Talk:Characters of 8-Bit Theater/Archive 1

message: I removed the line "Black Mage breifly mentioned the Ultima spell early in the comic" since it seemed stupid. So BM mentioned Ultima. And? Fighter mentioned claymores. Should we mention that? Crimson Shadow 21:51, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ultima trivia

message: FOR GODS SAKE, IT'S SPELT NUTRINAL IN THE COMIC.  STOP CHANGING IT. --64.0.112.13 09:00, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeesh.  You don't have to yell.  Besides, it's the only time I've changed it, so telling me to "stop changing it" seems a bit excessive. --Matthew0028 13:04, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's gone back and forth a couple times already, so I can understand anonymous-san's frustration. --Nifboy 16:05, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added [sic] to the quote, to indicate that the misspelling is in the comic, and not the quotation. --Matthew0028 20:40, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Nutrinal" 

message: Can we get cracking on actually making this make sense, please?  I'm going to start spellchecking my way through, but there's not a whole lot I can do for some of the grammar issues because I honestly can't tell what some of the sentences are trying to say.  Rogue 9 05:38, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I know enough about 8-Bit Theater to know about that one.  :p  Rogue 9 13:18, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Good God, the spelling in this article is criminal

message: I went through the entire article and did some editing along the way. Mostly cleaning up, but I did take out a bunch of stuff that seemed to me like nothing but retellings of funny passages. I can understand wanting to share those, but there's a time and a place - I don't think we need entire storylines retold if it's not absolutely necessary for the understanding of a character, and even if, we should keep it brief.
Also, there was a misconception of sorts about my login state. I'm 193.175.236.198 (Cleaning up and shortening where necessary.)
--R. Wolff 19:15, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Simple citation? (See my most recent edit.) NoDot 03:55, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleaning up 

message: Having just removed alignments from this article, can a regular fan assure me that character stats actually appear in the comic at some point for the characters in this article which include them? Otherwise this is just as bad as the alignment problem. Kit O'Connell (Todfox: user / talk / contribs) 21:57, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I am at a loss as to why this particular article seems to attract this sort of thing. Kit O'Connell (Todfox: user / talk / contribs) 09:02, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The main reason is probably the fact that it's fans who write most of this, not normal Wikipedians. I'm wondering if a Wiki (not open to edits from the general public) on  would be a good idea, and most of this could be moved onto it, so the effort here wouldn't have been wasted. NoDot 22:13, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Two words: overanalyzing and... uh, taking-things-at-face-value-a-lot. But I do like the Wiki-on-the-page-idea. Almost as much as I like hyphens. --R. Wolff 11:35, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Overanalyzing"? Please explain. NoDot 03:44, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ... well, okay, mainly taking things at face value. --R. Wolff 15:29, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I gots your overanalyzing right here.  Several people analyze how Fighter isn't talking. That's pretty much what I mean. (Unless, of course, it turns out that does have some significance. Eheh.) --R. Wolff 02:11, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Character stats

message: Let's face it, the article is a complete mess. A lot of the characters that are listed here are completely irrevelant to the plot, like Left Hand Man Gary, Akbar, Jeff or Queen Jane. Who else thinks they should be taken out of the article and make them into a little list of minor characters? Regulus Tera 23:38, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm comfortable with removing or radically shortening the entire "Side Characters" section. Maybe we could make an extra section ("Running gag characters" or something) for Onion Kid, Akbar, the messenger and Hank and the Real Light Warriors? --R. Wolff 21:20, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

text: OK, I just removed The Dark God, Queen Jane, Vargus, and Jeff. None of them, IIRC, have appeared more than once. The Dark God can come back with he appears some more. NoDot 16:28, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Made the minor character list. Now up to clean it up, since I just copy pasted it. Regulus Tera 01:51, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done and done. --R. Wolff 15:52, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What characters to take out? 

message: The images for Thief and R.Mage seem to have been un-uploaded.  Did someone remove them?
Also, I suggest possibly supplying links to the characters' first and/or most notable appearances, especially with the minor ones.
--- 208.47.211.5 17:33, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My mistake.  It's White Mage's image that's missing. --- 208.47.211.5 17:35, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the images for King Steve, Red Mage, White Mage, and Thief appear to have been deleted by an administrator, namely SCEhardt. I would imagine this is because whoever uploaded them in the first place failed to follow some rule concerning licensing or something. Whoever uploaded the images should find out why they were deleted and correct the problem. DarthVader1219 06:45, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Character Images 

message: Is the information on how Swordopolis, er, "posesses" someone correct? It seems entirely too scatological to not be vandalism. --maru  (talk) contribs 07:24, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm afraid the comic seems to imply it, and it's certainly not outside the range of 8-Bit Theater. Feezo  (Talk) 09:41, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's certainly correct, but I'm not sure if it merits mentioning in the article, seeing as that was the only time it happened (wasn't it?) --R. Wolff 10:11, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Swordopolis 

