To commemorate the absorption of WP:SE by WP:FF, here's a GAN for a non-Final Fantasy topic. I now have three GAN's up at once, as the music section of GAN is particularly slow- if anyone would care to review them, I'd be much obliged. --PresN 23:14, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Music of Chrono Cross is now also at GAN. Still have three GAN's up- the "music" section of GAN is now 2 1/2 months long from top to bottom. --PresN 03:34, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

{{FFX}} This is very small and should be merged with the other Final Fantasy template. --Blake (talk) 01:25, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't make any sense to merge the template for one game and its sequel with the template for a 13-game series. And a nine-link template isn't small. --PresN 02:33, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

For reference:

This could easily be merged in. There are numerious examples of long-running series with multiple unrelated titles using 1 template. As an example:

じんない 03:21, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Uhhh.... what? There is absolutely no reason, again, to merge either the FFX template or all of the FF game templates together into one super template. It looks awful and serves no purpose- Why would you want to template-link Characters of Final Fantasy VIII from Final Fantasy Tactics? And why would you want to merge thirteen templates into one template of dozens of articles? Your example works because there are only 30 articles total, and most games only have 1 or no child articles. Most FF games have at least 3-4 child articles, if not more, and the series as a whole has 106 articles- a bit too many to fit in one template. --PresN 04:39, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Style is the least of the concerns: relivancy and ease of navigation linking all related articles is far more important than "look and feel." Function over form so to speak. And TBH, FF does probably need fewer articles. If that's your reason, I may propose it in the near future here and WT:VG for a review as I doubt most FF articles need 3-4 child articles on them (some of them, most notably FF7 probably do). NOTE: I may still do this anyway now that you have brought the matter to my attention.じんない 05:03, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

For anyone interested, the proposal mentioned above has been started on WT: VG —Ost (talk) 13:21, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Yah, sorry, when I posted this I diddnt know there was a template for each game. I think the purpose of a template would be to link to other pages. This is very confusing having them all split up.--Blake (talk) 14:16, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Another template that might be a good place to look how its done is

This one has some problems with redlinking (which is generally frowned upon in navbars unless the creation of the article is imminent and it doesn't list nearly all the pages, especially the list pages. This may be due to the fact its trying to tie too much together as well.じんない 21:40, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

• --PresN 17:37, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
• Ost (talk) 18:23, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
• Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 21:06, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
• じんない 01:19, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
• --Kung Fu Man (talk) 21:22, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Biggest issue it has is there's absolutely no development section...I'm considering buying the Ultimania book for FF series characters to see if that turns up anything at all. There's still some critical reception to add too.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 21:25, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

It should probably be given a bit to see if there is anything that can be found of development, but if there isn't, it can be added back as a robust section of the Final Fantasy VI characters article. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 16:51, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Well there's an Ultimania that discusses the characters...there has to be some development information available, even if just a few paragraphs. I at least know there's something for the Dissidia appearance.

With the amount of reception he has though I don't see how remerging it will do any good.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 17:15, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

If anyone is willing to review an article for me, I'd be most obliged.

• Discography of the Final Fantasy VII series has been at A-class review for two months - it just needs one more person to say if it's A-class or not.
• Discography of the Chocobo series has been as GAN for a month and a half - it's holding up the whole FF music GT.
• Music of Chrono Trigger and Music of Chrono Cross have only been at GAN 2.5 weeks and 1 week, respectively, but it would be nice to have them reviewed.

Any help would be appreciated. --PresN 15:46, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Ugh, good effin lord. It's become every editor for himself. I'll look at Discography of the Chocobo series after I finish something here.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 16:59, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Much obliged. --PresN 20:06, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to thank Kung Fu Man and Ost316 for taking the time to review DoFF7 and DoChocobo for me! With the Chocobo music article at GA, that means that the FF section is back up to 50 GA/FAs! It also means that the project as a whole has 50 GAs! Well done, everyone. --PresN 14:59, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I'd also like to thank Ost again for reviewing Music of Chrono Trigger and Cross - somehow I didn't see it when he made the reviews. --PresN 05:53, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Single articles:

• Aerith Gainsborough
• Aki Ross
• Barret Wallace
• Chocobo
• Cloud Strife
• Kefka Palazzo
• Sephiroth (Final Fantasy)
• Squall Leonhart
• Tidus
• Tifa Lockhart
• Vincent Valentine
• Zack Fair

