Talk:List of Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance characters

message: Which would you prefer, because the article needs consistency. Ashnard Talk Contribs 16:00, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I assumed American was the standard (if not, I assume the majority of the visitors/editors are American), so I would go for that. Plus, I'm pretty sure the game script is in American even in the European versions (I never really noticed while playing though). Aveyn Knight 19:07, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It also seems as if most of the article is American already.  Just as a side note, Ashnard, when using links, instead of using something like nouns you can  just use nouns.  ThunderkatzHo! 19:15, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I also realized that we need to define the term beorc somewhere in the article.  ThunderkatzHo! 20:40, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

text: ....American it is. Pah. I'll add the beorc thing in the lead. Ashnard Talk Contribs 17:20, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

text: According to my spellchecker, all of the errors are gone and it should be in American English. If there aren't any objections, I'll finally nominate this for FL. Thanks. Ashnard Talk Contribs 20:28, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have the feeling that it will once again be ripped for not having enough out of universe info, or info on the creation of the characters,  though I think that info is very hard to find for this game.  ThunderkatzHo! 20:51, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it will never have that info because it doesn't exist. I'll nominate it later. Ashnard Talk Contribs 14:41, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking at the FL page currently, I hate to say it, but... awww, crap, I can't say it w/o sounding snotty.  I think you know what I mean though.  ThunderkatzHo! 01:22, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, I just remembered there was a staff interview on this game. Of course you would need somebody to translate it. However, from what I've seen, the only character they discuss is Ike. Aveyn Knight 20:39, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  American or English? 

