Not to doubt you, but the north American FFXII does not give the Ajora mentioned a gender, so I would rather note both options versus completely stating the Ajora is female.
To further this, it will create a problem in one of two areas. This would mean that there are THREE Ajoras or that the timeline presented in the bestiary is not given in the perspective of FFXII. Either way, we have a massive problem to further the confusion....67.142.130.23 23:12, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes, i'm fully aware of the confusion this may bring. not to mention the fan-forums i found had already discussed about the scan i posted. still we have the NDS Revenant Wings and the PSP Tactics remake that could either tie the timeline or break it apart. so i think we should not make any further edits, additions or whatnot, beyond what is already written here. perhaps until the two games does come out. 私はBluerfnです 23:20, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, I think the article is perfect now giving mentions to all the facts and actual places/locations of each game, the only thing that can be done is sit out and wait for the lion war and Advanced 2 to shed light on the connections (HOPEFULLY not add even more puzzles than answers this time)67.142.130.38 03:04, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editing Section slightly on Ultimania 

message: I really wish to spice up this Ivalice page with more pictures from Final Fantasy Tactics, Final Fantasy Tactics Advance and more Final Fantasy XII, and perhaps a screenshot of the VKP Headquarters in Valendia, or Duke Bardorba mansion in Vagrant Story, but I'm not sure if I have any! I ask that people with images to upload some or all so we can have a good, no, great Ivalice article! "...I truly love Yvalice!" - Alma Beoulve 私はBluerfnです 09:33, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images for Article 

message: Against. Ivalice Alliance is a game series, as like Fabula Nova Crystallis. The article Ivalice is about the location, the setting. However, the locations within the Ivalice Alliance games can be placed in. 私はBluerfnです 07:42, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging? 

message: This article, while of Mid-priority, needs major improvements in terms of content, layout and such. I could see that the traffic of this article is small to the point of minimal. Someone suggested adapting the Spira article. But Ivalice have different incarnations in three games, and most references are hard to find. Any suggestion? Bluerです。 なにか? 16:54, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ivalice is only truly different in one game (and we have a source or two to back that up already in the article). TA could have its own subsection on a main Ivalice article due to that, but the others can be covered in one main section, since they're all geographically related. They have some differences in races and such, but that can be covered in the article, too. --77.99.28.91 17:45, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Bluer: Yes, two Ivalices, but one is a kingdom and the other a region. We already know the events of XII and T take place on the same world map, just not on the same regional maps. So they could still go in the same article. --77.99.28.91 18:34, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, yes, that's right. Good point, er..77.99.28.91. Yet, there are different elements within two games? How could we achieve doing it on one article?  Bluerです。 なにか? 19:04, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

text: But Gaia's different in both games. How do we do that? Bluerです。 なにか? 19:08, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

text: It looks to me like VII's Gaia should have its own article (given the Compilation), but that the others should be left with their lists (excluding, perhaps, Vana'Diel, which might deserve a proper article). Spira has both a list of locations and an overview of the planet, so I'm not certain what the policy is on location lists. Given that a different area of Ivalice is explored each time, and assuming location lists are generally allowed, then each Ivalice game would probably still require it's own location list. The Ivalice article would then deal solely with the issues that the Spira one does (or rather, Ivalice's equivalent of those issues). --Made2Fade 19:53, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Okay. I'm creating a template. It should come up in awhile, so everyone can make and review changes there. Bluerです。 なにか? 07:09, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Template is created here: User:Bluerfn/Ivalice Bluerです。 なにか? 07:17, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

text: I have moved the Template to the article, and archived the former shell to the link. Bluerです。 なにか? 00:41, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improve 

message: I removed the mention of "But the Glabados church does not exist before XII" remark, it is incorrect. The ending of FFXII takes place after the events of the main game, and may in fact would align with the timeline present in Ultimania of the Glabados creation at the very least.
67.142.130.48 04:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Glabados 

message: I merged the appearances into the first paragraph, and the bit about design into the Design section. The other stuff in Overview is pointless in light of the rest of the article. Compare the Spira article, for example. A brief overview of the geography is more suited to the individual game articles; there's an entire section for it in this one, so it just seems like a waste of space. --77.99.30.52 15:37, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Suppose I should log in, lest I appear like some drive-by anon. --Made2Fade 15:42, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: =D You should have, I thought it was a vandal. Well, the overview was suppose to serve as a brief introductory to the differences of Ivalice in the different games. I don't think it's a waste of space yet, i thought it was good to have it there. Bluerです。 なにか? 16:01, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My problem with it is mostly due to the repetition. A very brief summary of the geography is already made in the intro, and anyone looking for more than that can check out the respective game pages or look in the Geography section, which explains it in much greater detail. Apart from the geography, my anon edit goes to show the other bits of the section can be merged with other sections quite easily. Of course, lead-in paragraphs themselves are supposed to be an overview, which is another reason, and I feel the article flows better the way I did it. I'll not edit it again if you've a problem with that, though. Either way, that'll teach me for being too lazy to log in XP --Made2Fade 16:10, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overview 