Lists:

• Characters of Final Fantasy V
• Characters of Final Fantasy VI
• Characters of Final Fantasy VII
• Characters of Final Fantasy VIII
• Characters of Final Fantasy IX
• Characters of Final Fantasy X
• Characters of Final Fantasy XII

• Characters of Chrono Trigger
• Characters of Chrono Cross

As it stands, the highest ranked article of them is Aerith's. So here's what I'm proposing to do

• Tidy up Cloud Strife, Squall Leonhart, and Tidus in any way possible and push for A-class.
• Go ahead and merge Aki Ross's reception information with Final Fantasy: Spirits Within. She won't be reappearing again and was more of a promotion piece for the film than a fully formed fictional character. After reading the sources...going to retract that. It just *might* work as a full article if it can be cleaned up. Google Books shows there is a LOT of mention for her.
• Bulk up and improve the remaining articles to GA-class by year's end. If they can't be improved, merging is a better idea then. I'm working on Kefka, and I know someone else is tackling both Vincent and Zack. That leaves Rikku the lame duck.
• Might be a good idea to start compiling resources together and see if any other characters can be made as stand alone articles after significant bulk. Tonberry for example may be a good candidate.

When the dust settles we should be able to take what we have and make a GT. What do you guys think?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 20:13, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

That sounds like a reasonable approach with the exception of cleaning up Rikku. Why does she have an article but not Yuna?

When looking at future articles, I haven't taken any time to do so, but I would like to see a Moogle article. I would think they would be more notable than Tonberry considering they've been in games since Secret of Mana and Final Fantasy III. Some of the old article could be salvageable if development and reception information could be found. —Ost (talk) 21:16, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget Characs of FF5, Characs of FF6, Characs of FF7, Characs of FF8, Characs of FF9, Characs of FF10, and Characs of FF12. If CoFF9 was GA, FF9 would be a GT, and if CoFF6 + Kefka were GAs, that's another one. I look forward to seeing what you can make of the character articles! --PresN 03:58, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Articles on characters from FF5 and FF9 should probably be merged, as there seems to be far less development and reception information on them than the others. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:59, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Went ahead and merged Rikku, might strengthen the character list some as a result. I agree on restoring Moogles if possible: to be honest I expected them so readily to have an article I overlooked that they didn't o_O houghts?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 21:31, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Probably best to bulk up the articles that they are in now so that we will know that they have enough for their own article, and if they don't the character design article will be much better anyway. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:27, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

There's also List of characters in Chrono Trigger and List of characters in Chrono Cross - building those two up can make the Chrono games GT into a full Chrono series FT. --PresN 05:51, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

I've been working a little bit on Zack Fair and Vincent Valentine, though they definitely will need some work. Mostly, it seems reception and critical impact. After that, the concept/creation and appearance sections can be cleaned up. Would anyone mind finding some nice images for the articles, though? Particularly a nice shot of Zack, because he never was given original colored art like the other characters, and I haven't found one. I have done nothing with Tifa's article, but I do own the Reunion Files, which has a lot of nice information in it; I haven't looked at hers that closely, but other profiles contain some concept/creation notes, voice casting, voice actor opinions, CGI creation, and other notes on personality. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 18:48, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Just a head's up, but currently finishing up the development section for an article on Barret. Reception took a little work finding...but with this we should be able to get a B-class article out there immediately once I'm done, just need to source and restructure the appearances section before we can push for GA from there.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 06:14, 30 June 2009 (UTC) And now Barret's a full article. Just need to tidy up the appearances section with references and organization and track down some info on the character's merchandising and we should have him to GA. I'll tackle Tifa the rest of the way from there to get her article also to GA.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 05:29, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

And with that, Barret's passed GA. One down, several to go.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 19:17, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Hooray for you! --PresN 20:38, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

After over a year of work, the Music of the Final Fantasy series GTC is now up! Feel free to leave comments here. --PresN 15:50, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Music of the Final Fantasy series has now been promoted as the project's second Good Topic! --PresN 16:00, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Just to let everyone know, I am reassesing Final Fantasy Adventure. Give your thoughts here. GamerPro64 (talk) 20:06, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Final Fantasy Adventure is now delisted. GamerPro64 (talk) 23:32, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Chrono (series) is up for GAR, see it's talk page. If it gets delisted, it takes out the Chrono featured topic as well. --PresN 18:33, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