message: Roy and Marth have both their own pages, should we separate Ike as well because he has enter the SSB ring? OBEY STARMAN 17:39, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that Ike should have his own article as well, for many of the same reasons that were stated below.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.31.55 (talk) 02:26, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, Roy and Marth would barely survive an AfD as it is. They are more notable since they popularised the series and the figures by which the series became known. More so Marth, who is the first Lord and featured in the FE anime. Basically, being in SSBB alone doesn't warrant a separate page. As the SSB series progresses, the inclusion of characters becomes less notable as the characters have no effect on anything really. Ashnard Talk Contribs 17:45, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought Ike should have been his own article for a couple reasons. I do realize that he shouldn't be there just because of Smash Bros., but Ike has been in a couple different games. I think we should leave it until Brawl comes out, then see what his reception is. For example, Roy became immensely popular after Melee was released, so if Ike goes the same way then I think he should be notable enough for his own page. Also, as you may have seen on this article, there is over 114 kilobytes of information, and it is suggested that this page should be split into different articles. I think we should have some other opinions on this as well.  14:23, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh as another note, I forgot to mention that it is extremely inconvenient to readers to try and find information on Ike in three different locations (PoR, GD, SSBB) and a collected location would be wiser.  14:25, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In all fairness, an article should be created for its notability, and not for the sake of convenience. As I've said, Roy and Marth will probably have had the pinnacle of notability in the situation, being the first FE characters in the West, and even Roy's notability is questionable. If we are to wait for any possible increase in notability, surely the article shouldn't be in existence in the meantime—not the other way round. Thank you. Ashnard Talk Contribs 14:39, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I don't believe we should have even more dependence on this article because it is already much larger than needed. Ike having his own page will provide better access to users with slower internet connections as this page is already much larger than necessary. Also, as I stated, Ike has information in many different spots, not only making it inconvenient but very unwise as you should have information on a character in one location. I'm not saying Elincia, etc. should have their own page too, but Ike has been in a couple games already and an alternative should be suggested, if we aren't keeping his page.  15:13, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Remember that all the relevant information is in two places—not three. All of the info on SSBB is on this page. The only possible alternative that I can think of is to merge all the info from the RD page into this one and leave all of the new characters in the RD list. All that will result in is a long list here and a short list for RD, though. Ashnard Talk Contribs 15:35, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well is there a spot where we can promote this talk page so we can get some more suggestions? I think we should have some exterior input in this conversation. Maybe someone will have an interesting idea that we can live with.  15:42, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also we could have a system where there is a list of characters in the "Radiance series" of Fire Emblem but have an A-D system, etc.  15:44, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: With the advent of Ike in Smash Bros however, it seems that people who want to know more information about that character should read about him without having to go through the other characters in the other game, if that makes sense.  15:54, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Another note... (sorry if I keep forgetting them) if you look in the history people have stated that they want Ike to have his own page, as it is causing confusion. For example, someone suggested putting the category "Smash Bros. Fighters" on this page but another said that he should have his own page where we can put that category.  18:02, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Well if we're going to use rules, you might want to look at WP:WIARM, because I'm quite sure this rule comes first, and nothing we're doing is breaking those rules. What I'm not saying is that we should be breaking all the rules, but I do not see why Ike is not notable if most editors deem him notable. I'm pretty sure this "helps" improve Wikipedia, and I don't see how this helps destroy it.  18:25, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What, so do you want to give you reasons why Ike isn't notable now? Ashnard Talk Contribs 19:55, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, if that's what you want to do. At least this way everyone looking can have opposing viewpoints to compare and make an informed decision with.  23:01, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Characters need real world information (please actually read the link) to receive an article. Ike has none. TTN 19:16, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Then explain please because it looks correct. Development of character, foreign translation, voice actor, design and software company are all readily available. Wikada - TALK CONT ISU 19:28, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Would you care to show some development information then? Development means how the creators designed the character, not in-game personality transitions, if that's what you're thinking. Translations/localization, and voice actors are a given for most characters, so that does not apply. Having information on the company is irrelevant; you need information from them regarding the character. TTN 19:33, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well that's a little odd because I would think "both before its first appearance and over the course of the narrative" would mean how the character develops over the course of the narrative, or in this case, game. Wikada - TALK CONT ISU 19:37, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It means actual development (note the section that you're looking at) over the course of the works (such as a major redesign between two games). What you're talking about is primary information. TTN 19:41, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Did I not mention the redesign in character between the two games? I'm pretty sure that is what you mean. Wikada - TALK CONT ISU 19:46, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be an original synthesis of details from the primary source, and again, that is in-universe. To have an actual section, you would need a creator to state something like "We decided to make Ike more like his father for the second game because..." TTN 19:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it also fine then to have another website, such as IGN or GameSpot, to declare that? Wikada - TALK CONT ISU 19:54, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Anything from reviews would go in a reception section. TTN 19:57, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But then would they still count as secondary information, or is that tertiary, or primary? Wikada - TALK CONT ISU 20:03, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Well, while we wait for a decision, do you suggest putting all Ike's information in this list? As in, all the info on his old page really save the Radiant Dawn info? Wikada - TALK CONT ISU 23:15, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, anyone else can write in here too in case they were wondering. We need some third opinions. Wikada - TALK CONT ISU 23:17, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what you said when I was posting, but then TTN came. You just want someone to support your opinion. I'm sorry, but I can't see how an article can be built—or notability asserted—on his inclusion in SSBB. If it were to be made, then it could never attain any sort of status becausethe out-of-universe info isn't there and the notability is dubious at least. Ashnard Talk Contribs 06:34, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well then there must be a way to at least cut up this article into smaller articles, because it is way to big. Do you think an A-J, K-T, etc. style of list would work better than this? We have to do something. Wikada - TALK CONT ISU 10:18, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm uncertain on this point. You're best off raising this legnth point at WP:VG; they should know. Ashnard Talk Contribs 14:38, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Oh good point, I didn't remember that. I figure he must be at least a little notable seeing as he got a sequel unlike many Fire Emblem characters. Wikada - TALK CONT ISU 10:29, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Notability within their universe is completely irrelevant—it's about how they are covered by secondary sources. As for Roy, I agree that his notability is dubious, but along with Marth he is well known outside of Fire Emblem because of his their introduction of Fire Emblem to the West. Ashnard Talk Contribs 15:28, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well most people who have heard of Roy heard of him through Smash I'm sure... as well as Marth. Not because of Fire Emblem. Wikada - TALK CONT ISU 19:39, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

text: That's what I was referring to, they introduced FE through SSBM. Ashnard Talk Contribs 20:50, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