message: I honestly admire how well the section is written, but is it really necessary to include descriptions that exact? I don't think very many of those encounters had much impact on the story, at least not on the same level as, say, the Fiends. At most, the random encounters (which would make a smashing title for the section) should get as much space as the side characters such as Vargus. --R. Wolff 22:05, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like the section in question has been taken out and replaced since this was posted. Even with the new title, it should probably be removed. This article is huge (74 KB) and taking this out would bring it down by about 9 KB. The giants could be salvaged into the minor characters section, but the rest of it just looks like one time gags. Feezo (Talk) 05:46, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've taken out the section entirely.  The article is now 49KB, which is still larger than it should be. - Kalarchis 20:13, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Monster List 

message: "The most important factor in Red Mage's plans working, it seems, is how "down on their luck" the party is; it's been noticed that while a random battle gives the party all kinds of trouble ( and following), the party can blow through bad situations with relative ease. Both Lich and Kary took fewer comics to defeat than the recent Green Monster and this is mostly due to the fact that the characters "goof off" during random battles. For a major fight, however, the characters seem to "shape up"; whereas Red Mage keeps trying to convince Thief to do a "Ninja Blade" in the background during the fight with the Green Monster and Thief actually *threw* Black Mage at the Green Monster to start the fight, the entire team pulls together to defeat a more dangerous foe (usually a fiend). Likewise, when captured by the Eye, the party wasted no time in slaying the cultists who'd stuck them there upon escaping their prison (or the Eye, though this occurred off-comic). 
This factor is nowhere more true than it is for Red Mage. Essentially, Red Mage's plans will work when they need too; otherwise, the party is out of luck. Besides his successful battle strategies against Lich and Kary, Red Mage also came up with the plan to slay Vilbert when he proved unkillable with normal weapons (and, coincidentally, he's the one who initially dropped the Armoire of Invincibility on Vilbert's head). This was because Vilbert was "tougher" than normal; Black Mage's stabs had no effect on him. It could be argued that Red Mage's strategies only ever work on "bosses"- Vilbert, as a future Dark Warrior, could well have been considered a boss (and this also fits in with a FF1 reference; Lich's dungeon, the Earth Cave, has a vampire as a midboss. Facing Vilbert von Vampire before fighting Lich could count as a reference.)
Another idea is how much more powerful the fiends are. While there is generally some safe path out or some stronger force that can save them when fighting random encounters or the Dark Warriors, there isn't anything like that when fighting a fiend. As such, they have to work harder, since they are now in a life-or-death secnario."
Too close to original research for comfort. --R. Wolff 20:33, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Eh, sorry for being gruff, but it does strike me as too interpretational for an encyclopedia article, and too in-depth descriptive. It is well observed, though. --R. Wolff 18:24, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  He is the Red Mage! 

message: I have merged together the articles for the four main characters into the new article Light Warriors (8-Bit Theater).  I did this in response to the discussions that took place in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fighter McWarrior.  However, as I am not terribly familiar with the comic, I did not make an attempt to trim the four articles before putting them together.  As  you can imagine, it's kind of flabby, though not so bad as some of our other "Characters of..." type webcomic articles.  –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 21:27, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger of the four main character articles 

message: This is getting ridiculous now. To anyone looking to edit this article: Do not throw in new information based on the current comic.  Three times today people have thrown in a quip about White Mage because today's comic (697). These are not meant to be character biographies, so please do not add information/speculation every time a new comic comes out (I know it seems weird to some of you, but people are doing it.) This applies especially to comics that leave you with a cliffhanger. Please wait a few comics and determine if the information is important enough to add to the article. Thank you. - Kalarchis 01:00, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, information from guest comics is generally considered non-canon unless explicitly stated, much like fan fiction isn't canon. And no, if the guest comic appears on the front page, it doesn't count because all guest comics do. --R. Wolff 07:36, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also also, we took out all that clutter for a reason. Please don't reinstate it. Thanks. --R. Wolff 11:53, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guideline (Please read before editing the article) 

message: I was curious to know where the name "Onion Kid" came from. Also, I noticed in episode 700.1(), in the "Foster Parent Slayer" article, he's given a name, Rex Crockett. 151.204.67.177 18:42, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This[] explains his name, and the episode you're referring to is a guest comic, so it's non-canonical.  Thank you for discussing it here, though.  Most people just go in and blindly edit the article. - Kalarchis 19:39, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Turns out Mr. Clevinger actually does consider that comic canon: http://forum.nuklearpower.com/showthread.php?p=464708#post464708 . I opt for leaving the info in on that grounds. (Mind you, it's only now that this is actually confirmed that we can include the information.) --R. Wolff 20:28, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Onion Kid? 