I've done some work on it; it needs some references and general fixes if anyone wants to lend a hand. --PresN 00:10, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks to Kung Fu Man for working on it, as well as Ost and Deckiller for doing some ref and formatting fixes. --PresN 21:37, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

It's been saved. --PresN 14:48, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

And I am worn the hell out!--Kung Fu Man (talk) 21:28, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Hooray for you! --PresN 23:23, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Well it did take a year from the original little stub. :\--Kung Fu Man (talk) 23:26, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

And it passed, for the curious.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 20:29, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm taking care of the Chrono (series) GAR above, so I think that one will be kept, but the next problem will be coming up soon- Characters of Final Fantasy XII is listed as an article to be looked at as part of the pre-2007 GA sweeps (the reason for the outbreak of GAR's recently), and it's going to need some love to keep it's GA status and thus keep the FF12 GT around. If anyone has some time, some preventative maintenance on that article would be great. It's only a matter of time before someone gets around to doing a formal review on it, and the big OR tag at the top might be enough to push them to just delist it. --PresN 23:15, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Note that there are several other SE articles on the list as well, CoFF12 is just the most obviously deficient. --PresN 23:23, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I fixed a citation that was removed from the Basch character development bit . Most of the [original research] tags are concerned on the plot developments - which can be solved by citing the game script, or for more desperate measure, removed wholesale since it is something of a game details/trivia. What should we do? — Blue。 11:22, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

...Well guys, it's now been delisted, so you have 3 months, or until 17th September, to get the article back up to GA or the FFXII topic can be nominated for demotion - rst20xx (talk) 09:28, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Wait, what the hell? It's still being cleaned up! We didn't even get a week or any sort of warning they were going to hit it!--Kung Fu Man (talk) 17:07, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Ugh. I say, just act like it's on hold- if we can get it fixed up within a week or so, I'm just going to relist it. He only delisted it because he didn't think it could be fixed in a week- if we do it in time, there's no reason to follow a bunch of unnecessary bureaucracy. --PresN 02:59, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

If you really feel it was improperly delisted you can always post for a second reassessment at WT:GAR explaining that while it wasn't up to the quality when it was reviewed, it was not given a proper chance, especially as it was mostly just sourcing.陣内_Jinnai 04:50, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

The effort is severely crippled by the fact that there's some character development from Revenant Wings necessary, and I haven't played that game to take down the dialogue in the game and things. — Blue。 05:47, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

When it passes in a month, this will be added to the (still in progress) Disc.ofFF GTopic. --PresN 20:21, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Passed. --PresN 16:10, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

The hits just keep on coming- Organization XIII is at GAR right now (started June 9), and Tidus just passed GAR (started June 4). --PresN 14:55, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

David Fuchs looks like he's about to review Squall Leonhart and Final Fantasy III. The GAR hasn't been started, but it's listed as "in progress" on the sweeps page. --PresN 14:59, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

FF3's has started, Fuchs wants less images and more reception. I'll work on Ivalice if someone will tackle this one. --PresN 23:36, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

I think I'm done, added a lot of reception and cleaned it up in terms of images.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:45, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

The status of the recent GARs:

• Final Fantasy Adventure - Delisted, no one worked on it, way too far gone.
• Chrono (series) - Saved by PresN
• Tidus - Saved by Guyinblack
• Characters of Final Fantasy XII - Delisted without review, Bluer's worked on it a bit
• Organization XIII - Saved by Guyinblack
• Final Fantasy III - Saved by Kung Fu Man
• Ivalice - Saved by PresN
• Squall Leonhart - Pre-emptively saved by Kung Fu Man