text: An article shouldn't be made for the sake of convenience. WP#OTHERCRAPEXISTS isn't a great argument either. Ashnard Talk Contribs 09:26, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

text: All of these aren't factors when considering to create an article; please try to define his notabilty with out-of-universe information. Thank you. Ashnard Talk Contribs 09:48, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, let's see... main protagist in one FE game, and it sounds like he'll be a protagonist in DoR (not worthy of note until release). If he is, that'd mean Ike's a main pro in two NA FE games, AND he has Brawl working for him. I'm no Wiki expert, but IMPO, that's notable. ----Jump! Slash! Dash! Ouch! Super Mario SonicBOOM! 00:04, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Ashnard.  Until people can find real-world information, such as how the designers came up with the idea for Ike, and out-of-universe information besides a single SSB game, Ike just doesn't deserve his own article.  Think about this, if Ike got his own article, what would go in it?  You'd have a brief intro paragraph.  A paragraph about PoR.  A paragraph about RD.  And you'd have a very brief paragraph about SSBB (as there's very little story, the only information you could really provide is, he's a character in it).  That's it.  4 paragraphs, of which 2 would be incredibly brief.  That's not worth an article, and won't help shorten anything else up.  ThunderkatzHo! 02:27, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

text: On a similar note to waht Thunderkatz said, if the article was to be created—or recreated—it could never achieve GA status and would be AfD contender for the duration of its lifespan. Of course, this is unless any new info or notability-defining reception arises. Ashnard Talk Contribs 15:49, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separate Ike from the Article? 

message: Why don't we simply have a vote to end this debate?
P.S. There is a lot of info about a character in a game. PoR could span more than 4 paragraphs alone. As for SSBB, a lot could be explained like his fighting abilities and his mini-story that will appear in the Subspace Emissary mode.76.237.21.242 05:00, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you show us an attempt to make those 4 paragraphs that you claim could happen?  Also, a character's fighting abilities do not belong in an article, as that's borderline walkthrough.    ThunderkatzHo! 20:14, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I attempted a vote but right now we have one support from myself and one decline from TTN, as we're the only ones who have actually voted. I'll try again and I'll put TTN's vote down again.:
* Support: This article is large enough already, and I feel that Ike should have an article to reduce this page's file size and because he is relatively notable. No personal attacks please, just put your vote below. Wikada - TALK CONT ISU 11:29, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

text: "He should get his own article for practical reasons"—that exemplifies the whole argument for it. Please remember that their notability should determine the outcome, not practicality or convenience. Ashnard Talk Contribs 23:02, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wait a minute, because you don't seem to have a grasp of the policies, I'm wikilawyering? Not one person who has supported this proposal has given a legitimate reason for the creation of a page. Creating a new page out of convenience just simply isn't viable; it isn't common sense either. You're also twisting what this is supposed to be about—this is a vote to test consensus on whether Ike should have his own page, not on whether the current list is too long. Don't make assumptions that an "oppose" vote means that nothing will be done with the list. I've said that I'm not too knowledgeable about article lengths, and that you should request advice elsewhere. I'm under no obligations to raise ideas for the list; this factor doesn't accentuate your reasoning nor devalue my opinion on this matter. You don't seem to listen to what I'm saying, so I'll probably seek further opinion. Ashnard Talk Contribs 15:48, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you want to write about Ike, I suggest Wikia. You can use a Fire Emblem or a Nintendo/video game wiki. There will be no way to have an article for him here. TTN 16:23, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

text: From Wikipedia:Notability (fiction): "Avoid creating new articles on fictional topics that lack substantial real-world content (and ideally an out-of-universe perspective) from the onset." If you want a separate article, start adding out-of-universe information to Ike in this article. Who created the character? What was the development process? How have critics judged the character? How has the character impacted gaming or popular culture? Once you have this type of information in the article and the section on Ike becomes too big to be contained here, he can be split off into a separate article and no one will complain. Pagrashtak 20:35, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vote:Separate Ike from article

message: FMV from video game, No indication You Tube uploader is the games production, design or releasing entity Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:12, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you rewrite that in proper English? I seriously don't know what you're trying to say. Ashnard Talk Contribs 15:16, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commented You Tube link 