message: Cheers for being so dainty in your approach, there, Nicholai. Couldn't you have integrated that a little better, or else copied it somewhere and let someone else do it? You pretty much trodded over everything, instead. --Made2Fade 22:59, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The races section was a result of many editor's contributions and was originally written to match the style of a different article (Races of Final Fantasy).  There was a need to move the information into a more relevant location and this is it.  The proposal for the move sat for a couple of days on WP:FF with no one doing anything about it beyond discussion except me.  This is one article of 14 that was affected by the proposal and I made the changes to all 14 articles myself, so I'm sorry if I couldn't devote the time to make this one article better suit your fancy.  As opposed to possibly screwing up the information I decided to just copy it exactly as it was so that someone more familiar with Ivalice games should do the final copy-editing and reorganization seeing that the only Ivalice game I've ever played is FFXII and I'm currently only 28 hours into the game for my first play-through ever so I'm obviously not the expert on Ivalice races and am unqualified to make such reorganizations, but you are more than welcome to rearrange them as you would be both more familiar with the races and more familiar with the flow of prose of this article than I would.  Instead of biting off my head you could practice WP:FAITH and WP:CIVIL and give me the benefit of the doubt, such as fixing it yourself to improve upon my contribution or politely asking me why the change was made in the way it was.  But thank you for insulting me instead, I appreciate it!  --—ΔαίδαλοςΣΣ 00:02, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps you took that sharper than I intended it. I didn't insult you, I just observed how messy the integration was- read it again with a more fun-poking frame of mind. My point was basically that you could've pasted it somewhere else for safe-keeping, and so allowed it to be integrated a little smoother. Sorry that you took offense. I'm only a casual editor of wikipedia recently (I only touch this article, really), so it's hardly a wonder I hadn't seen the proposal. --Made2Fade 11:07, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to apologize for my reaction, I was a bit stressed that day and shouldn't have vented on you.  It is true, unfortunately, that the tone of a post could be very misleading since I can only read your text and can't hear your voice inflection.  I probably would have laughed and made a witty retort had I heard you speak the same thing.  Yeah, it's a little messy, but it actually was posted somewhere else for safe-keeping awaiting integration.  Since integration, that page doesn't exist anymore, so pointing to it would be useless.  --—ΔαίδαλοςΣΣ 16:34, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Races 

message: *The result was merge into Ivalice. -- — Bluerで す。 08:08, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My earlier reason against this merger is that Ivalice is a game world/location as opposed to Ivalice Alliance as a series of games, and it's not the same vein as Eyes On Me (a song) merged to Music of FFVIII (the soundtracks). But if there's a chance to make it a GA, why shouldn't it? — Bluerで す。 19:00, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Bluer, A world article and a series article should not really be merged together.  --—ΔαίδαλοςΣ 19:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This article mentions several games set in Ivalice, and will eventually and necessarily mention all the games of the Ivalice Alliance in one way or another because it has to describe their creations and their settings. Moreover, the Reception section of this article (currently empty) will mostly be redundant with Ivalice Alliance's Reception section. So why not merge the two articles? We already have something much bolder: a series article merged into a sub-article of common themes of a main series article, so why couldn't Ivalice Alliance be in Ivalice? Kariteh 19:28, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm on the fence, but done the right way, it might make sense that this joins the Ivalice article. Judgesurreal777 06:31, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you sandbox what your idea of how it would look? Judgesurreal777 05:27, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's quick: . It deals mostly with the "Creation and influence" section. Regardless of the merge, this section has to mention the games of the Ivalice Alliance anyway, so it does in that sandbox version. With that, the rest of the Ivalice Alliance article is then redundant and superfluous. The "Other appearances" in the Ivalice article is unnecessary because FFTA should be integrated in the rest of the article like any other game, and the "Reception and criticism" section (currently void in both articles) should speak about what people felt about Ivalice in FFT, (VS), FFTA, FFXII, and the Ivalice Alliance games. And the rest of the article needs trimming and more out of universe sources, but that's a different problem. Kariteh 13:29, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I really like it. We should get some more feedback before we merge it though. Judgesurreal777 05:53, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We should heed the advice on WP:FF, stop the Merging frenzy and concentrate on the main articles. — Bluerで す。 06:09, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I had removed the tag to say my agreement, and the merger can proceed (pressed the save page before finishing edit summary - which was "rm tag for merger"). I am also sure that the Japan Wikipedia's Ivalice article looks like the best approach for this "out-of-focus" article; the example have merged Ivalice Alliance. If anything, the meager merger of Ivalice Alliance is appropriate. But again, we should concentrate on main articles now. :) — Bluerで す。 07:31, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't know the process required the removal of the tag before the merger, sorry. Since it's really just a small paragraph to add, I'm going to go ahead and do the merge, even though I agree that's about it and we should concentrate on other articles (it's not like there is any focus on this article anyhow). Oops it's already done aha. Kariteh 07:59, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge with Ivalice Alliance