Ugh, that's a lot of reviews. I wanted to make a central place to keep track of them. --PresN 16:00, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Waiting on Dave to finish up FF3. Been working on Squall a lot, rewrote the reception section completely and overhauled the development section. I'm waiting to get a friend of mine to translate the Ultimania content on him, just benched somewhat with comp problems. We at least (finally) have a citation for the River Phoenix bit, but does anyone have a citation where Gackt calls Squall his "copy"? This gets mentioned a lot online but I've never seen a reliable source yet.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 11:37, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Squall was passed without comment by Fuchs, presumably due to the extensive work Kung Fu Man has put into it in the last few days. Once FF3 is done, that will be all of the current GAR's finished. With Chars of FF12 delisted, the topic will get delisted in a couple of months, so that should be a priority to take care of. Also note that there are still 6 articles on the GA sweeps page that will at some point get reviewed- Chrono Break, Code Age Commanders, Final Fantasy XII: Revenant Wings, Final Fantasy Chronicles, Final Fantasy Mystic Quest, and Final Fantasy Tactics Advance. There's no telling when they will be reviewed- could be tomorrow, could be next year. I'll try to watch out to see if anyone looks like they're going to review them. --PresN 17:34, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I doubt that anybody would be watching the FFT talk page so I'd just direct this to the Project's discussion page, also this is some sort of a c-c-c-combo breaker of the recent GARs, lol .....Anyway, I saw entries of fan-mods being mentioned in the Final Fantasy Tactics article. I made a bold step and removed these mentions. I hope that didn't cross the line of any Policies out there. Sure, if anyone thinks that was wrong *shrugs* do whatever. — Blue。 07:23, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

I was the one that added that section - I was wondering why it got removed. I think that the modification of a console-only game is somewhat unique and probably worth noting, and it also reflects the state of the game today (along with the port to PSP). I'm new to wikipedia, so if I've ignored any guidelines or if this breaks well known standards, I apologize. - aeturnum | 12:41, 11 June 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aeturnum (talk • contribs)

As I recall, there's a bit on notability/verifiability - the same reason why the existence of the "FFVII unofficial Famicom version" article was contested: there needs to be enough media coverage and such, things like that, for fan/unofficial modifications and fortunately said article got enough attention. I'm sure you could get a second opinion though. — Blue。 03:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

For fan mods its a mixed it really depends. If a site exists that can show a working finished mod and does not link to a downloadable version of the game, then it might be enough to mention it. I know that for fan-translations that has generally be considered enough to meet WP:V. In this case, at most it might get a mention that mods for the game exist with a citation.陣内_Jinnai 05:15, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Either way I think the hacktics forum is trying to keep a low profile due to the cease & desist letter that a Chrono Trigger fansequel received recently. I don't think they should be advertised on Wikipedia. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 13:39, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure a company's legal problems should be considered when deciding whether to add content to an article. That seems to be in the WP:COI area. If the mod is notable and verifiable by third party sources, it could be included. —Ost (talk) 13:51, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, its the reserve lack of notability. We do not censor at Wikipedia.陣内_Jinnai 16:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I just thought the modification of a title that was released only on consoles was interesting and referenced the various sources to have work backing up the paragraph. There's no reason that specific mods need to be sighted to talk about the general trend, though it might be nice. Aeturnum 22:08 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Not trying to kill people for this, but I've now put Ivalice up for reassesment. You can go right here. Happy editing! :) GamerPro64 (talk) 19:00, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm actually starting to worry about the volume of GAR's lately. It's good to have the articles fixed and all but it's hard to fix one batch when another's right on its heels.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 20:07, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

I've worked a bit on this GAR; still remaining is to expand the "reception" section and find some more refs. I also agree that this is starting to be a bit tiring- between the GA sweeps picking up again and GamerPro's personal video game GA sweep, I'm feeling a bit overrun. --PresN 17:11, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

The article still needs creation and conept info to pass a GAR. I know that there was talks specifically about linking FFT with FF12. There may also be mention of relation with the world from the Ogre Battle (series) as FFT had many of the same developers. Not sure if the latter exists though. Nothing directly comparing the world of FFT/FF12 to Ogre Battle/Tactics Ogre, but there are WP:RS reviews which do note the connection between FFT being convoluted Tactics Ogre's sequal.陣内_Jinnai 19:29, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Does anyone know where I can find a game script for Revenant Wings? I have a bunch of stuff that I feel like I could cite to the game if I could find the right quotes. --PresN 16:46, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay, long story short, Dragoon X Omega II got added to the wikiproject by accident, User:PresN pointed out it was a hack with probably no notability, and User:Megata Sanshiro took it as a statement to remove Final Fantasy VII (Famicom) as well from the project completely. I ran across it this morning and undid it, citing on Sanshiro's talk page similarity to Chrono Resurrection and that it'd been under the project's scope knowingly for over a year...and another user went and undid that suggesting I bring it up here, stating that it according to the wikiproject's page it didn't fall under it. (Not meaning to sound rude with any of this for the record, just giving a quick rundown as far as I understand it).