message: Is it really a good idea to include Radiant Dawn spoilers (like the identity of the Black Knight) in this article? These spoilers may be about characters who first appeared in Path of Radiance, but do developments made in Radiant Dawn really have a place on a PoR page? Patrician Vetinari (talk) 14:36, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. This documents the characters as they were known in PoR. Any reference to RD will be reverted. Thanks. Ashnard Talk Contribs 16:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: People need to learn not to keep adding these, as it must be tiring to revert it over and over. Should we put a note at the top of the page? Or should we lock it from new users. Wikada - Talk Cont ISU 12:29, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is getting to be a pain. I feel that semi-protection is too harsh, but I'm in favour of a message at the top of the talk page. Ashnard Talk Contribs 12:52, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Radiant Dawn spoilers 

message: I've been looking at other Featured Lists (eg. List_of_Metal_Gear_Solid_characters and to an extent Characters of Final Fantasy VIII. It seems like we should make it so that the characters are sorted by heading, not by paragraph, as Main characters, Other playable characters, etc., and give each character their own paragraph. For example, instead of keeping it the way it is by having the characters all bunched in a paragraph, we could keep those main headings such as Other playable characters, but each character would have their own heading and paragraph.
===Other playable characters===
====Brom====
Brom is a knight, etc....
Like that? Wikada - Talk Cont ISU 21:33, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know if you watched this page then, but it used to be like that. The problem is that the roster of characters is massive compared to usual games. This leaves several very short sections, as there are loads of characters but barely anything worth mentioning about them. So what happens is that there is a list of very short sections, which have poor presentation and are very repetitive, as the basic context has to be repeated for each character. Psychologically, some people also think that they should relieve short sections by adding cruft, which just isn't productive. User: Axem Titanium suggested the current formation a while back, and I honestly think it's the best way to do it. Of course, I'm open to any other ideas. Thanks. Ashnard Talk Contribs 22:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh I see that makes sense. This part is off-topic but I think its worth mentioning. This list is so frustrating to expand due to the extreme lack of information for the entire series, as I'm sure you know. Is there ANYWHERE... even Japanese... that will have anything out-of-universe? I swear the creators live in a remote part of Siberia or something. The only thing I was able to extract was a loose translation of that Ike bit someone mentioned a while back. Wikada - Talk Cont ISU 00:30, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I know exactly what you mean. I've searched high and low for that stuff, but with no luck. This absence of info is preventing any FE article/list from reaching FA. Well done for what you've got, though. Ashnard Talk Contribs 07:41, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You've done amazingly well too! I mean we've cited over 100 pieces of dialog and you've done lots to help this article out. Oh here's some articles I need to post up here before I log off: 
* 
* 
Wikada - Talk Cont ISU 11:16, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ike should definitly have his own page. He is now pretty well the most recognized fire emblem character, save marth, not only because of brawl, but he's been the main character (disputable)in two games, which is something only marth has done. Marth and Roy have their own pages, and roy is far less important than Ike. Plus, Ike is one of the first non royal lords.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.141.43.88 (talk) 22:53, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Organization 

message: Mia is not mentioned in this article. What's with that?
Mini Joe (talk) 15:25, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't realise that. What I presumed has happened is that users have transferred Mia's section from Greil's Merecenaries to Crimea. As the revisions have been undone, they must have forgotten to retain the info on Mia. I'll get it back later. Thanks for pointing that out. Ashnard Talk Contribs 15:55, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think he used to be in, but was taken out because it was dceided that every minor character didn't have to be covered. Ashnard Talk Contribs 20:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Missing Character

message: No, this isn't some "Do we really know that he's in?" question (that would be stupid). Instead I was wondering; is it in any way notable that while Ike's appearance and sword stance in Brawl are based off of his Ranger class appearance from Path of Radiance, the skill Aether and the sword Ragnell could only be used after Ike promotes into the Lord class?
Also, does Ike use Aether in Radiant Dawn? I was just wondering. ChromeWulf ZX (talk) 23:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ike in Super Smash Bros. Brawl 

message: This is probably also along the lines of my last question (see the above section), but I just realized something: while both Ike and Marth's On-Screen Appearances in Brawl use warp magic, the only known character in the series (as far as I know) that used warp magic was the Black Knight in Path of Radiance. This probably isn't notable, but I just wanted to point it out. ChromeWulf ZX (talk) 19:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't played Brawl, but if that is true, then this would be a technical error. You probably already know this, but to mention this would still be trivia and OR, unless a reliable source comments on it. Thanks. Ashnard Talk Contribs 19:51, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warp Magic as an On-Screen Appearance? 