message: The line about White Mage being "a member of Project fate" seemed somehow fishy to me, so I went and asked the author. He said: "I don't remember doing anything like "Project Fate", especially since I'd have a colon in that phrase if I had done it." So I changed it. I also remember reading a comic where it said "protect fate," and I guess someone just misread that (I did, too, initially). If someone does find a source that says "Project Fate," feel free to change it back. --R. Wolff 07:15, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project Fate 

message: I've been thinking about Megahedron. Aren't we, by choosing to include him in this article, technically speculating on his reappearance? At the moment he's appeared once, and I think we're giving him more credit than he deserves, all hints by Brian Clevinger notwithstanding. I move we take his entry out of the article for now. He might just be a one-time joke, and we can store the text here and still include him once it's clear he's a recurring character. --R. Wolff 08:49, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Even within the context of the comic, it's pointed out that he may not be a diety on the level of Swordopopolis, Raven, and "Darko," but rather a hallucination. You Can't See Me! 23:09, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Megahedron 

message: I've added a comment to the top of this article asking new users to read Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. I think this will help protect  from the speculation and overanalysis that articles about web-based media attract — this article in particular, since Wikipedia is fairly well known at the 8-bit Theater  forums. If anyone has other ideas, or suggestions about the wording, please let me know. Feezo (Talk) 23:42, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fancruft 

message: Hey, could a native speaker look over this edit of mine  and tell me if those commas do or don't belong? I'm fairly sure they don't, but they get reinstated a lot and who knows. --R. Wolff 21:14, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  My grammar fixes 

message: I don't think this article should attempt to predict the fate of Red Mage.  Although the cited comic strongly suggests RM was killed in an extremely painful way, there are plenty of ways for the author to avoid his actual death.  So I've removed "and killed" from "engulfed and killed" in the section on Ur, since we have direct evidence for the engulfing but not for the killing. Michael Slone (talk) 06:15, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Speculation

message: "The thing that the Light Warriors fought was a shard of an ancient and terrible entity. These things have many names. Kraken works as well as Ur."  Words of the author himself. I made it Kraken for now as that was its name in the game, but I'm not opposed to changes within reason. --R. Wolff 21:47, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kraken, Ur, or what? 

message: Besides Berserker, none of the Dwarven Kingdom is here (unless I'm blind). I feel that they deserve a little description under either "Friends and those they have met" or "Running gag characters" since it seems to be a running gag that, much like Onion Kid and the Real Light Warriors, Dwarf Land is always getting hindered by the antics of the Light Warriors (usually Black Mage). However, I do realize that these pages are dwarfing (no pun intended) the main 8BT article in content. --Jopasopa 02:34, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Dwarves 

message: Normally I wouldn't take notice, but it appears as though the Notability message was added by a bot. So, what should be done?
8-Bit Theater's characters are... well, not very notable on their own. But, there are quite a lot of them (enough so that they will not fit on the main 8-Bit Theater page), and they are notable in the context of the series.
Is there anything that we can do to make it more notable to the bots? Sorry; despite having an account for more than a few months, I'm still an infrequent editor and therefore know little about how things work. You Can't See Me! 04:02, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Alaibot just changed the date tag. Simonkoldyk put the original notice up. Feezo (Talk) 04:52, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't seem as though anybody minds it. Take it down? You Can't See Me! 23:36, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

text: The existence of articles which may (or may not) merit inclusion doesn't normally affect whether similar articles should be kept, unless a precedent was established in a previous deletion debate.Feezo (Talk) 07:56, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability Message 

message: According to the article the character Akbar is a reference to a Matt Groening character.  However, I always took the reference to be to Admiral Akbar, as in, the character Akbar sells shoddy products, and people should realize that "It's a trap".  Does anyone have a reference, such as statements by Brian Clevinger, as to exactly where the name came from?
Sdr 14:07, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, yes: http://forum.nuklearpower.com/showthread.php?p=239510&highlight=Akbar#post239510 Thanks for asking, though - that bit of information would probably have qualified as speculation without Clevinger backing it up, and I couldn't remember whether he had or not. --R. Wolff 14:33, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Awesome, thanks for checking.  Sdr 15:51, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Akbar 

message: I gave this article a makeover. I did put some thought into it, especially the headlines - I don't think every single character has to have his own linked-at-the-top heading and have put some groups (the Dark Warriors, the other Warriors) under one heading. I organized it like this:
*1. The Light Warriors Should be self-explanatory.
*2. Other main characters Characters who have in some way furthered the plot and are more or less friendly towards the Light Warriors. Mainly as in "they haven't, as such, fought."
*3. Major enemies As it says. Somehow most of these seem to be based on game characters.
*4. Minor characters Now this is important. These are all the characters who either have appeared only one or two times, who haven't had much plot significance or whose plot significance is still unclear. If, say, the Dark God becomes a major enemy later in the comic, we can still move him up to the appropriate section.
As always, criticism is welcome. The formatting isn't perfect, but I'm sure we'll sort it out in no time. Oh, and we need some new pictures - the Dark and Other Warriors probably should have group shots. --R. Wolff 20:02, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Addendum: 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. --R. Wolff 12:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But the cast of characters in this comic isn't altogether very large, and the running gag characters are an essential part of the humor in it, if not the actual plot. Removing them altogether would be an unfair move as such. SamSandy 09:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overhaul