So yeah, any objections to adding it back? Also while I'm here, should we just AfD the FF1 hack?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 11:31, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

There's no question that the FFVII game IS notable. Dragoon X Omega II is most likely not (though I'd love to see someone prove me wrong) and should probably be taken to AFD, yes. DO note it IS probably the biggest and most complex hack (certainly of an NES game) ever made public so it's quite possible any AFD will have some keep votes in that direction. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 14:11, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh hi, yeah, I'm said "another user". Just to explain why I repeated Sanshiro's edit wasn't questioning whether the article was notable or otherwise - there's no question that the subject matter is notable; according to the present state of said article, it is.

The issue was when the article is included as part of the project. Some time after WP:FF was merged into WP:SE there was a discussion over what topic or scope are covered by the project. If I could recall, as stated at the front project page of the WP:SE, the scope is generally subjects only developed by Square Enix, and not subjects published but not developed by Square Enix, as well as subjects developed by Taito and Eidos. So I was just going through with the scope and figured since FFVII Famicom isn't developed nor published by Square Enix it's not covered by the WP:SE. I bet Chrono Resurrection is just a matter of an overlooked case and has been within the WP:SE before the merger. So yeah that's basically the reason why I removed FFVII Famicom from the wikiproject index. — Blue。 15:13, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

That seems like a pretty narrow line of thought to exclude those two (FF7Fam and Chrono Resurrection) when they're pretty fully related to the subject of SquareEnix on wikipeida though. My impression of that was it's a case of dealing with articles like Breath of Fire that weren't completely published by SE than "if SE didn't have a hand in it, it doesn't count, even if the titles are related".--Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:48, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, my thoughts. FF7Famicon and Chrono Resurrection were attempts (one successful) to remake an SE game in a different format. The resulting games were still recognizable and intended to be FF7 and ChronoTrigger. DragoonXOmegaII is an entirely new game built using the FF1 graphics/game engine. If another company had licensed the engine and made their own game, we wouldn't consider it as part of SE (I.E., no one wikiproject holds sway over all of the games made with the Unreal engine), so why should we cover the article since they hacked the game rather than licensing it? To sum up, FF7F and CR are remakes, unofficial as they may be, and therefore should be covered in the project. DXO2 is a separate game unrelated in plot to the game whose engine they used, and should not be covered. --PresN 17:11, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Then we should clarify that in the scope. I'm neutral either way, except that for that.陣内_Jinnai 06:53, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

True. The project scope as of 10:37, 1 July 2009 (UTC) still reflects that the WP cover subjects that "Square, Enix, or Square Enix designed or produced". If FF7F and CR, remakes that are not being designed or produced by Square, Enix, or Square Enix, are covered, the wording could be clarified. Since I'm a bit biased on this issue I couldn't bring myself to "fix it", though. — Blue。 10:37, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I've noticed Jinnai prodded Dragoon X Omega but was reverted. I nominated the article as well as Dragoon X Omega II for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dragoon X Omega. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 11:09, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Another SE Music article is up for GAN. --PresN 21:00, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

And passed. --PresN 22:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

• --PresN 19:18, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
• --Kung Fu Man (talk) 19:22, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
• —Ost (talk) 19:56, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
• --陣内_Jinnai 20:56, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
• --WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 22:46, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
• --Axem Titanium (talk) 14:28, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

It links to three articles, which are already extensively cross-linked. All other FF templates have 4+ links. The template for FF3 has been deleted for having only two articles, but I think the case can be made for this one too. Thoughts? Axem Titanium (talk) 16:32, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I just got a new idea for the FF series template. Take a look:

• FFVIII mockup
• FFI&II mockup
• FFIV mockup

It would not apply to FFVII or Ivalice (and potentially FFXIII in the future, who knows). Basically, you pass all the links needed for that FF game into a template parameter. Thoughts? Axem Titanium (talk) 16:47, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I kinda like that, actually. It would also mean we could bring back the templates for the smaller games, the ones that only had 2 or 3 links- just pipe them into that top line. I'm for it. --PresN 21:39, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Good idea. How much of a president does this have? I am wondering because for series like Megami Tensei and Dragon Quest if the template seems to work here we have propose it to WP:VG for larger series usage.陣内_Jinnai 22:22, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I suppose you could do that. These sort of things usually get spread across the wiki memetically by themselves though. People who see that it's a good, applicable idea will adopt it. I can't think of other series that would need it though, since few have as many companion articles as FF (music, world, characters, etc.). Axem Titanium (talk) 13:35, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

As I said, those 2 would be the best candidates. Both are spawling series with multiple spinoff series. Only other ones might be Mario and Zelda franchises. I also think in this case its better to not go the meme-ish way.陣内_Jinnai 23:36, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, obviously, since I just thought of it, it can't have too much precedent. Looking at MegaTen and DQ, only a few of them have character articles and nothing else, so I don't think it would be too useful to them. Zelda is similar, with only character articles, which their main template handles well. I didn't look too closely at Mario but I doubt it has sub-articles for each game. If you want to drop a line at WT:VG to let a wider cross-section of people take a look, go ahead. Anyway, does anyone oppose implementation of this template format? If not, I'll go ahead and make the changes in a few days and then nominate the old templates for deletion. Axem Titanium (talk) 04:52, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Posted. Looks like they have the first response.陣内_Jinnai 21:21, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I can't tell the difference. What has changed? SharkD (talk) 08:47, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

It includes game-specific links (characters, music, etc.) in the first row, eliminating the need for game-specific templates. I suppose one disadvantage to this would be that you'd have to change the parameters on each relevant article if you want to change one of the game-specific links, but you can just define those parameters in the main template instead of passing them in. I'll have a mock-up in a bit. Axem Titanium (talk) 13:42, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok, it's ready. It looks identical to above but now all the links for each game are contained in the series template. You define the parameter "FF" to which game you want and it'll automatically produce the correct links. If you want to edit the links, they're all centralized in the series template, including the game-specific links so it's easy and you don't have to edit each individual article. Axem Titanium (talk) 14:20, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Any objections? I'll be implementing tomorrow I guess. Feel free to revert if you feel it's a tremendously bad idea. Otherwise, speak now or forever hold your peace (until a better idea comes along). Axem Titanium (talk) 15:03, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I've made the switch on all relevant articles. If no one minds, I'm going to nominate the outdated templates in Category:Final Fantasy templates for deletion. Keep in mind that it would not include FFVII or Ivalice, or the unrelated music and location templates (or the main series template, obviously). Axem Titanium (talk) 15:40, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Up for deletion here, just keeping you guys informed. Axem Titanium (talk) 15:33, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

1 2

Bringing this up here because it's worth asking if now we've retroactively absorbed Eidos' properties into the project or not. I'm going to do some checking to see if anything's said about this in other news sites.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 20:16, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

It seems like Eidos publishing is now SEEurope, but Eidos development is still Eidos- either way, the project doesn't cover games published by SE of any kind unless they are made by Square Enix main, so I don't think this announcement messes with our scope. If they start turning Eidos into just a European branch of SE, rather than a distinctive development studio, then we'll have a problem. (I.E., if they make a Final Fantasy game there, our scope will explode) --PresN 20:49, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Still something to watch out for. It's likely nothing to happen anytime within this year, but the next couple of years might be more telling.陣内_Jinnai 23:34, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I've moved from Final Fantasy to Xenogears; Creid is now at GAN. The music backlog stands at just over 6 weeks right now, so we'll see about it then. --PresN 18:27, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I can review the article if you want. It's probably gonna take some time to get it reviewed anyway, what with the backlog and all. :) The Prince (talk) 19:31, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd appreciate it, but don't feel obligated- the backlog bothered me when it was holding up the GT I was making, but since nothing is depending on this article I don't mind waiting for a while. --PresN 20:53, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Now passed. --PresN 21:02, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Congrats. :) Axem Titanium (talk) 21:06, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey guys, does anyone know where the original discussion about moving all the "Music of" articles to "Discography of" articles is? I can't seem to find it. Axem Titanium (talk) 18:36, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Music of the Final Fantasy series#Requested moves. I'm totally up for moving them back, by the way. --PresN 18:44, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Note that no one commented at the WT:VG discussion referenced in there- Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 49#Possible rename of the .22Music of Final Fantasy .23.22 articles. --PresN 18:48, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that'd be nice. I never really liked how they were kind of shoe-horned into discography articles when they should (and now, thanks to you, are :D) be about the music. That the music was post-hoc released in albums is irrelevant to the fact that they first appeared in a game and should be treated as an aspect of that game. Good job on the music GT and I totally support a move back to "Music of", now that they all are focused back on the music. Axem Titanium (talk) 19:55, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Done! --PresN 20:24, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I've noticed that Music of Final Fantasy III is not treated as an aspect of that game. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 12:11, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Alright, I'll work on that one. --PresN 14:17, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Another thing I noticed, should soundtracks or singles appear first in the article? I notice FFVIII and Kingdom Hearts (not part of this GT) music articles put singles first but the rest that have singles put them after the soundtracks. This should probably be standardized. Axem Titanium (talk) 15:16, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, I didn't write VIII, which is why it's formatted differently than the rest. I like to do the soundtracks first, because that way the article flows as lead->development->soundtrack/talking about the music/->albums based on the soundtrack. I might adjust FF8 later today; I always wanted to go back and make it follow the same pattern as the other articles. --PresN 15:42, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Go ahead. :) Consistency is good. Axem Titanium (talk) 20:01, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey guys, this article is going to be featured in the Main Page on August 10th! Score one for the Project! Unfortunately, there won't be any images to accompany the article. Any ideas? Do you think this image would be suitable? In any case, do you think the article can use any more improvements? — Blue。 05:48, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Why wouldn't it be? It is used in the article. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 10:36, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

From what's been said about the game, the DS remake appears to be fundamentally different in many aspects, even the battle system which apparently has more in common with CT's encounter system than FFL's older random battles. I'm inclined to push for it to be split into it's own article as a result (a la Final Fantasy IV (Nintendo DS), but wanted to see what everyone thought here first. FFL2 could stand by itself if bulked up. A split most likely won't happen until the US release of the game by any means to make sure the English title is right.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 04:29, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I'd say to wait until it's released here, and then see. There won't be any real meat until then, and it adds content to the current article. There is no need to preemptively split it now, is there? Also, I think this is being discussed on the article's talk page as well. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 05:46, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Universe of Kingdom Hearts is undergoing a GAR right now. It currently has way too many non-free images, and spends most of the article talking about in-universe details. I started the GAR at Collectonian's urging. If the article is delisted, it will take out the Kingdom Hearts FT. --PresN 18:10, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Wow that's going to need one helluva overhaul...I got rid of a lot of the images, reduced it down to 3. I'm not that familiar with the setting though so I'll leave it to Guyinblack or someone else to tackle the read.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 18:22, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

The reception has a lot of non-relevant information. Talk about the graphics, unless it specifically mentions the world or aspects of it is not really relevant as the word is not just graphics. Also info on the series as a whole isn't relevant to info on the article. Also there are a lot of unverified statements, far more than the occasional one we could overlook for a GA-level article.陣内_Jinnai 21:47, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Delisted, the KH topic now has a gap. --PresN 15:30, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Music of the SaGa series is now at GAN... and will likely stay there for a long time, seeing as Junya Nakano (June 22) and Creid (July 8) are still buried in the middle of the 'music' section. --PresN 17:03, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Three months+ later... it passes! --PresN 15:33, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

First off, I am 100% on the side of keeping the images in articles like Music of Final Fantasy V and so on. I am currently working on Music of the Command & Conquer series but I'm taking heavy flak from the guys over at WP:NFC see here

My question is, how did you get them to get off your backs about having even just the one image. -- Cabe6403 ^{(Talk•Sign)} 22:53, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Showing precident from other music FLs, or gaining wider support, particularly from those in WP:MUSIC (and related wikiprojects) to believe you aren't in violation of WP:FAIR USE because the items show something that is non-trivial and important to the work itself. In all, I'd say you have an steep uphill battle.陣内_Jinnai 23:11, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

I did almost of the the Final Fantasy/Square Enix "Music of" articles. My rationale for the pictures was the one that you gave in boldface- if it's fine to use one identifying picture in an article-style article about an album, it should be fine to use 3 identifying pictures in an article-style article about 3 albums. At some point I got opposed on that- probably by one of the guys in that NFC discussion- and after they were all removed I added one, with the idea of using it as identification for the "most common" album, which in my case would be the soundtrack album for the game in question. Your case is harder, as its a series of soundtrack albums. After that, I mainly just hope that no fair-use police come by and remove it. It also helps to make it a true "music" album, as you noticed, calling it 'discography' gets the images smacked. You do this by talking about the musical styles and such in each album, the music's relation to the game, concept and creation, and legacy. This has a side effect of filling out the article nicely.

What Jinnai said above is basically what you need to do. To be honest, you aren't going to convince those guys- a straight literal reading of the fair use rules means that unless you are discussing the image in question in the article, it shouldn't be there. That an image is expressly allowed for identification on a single-album article is something they just ignore. Just keep hammering the big point- 1 image in a 1-album article == 3 images in a 3-album article. Combining articles should not reduce the information given. --PresN 02:49, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, the Vagrant Story FA during its passing had all the images, without any complains or taggings whatsoever for over two years. Then, when it goes featured in the Main Page, it got tagged for excessive non-fair use image. Any advice on tackling this, perhaps without removal of images? — Blue。 06:23, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, the promotional artwork could be removed since it uses the same art as the cover art. --Mika1h (talk) 09:01, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Also it's a shame the free image was not used for the main page entry. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 09:18, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I'd remove the album cover as it doesn't add anything to the article. Come to think of it, I'd simply remove the entire infobox; it's just distracting and redundant. The Prince (talk) 10:15, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I have nominated Final Fantasy IV for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. The Prince (talk) 12:53, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

The FAR has moved to FARC, and still needs some work if its going to be kept. --PresN 14:32, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Just to update everyone, FF4 was demoted from its FA status. GamerPro64 (talk) 02:48, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Due to the numerous dubbed actors being revealed, I wish to request that we fill up the "known charatcer roles" in Dissidia. If sources are needed, I've found Anime News Network to be of such use as it is sourced at certain Wikipedia pages.Fractyl (talk) 15:26, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

ANN can only be used for reviews and news information, just so you know. We discussed this is the Anime/Manga Wikiproject; because encyclopedic information is user-contributed, much like Wikipedia, and numerous errors have been found, we have stopped counting the encyclopedia portion as reliable. However, if a news articles claims that blank is voicing blank, than it can be used as a source. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 17:59, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, at Otakuthon 2009, Johnny Young Bosch confirmed his role in the game as Firion. Can it be added as that came from the horse's mouth? Fractyl (talk) 04:33, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I believe it depends on the situation. Unless there is a news article to back it up, then it shouldn't be used because anyone can make something up. It's fairly close to the release of Dissida, though, so these problems should be cleared up soon enough. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 21:18, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

That one is questionable. I'd run it by RS/N because Otakan isn't some 3rd-rate convention.陣内_Jinnai 21:33, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Posted a request at RS/N here. Anyone who can add more info please do so like if it was in a panel or opening/closing ceremonies, etc.陣内_Jinnai 20:47, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Dear users of Wikipedia,

I know that a few years ago, that there was once a page about the Mana Spirits, that gave detailed information that was considered to be "excessive and superflous" for Wikipedia itself, and was some how deleted.

To the writers of that page, I'd like to ask if you could contribute your writing prowness on such matter, and if you can, other subjects, ie; like Flammie and trademark monsters of the series to the Wiki of Mana, as I know that it would be best there than on Wikipedia.

Thank you and have a great day.

Anonymous person, 71.220.81.178 (talk) 23:11, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Maybe you can trace back where the article once was, and ask admins to undelete them so you can recover the text to put at the Wiki? Dunno if its possible. — Blue。 00:37, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, those articles were merged into the main Mana (series) article. Old versions from the redirects should still be in the histories. See spirits, Flammie and rabite. ~ Hibana 02:26, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Hibana! Anonymous User 71.220.81.178 (talk) 19:56, 13 August 2009 (UTC)