message: I think this list is way over referenced with all the character quotes, increasing the size of the artical. Can we remove the references and explain the characters more, giving them individual paragraphs like in Radiant Dawn? I could see only adding character quotes where something is disputed. Also add picture for Ike. -Ether7 (talk) 21:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Technically, an article can't be over-referenced, unless it's an aesthetic detraction. Size is a separate issue, which unfortunately hasn't been resolved yet. Added explanation to the characters makes the list less encyclopaedic, and delves this even further into in-universe information, which is not waht is excpected for articles at Wikipedia. Having the characters categorised by location helps to achieve cohesion and cuts down on irrelevant info. Cheers. Ashnard Talk Contribs 21:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: When the references are as long as the artical, then it is aesthetics. References should be provided only for sources outside the game. Size is a separate issue, but hey, you could kill two birds with one stone. As to being more encyclopaedic, a real encyclopedia would not even have this artical, and much less quote characters. I do like the grouping of characters by location. I'd suggest though that Titania and Soren have their own paragraphs in the main characters as the Deputy Commander and Tactician respectively... also having a pic for Ike. Just my suggestions for making a good artical great. -Ether7 (talk) 15:54, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The textual references are divided from the actual prose, so it is not a matter of aesthetics. In-universe inline citations are provided in many articles, and are used usually to verify in-universe information. For the existance of the article, it's actually a sub-article in relation, meaning that the usual rules regarding WP: Notability do not pertain to this article. Thanks. Ashnard Talk Contribs 16:33, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Over referenced/ Dumbed down Character descriptions 

message: every other search i do on wikipedia has this page in the results, especially if the word fire is included
for christ sakes can't this be summarized
i could think of at least 100 more important pages regarding historic events, people, and places,
that are shorter and have far less sources than this one. 4.226.114.107 (talk) 04:58, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm afraid this not an adequate reason for shortening some of the article or removing some of the sources. This has been raised before, and I've asked users to consult more experienced users on this matter in regards to splitting the list. If you strongly feel that it's an issue, perhaps take it to this Wikiproject. Thanks. Ashnard Talk Contribs 16:12, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page too long, shows up in irrelevant searches way too much 

message: I have started a discussion on the Fire Emblem talk page. Aether7 (talk) 18:22, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recurring characters in the Fire Emblem series 

message: This article needs clean up....badly. I volunteer.--Wassup!!-D33DeeD33Guy Is the SuperComputer of Code Wiki!!??...R.I.P. Dad 01:45, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm thinking it would a good idea to list each character under their own subheading, instead of including them all within a group. The only problem that I can see is that it makes the article look slightly less attractive overall. If you're going ahead with it, I suggest at least removing the bolded names, since the subheadings make them slightly redundant. Aveyn Knight (talk) 20:13, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: A good middle ground would be smaller groupings for characters with one liners like Boyd. He could be grouped with Oscar and Rolf under a subheading called Three Brothers. Tormod and Murium can be grouped together under Laguz Emancipation. This type thing. Murium belongs under Beginon, and the Beast Tribe heading can then be renamed Gallia. Other characters that can fill out a paragraph by themselves should have their own subheading. Aether7 (talk) 20:34, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

text: I went ahead and reverted back. This "cleanup" is really an undoing of what was suggested in peer reviews for featured status. Minor characters should be grouped under headings which makes it look cleaner. This character list should be more of a model for other Fire Emblem character list to strive for. Individual characters that have bigger roles can still be expanded and broken out as need be, but the overall structure I believe is good as is. Aether7 (talk) 21:26, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup