Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Final Fantasy/archive/34

Template:WPFF Navigation

Welcome to the discussion page. This page provides space for community members to discuss housekeeping, project and article issues. Click here to add an issue to the discussion below, or here to edit the page to respond to a specific issue.

Effective May 2007, all topics with the

Resolved

template will be archived after three to five days. This keeps the talkpage fresh with current issues. All resolved topics can be viewed in the respective archives to your left.

The current month's archive is here.

Roll call: July

Please sign your name below.

1. — PresN 23:38, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
2. — Blue。 00:07, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
3. — Deckiller 00:09, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
4. — Anomie 00:10, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
5. — Melodia 00:16, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
6. — Greg Jones II 01:18, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
7. — Renmiri 01:49, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
8. — Judgesurreal777 17:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
9. --ΔαίδαλοςΣ 18:35, 3 July 2007 (UTC) Here, but unfortunately not very active. :(
10. — Thanatosimii 22:33, 4 July 2007 (UTC) Here, but also not very active...
11. — Teggles 00:14, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Characters of FFX article

Resolved

I haven't checked Wikipedia for almost over a week because of my Internet connection being down. The Characters of Final Fantasy X article needs a lot of work, so a lot of help is required. I would be appreciated if you respond to this. Thanks. Sjones23 19:25, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Also, I really need some help on this article since I am back on Wikipedia. Sjones23 19:46, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Will try to help what I can. — Bluerで す。 20:10, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Anyone else? Sjones23 21:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Count me in. It would be good if we can specific what are the issues that need to be addressed =) --Cyktsui 23:28, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I strongly urge you to create a To Do box on the discussion page so we can coordinate what needs to be done and strike what has been accomplished on the way to GA. Judgesurreal777 00:48, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

And also, Deckiller already listed in the now archived discussion his suggestions for what needed to be done...Judgesurreal777 03:38, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I've created a to do list here from Deckiller's suggestions. Sjones23 13:55, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

• Merged it with Characters of FFX2 today, fixed a lot of prose, cut a lot of images. Have a look and please feel free to tweak the prose. Renmiri 01:51, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Kingdom Hearts peer review

Resolved

Hey, everyone, please comment on the Kingdom Hearts peer review. A couple of editors and I are FA-pushing it. This is quite in the same vein as the above. Axem Titanium 18:35, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Sephiroth (Final Fantasy)

I looked this article over, and it is in need of major surgery. It is in universe in parts, isn't set up like the newer fictional character articles, and has some copyediting needed. Judgesurreal777 05:57, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Is there really a necessity to disambiguate the game that he appears in? (for instance, it's Yuna (Final Fantasy), not Yuna (Final Fantasy X).) Or are there multiple Sephiroths that i am unaware of? hbdragon88 03:59, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Sephiroth is also part of the Jewish Kabbalah. — Bluerで す。 04:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I am aware of the need to disambiguate from other things. I was questioning the necessity of needing to add "VII" to the end of the current article title. hbdragon88 05:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Good idea, it can probably be safely changed...Judgesurreal777 05:17, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Geez, how many different names does this character have?! And this "Safer Sephiroth" – what is that supposed to mean? Sounds like a poster boy for a "don't drink and drive" poster. hbdragon88 05:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Safer Sephiroth is the name of his final (sorta) form in which he has 7 wings and no legs. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣ 14:56, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, this article has lost GA status....guess it really did need some work. :) Judgesurreal777 02:21, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

How ironical that after all these "hasty merges", the one article which gets de-listed is one that wasn't affected by a merge or a split... Kariteh 07:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Point. Although it does need work like the rest of the FF7 character GAs. — Deckiller 10:48, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

(reset by Deckiller) Not so. There are other articles delisted. Two GA articles got merged into Spira (Final Fantasy) transforming two GA class articles into a hodgepodge of disjointed game facts that hardly qualifies as an article worthy of Wikipedia - see the cleanup tag - let alone WPFF class. Renmiri 00:42, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but that is totally false. Neither article was up to GA status, and the combined one is marginally better, in either case each needed an out of universe perspective, lots of references and copyediting. Judgesurreal777 00:49, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I beg you pardon ? They were both GA, just look at the history. Do I have to take a screenshot ? Besides, the current article is nowhere near the level those two were. because it was just "stapled together" without narrative so it is definitely a change for the worst Renmiri 19:03, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to improve the merged article. Kariteh 19:05, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

As I posted on the article talk page, I don't even know where to begin :( Renmiri 02:31, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Articles on Real World Items

A few pages about things existing in the real world, but more famously existing in the world(s) of Final Fantasy, have been merged into the Final Fantasy project. Should articles such as Gunblade, describing real world objects as well as popular culture references (i.e. Final Fantasy), really be merged into the Final Fantasy project? There is information about such items that is not available on any of the Final Fantasy project pages. Redirecting to these pages is more likely to misinform than to inform readers as it indicates that these items only exist in the game. Rather than redirecting a real world item article to a fantasy world page containing 3 words about how the item appears in a game, it would be better to link the game article to the item article. --Cameron.walsh 15:46, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Gunblades "exist" in the real world, but I don't think they are called gunblades. That name is specific to Final Fantasy VIII. --Teggles 19:33, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Good point, in the real world they are called "Sword Guns" or "Pistol Swords". However, no wikipedia article exists for any combination of two of sword, gun, pistol, blade etc. The name is not specific to FFVIII, it also exists in Parasite Eve and Wild Arms. Gunblade NY was also the name of an (unrelated) Arcade game by Sega. This indicates a few more options:

1. Move the article to "Sword Gun" or "Pistol Sword" and redirect Gunblade to that.
2. Create a disambiguation page for Gunblade (links to or descriptions of: "Sword Gun", FF weapon, PE weapon, WA weapon, Sega arcade game)
3. Keep the more common name of "Gunblade" and rephrase the article to indicate that "Pistol Sword" might be a better name.

Merging Gunblade into the Final Fantasy project is not the answer because "Gunblade" is not specific to Final Fantasy. --Cameron.walsh 03:41, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I was going through the notability guidelines, in case pistol swords would fail the notability criteria, but the template seems to apply to higher-level concepts like books, companies, games and so forth, rather than actual objects. At the moment I'm considering moving the Gunblade article to Pistol sword, rewording it to focus more on the real-world object, keeping the popular culture section for FF and other references. At the top of the popular culture section I'd put "Gunblade links here, for the Sega Arcade Game 'Gunblade NY' please visit Sega Model 2." Gunblade would then redirect to Pistol Sword#Pistol Swords in Popular Culture or similar. I'll leave this suggestion up for comments for a few more days. --Cameron.walsh 04:18, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

A small request for the lists

Do you guys think it's possible, to link to the character articles individually on my wiki for articles which didn't survive? That way those who want to learn more can more easily, through a single link, and those who get scared away can know there's a place for them. Although Wikipedia is meant to provide a brief overview, we have the obligation to direct people to places where they can learn more. --Sir Crazyswordsman 03:15, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

All cast of character articles should have links to the character category at the Final Fantasy Wikia; it would probably make the external links section too long to list all the chars. Every article here should have a wikilink to a Final Fantasy Wikia page. Perhaps each cast of characters article can provide wikilinks to each related category to make it more prominant (main characters category, etc.) — Deckiller 03:39, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with automatic linking. The articles should link to the FF Wikia only if the link has additional and interesting information to propose, just like with any external link. For instance, I don't think a link to Category:Final Fantasy characters is useful in the FFI article, since the Wikia category is filled with a small dozen of one-liner stubs. A link to Squall Leonhart in the Squall Leonhart article is also not necessary, since the Wikipedia article already really covers everything about Squall and the Wikia link doesn't add much. Kariteh 07:47, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

The Squall one doesn't add too much, but most of them do, I think, and I think it's, if nothing else, a good gesture to just make it across the board to always try to link to something relevant at the wikia for FF articles. I agree with Deckiller, though, that it should be to the category for character list articles, as 10+ external links gets a bit cluttered. --PresN 12:00, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Is there any policy that says that Wikias have a privilege concerning external links? I don't see why systematically linking to them everywhere would be benefical. I mean, we could probably find for some particular entries a "better" site than the Wikia, but even still fansites seem shunned in Wikipedia (for good reasons), while you're implying here that Wikias are privilegied regardless of their usefulness. Kariteh 11:04, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, there's CoN, which I still think is better than my site. But we have to link somewhere. If we don't link anywhere, we're saying "This character is not notable and this is the only information you ever need to know about this character." We don't want to give that impression. --Sir Crazyswordsman 13:13, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

AFAIK encyclopedias are meant to give you a comprehensive well thought out summary then link you to other more detailed sources. And as far as external linking there were some criteria: notability ( FF Wiki), preference for non-commercial sites to avoid WP to be used as free advertising ( FF Wiki), quality / reliability of the site ( FF Wiki), etc... Besides, considering Wikia is a sister of WP what is with the objection to linking to it ? Renmiri 02:29, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Please don't forget that notability is not inherited. Just because the FF Wikia as a whole qualifies doesn't mean that every entry it contains automatically qualifies. If an entry is not interesting because it's just a non-informative one-liner (or if it has even less information than here), is a link really useful? Sure, it could be useful to have the link so that potential Wikia contributors see it and expand it, but the same thing could be said for any other website (it's easier to edit a wiki than e-mail a non-wiki site yes, but still). Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against Wikia, but I just want for the criterias for external links to be followed and "fair". If there's a policy that says that sister projects can be linked to automatically, then it's fine and definitely benefical for these sister projects, but I don't know if there's such a policy. Kariteh 07:47, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Your contention lacks foresight: As a wiki editor you should have realized by now that active Wikis are under continuous improvement so the one liner stub article of today will be the FA class article of tomorrow. FF Wiki has a large group of dedicated editors constantly filling up stub articles with thousands of edits a day. Linking to it is a very sensible policy. Besides, you can always expand the one liner FF wiki article yourself if you are unwilling to wait. Unlike a commercial external site, FF Wiki is open to ALL wikipedia editors, free of charge Renmiri 19:32, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, but again, why privilegiate FF Wikia when there are other sites, like this one? Kariteh 19:53, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Awww you are so sweet! That is my site!! :D But this is precisely the reason I advocate FF Wiki: My site is a personal site, and although I don't intend to, what guarantees can you have that I won't start acting all snooty and say X and Y users won't be able to edit my Wiki ? Or charge for access ? At Wikia we have those guarantees because it is a sister project. See my point ? Renmiri 20:05, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Mmh, well okay I guess. But what about FFXIclopedia which is linked in Final Fantasy XI? There's no guarantee here either. Kariteh 20:13, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. We shouldn't be linking to private sites when there is a perfectly good alternative on a sister site. Like I said above, Wikia should take precedence over private sites, even when talking about my own site. Private site owners had the bad handicap of having something called a life and can not be counted to be around if their real life takes precedence ;) Renmiri 23:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

But can I remove this FFXIclopedia link? There was a discussion on the FFXI talk page which led to the link being added, with the reasoning that although it's a private fansite it's also a "premier site" acknowledged by the FFXI official site. Kariteh 07:36, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I vote to remove it if you have concerns about it. But then again, we can make an exception if it's a very notable private site. How big is the External links section anyway ? Does a link to this place really add value to the article ? Renmiri 18:54, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I second the vote. We have a guideline for ELs, but it seems that the FFXI article has more unnotable ELs than the other FF articles? WHy the special treatment? — Bluerで す。 19:11, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

I remember Deck telling me that part of the reason he okayed the merges was because of the FF Wikia articles. So wouldn't it be right for Deck to follow through on his promise? We are required to give "further reading" --Sir Crazyswordsman 04:05, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

It's a fair compromise to have at least category links on articles. Following policies and guidelines is good, but sometimes localized consensus and agreement overcomes those suggestions/rules. — Deckiller 04:47, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

That was the one of the reasons I believed/believe in the mergers, was the understanding that the content would not be "lost", but "relocated". Judgesurreal777 05:46, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

(reset) Wikipedia Annex is up. It's a resting place/transition for fictional material that does not yet have a wikia home or needs to be reorganized before being moved to a wikia. Renmiri started the idea. — Deckiller 05:56, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Splinter discussion about FFXI's ELs continues at Talk:Final Fantasy XI.

Paine still has an article?

Resolved

After all this merging and stuff? Wow. --Sir Crazyswordsman 03:18, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Seeing that all there is in there is in-universe info, I've redirected it to the Characters article. — Bluerで す。 03:40, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't see the material merged in the FFX-2 article. At any rate, I don't mind the merge as long as that characters of FFX-2 article is reorganized into headings. — Deckiller 03:43, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I reverted the change because nothing was merged into Characters of Final Fantasy X-2, and I really mean nothing. I support the merging of it (somewhat), but that was not a merge. :) Perhaps I'll merge it later if no one else it up for it. I haven't done any merges (afaik), so I might not be the best person for it, but I guess it's a good learning point. --Teggles 04:40, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

My point in doing that is a redirect and not a merger. Good luck in doing the merging :) — Bluerで す。 05:13, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Alright, I've merged it. I only created the first and last paragraph, the middle two were just copied. :/--Teggles 06:02, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:POINT issues aside, I don't think anyone has done a simple redirect in the past, at least not when there was no info already on the target article :-P — Deckiller 06:08, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

We might want to take care of the FF7/FF10 character pages sometime soon to be fair; people may incorrectly assume a systematic bias (FF7 was the worst in the series IMO, so it's definitely not bias). — Deckiller 03:42, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I would like to make a quick point about the whole question of mergers and the Good article status drive; one of the reasons I became very gung ho about these two drives is because it helps us on our way to having many Featured Topics. Now that we have our model, Final Fantasy VIII topic, we know what is possible, and with some careful restructuring of FF7 and FF10 character articles, we could be on our way to several featured topics from the same wikiproject, yet another impressive first from this group. :) Judgesurreal777 06:18, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

For example, now that the Chocobo restructuring happened, once I and others get the Chocobo article and the other two games up to GA status....maybe try to get two FA chocobo articles...Chocobo Featured Topic? Laugh, but Kingdom Hearts is rapidly getting there, and not long ago their articles were thought to be terrible :) Judgesurreal777 06:21, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Good luck finding sources for the Chocobo article. Did you know the existence of the mobile game "Choco-mate"? Kariteh 07:37, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I wonder if it's feasible for the non-Nomura games (FFVI, for instance) to become a featured topic? --Sir Crazyswordsman 13:08, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Probably, as long interviews and whatnot can be found. — Deckiller 00:34, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I was considering a merger of the FFX and FFX2 character articles. If we merge this, a lot of this redundant stuff can end. Greg Jones II 14:15, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Redemption

You might be interested in a discussion on Talk:Redemption (song), since the article was previously merged and has been de-merged. Kariteh 14:17, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Should we de-merge Eyes on Me? It's a similar case. Kariteh 09:05, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Cloud Strife, Aerith Gainsborough and Jenova

These three articles have had their Good Article status removed. I completely agree with it. Sure, we look better with more GAs, but I don't think that's what this project is about - I hope not. P.S. Traitor? Heh.--Teggles 19:39, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Damn, I forgot to tell him to archive that discussion :-D. Since our goal is GA+ status for all relevant articles, it looks like we're cheating if we keep sub-par GAs. — Deckiller 19:42, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

As long as List of Final Fantasy titles remains a Featured Article (even though it contains two stub sections and lacks sources), there's not much danger for FAs to get de-listed anyway. Kariteh 19:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

To be fair, those section-stubs were added when the list changes its focus. — Deckiller 19:51, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm not 100% sure about the reasons given, but I agree those aren't GA class. I also don't think anyone should be concerned about being considered a "traitor" for delisting articles that obviously aren't good enough (Yeah, I found that discussion too). Anomie 19:55, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

The "traitor" thing was mostly just a joke, but I did feel that someone from the outside should do it to satisfy any wikilawyers. — Deckiller 20:05, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I just did a lot of removal and modifications of Aerith Gainsborough, probably the worst off. Gems:

• "Aerith often puts on a naïve persona, but, in reality, is a wise and understanding person who knows what’s going on with the Planet and its people"
• "Aerith was apparently romantically involved with Zack, although she claims it wasn't serious"
• "After Aerith and Cloud meet during the game, she appears to be very flirtatious with him"
• "the only changes being the absence of her red jacket, the ribbon in her hair being red as opposed to pink, her gold bangles being replaced with silver bracelets on her left wrist, and the presence of a purple belt."
• "Aerith is seen serving sweet beverages, drinks that Leon dislikes due to their sweet flavors."

Fanboys. Don't you love them? --Teggles 06:23, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

• • Heh. I've come to realize that the best stories are those like Suikoden, FF12, and of course, Xenosaga. Most FFs are ridiculous in hindsight. — Deckiller 06:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

• You forgot Chrono Trigger. --Sir Crazyswordsman 22:07, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

• I was referring to games w/o evil guys wanting to destroy the world :) Lavos technically counts as that. — Deckiller 22:10, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

New notability guideline proposed

Resolved

Check out the talkpage of WP:FICT. I got bored, so I decided to propose it early. — Deckiller 21:23, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to let your voice be heard. This rewrite is based on our experiences and successes. — Deckiller 15:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Don't feel pressured into it, but the proposed party usually has to have a lot of outspokenness, so anyone who agrees with the proposal are more than welcomed to support it, and those who disagree should make a comment on what should be altered. — Deckiller 05:46, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Time to do stuff

Alright, it appears there are no current "projects", so here's something to do: get Aerith Gainsborough back to Good Article. I did a fair bit of removal and rewriting to remove original research, unnecessary details etc., but it's still a problem. Here's a to-do list:

• Rewrite Final Fantasy VII and Advent Children section to a concise version.
• Rewrite and possibly expand the "Before Crisis: Final Fantasy VII" and "Final Fantasy VII: Crisis Core" sections
• Expand the development section
• Expand the reception section
• Possibly merge "Cameo appearances" with "Other appearances"

Anyone up for it? --Teggles 09:07, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Not me right now; got my hands full comitting political suicide with the FICT rewrite.

Oh, and....

RUSH CONCERT TONIGHT!!!! — Deckiller 13:55, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Also, never subscribe to the Wiki-En-I mailing list. It's a scum hive. — Deckiller 14:02, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

See also Talk:Aerith Gainsborough#It's Aeris in FFVII. Kariteh 14:21, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Also, merge Characters of Final Fantasy X with Characters of Final Fantasy X-2 as well ASAP if you can. Greg Jones II 21:04, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Right now I'm merging some Pokémon into List of Pokémon (421-440). All of the articles follow the same format...

• 1. Information about the Pokémon franchise (a text copy-pasted into every lead)
• 2. Game-guide information (X evolves into Y at Level Z, has attacks X and Y)
• 3. Useful (!) appearance information in anime

It's surprisingly easy to merge because of that. The hard part is standing up to the many people who are going to reject it for unknown reasons - it beats me why they want an article with the same information as a merged article. But that's yet to happen, so I won't accuse anyone of anything! --Teggles 05:25, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I take it Final Fantasy XI isn't the priority anymore? Kariteh 14:57, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

As for Characters of FFX and X-2, the two articles put together weight about 108 kb 160 kb even with redundant parts removed; the articles may need to be cleanly trimmed first before being merged. Kariteh 19:31, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Uh... yeah. If we merge those two articles after we cleanly trim these two articles, we would put the Final Fantasy X-2 text in after the summary of the characters in the FFX story and the summary of the characters in. We should also remove those extremely minor characters first. Also, we need to add the voice actors in the character articles. Greg Jones II 19:49, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Even though I created the infoboxes for characters, I think we should remove them. The voice actors should be placed in the prose, where we can discuss their experiences (I'm sure at least one has brought up their character in an interview) --Teggles 00:27, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I am not even sure if your plan would work, Teggles, but that is a good idea. Greg Jones II 14:15, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Voice actor/ress prose? That should be placed in the respective VA's article instead, shouldn't it? And the VA infobox exists, while the list of VAs in the game article is regarded trivia and removed, why? — Bluerで す。 15:03, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

As what Bluerfn pointed out to me in one of the entries of my sandbox move, try to use the infobox used for the main characters as seen in the characters of FFX article so that the voice cast and image can be organized well. Greg Jones II 17:46, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

"That should be placed in the respective VA's article instead, shouldn't it?" - no, not really. That's the equivalent of placing Tetsuya Nomura's perspective of a character in his page instead of the character's page. I made the infobox just because the table thrown into the prose was annoying. I suppose it's no problem to have the infoboxes, but I'm still keeping them removed for the minor characters. --Teggles 05:20, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Anyone there? I need some help with the reception section. I can't find anything... also, it would seem the only development information is on her death. Can anyone help with that too? --Teggles 02:09, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Rikku from FFX2 won the best character of the year. Check the main FFX2 page, that sure counts as character reception Renmiri 02:57, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

BTW, did you like the merge ? Renmiri 02:57, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I was actually talking about Aerith Gainsborough, should have mentioned that. But well done on the merge, the grouping was a nice approach. Still needs to be cut down and cleaned up, but that's my pedantic side speaking. --Teggles 03:36, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Lack of significant out-of-universe information may warrent a merge. Hmm... Playable characters of Final Fantasy VII? — Deckiller 02:14, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Probably not necessary. I could comment on merchandise, and there's likely to be some good reception; surely her death annoyed a lot of people. You managed to achieve a good article with Rinoa Heartilly, and the amount of out-of-universe information there is low. --Teggles 02:37, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Good point; only 3 paras (which is probably the threshold for true notability), but that was scraping from the bottom of the barrel. I'm sure it's out there somewhere. — Deckiller 02:57, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

FFIX is now FA

Resolved

I'd like to be the first to say Congratulations to the Wikiproject Final Fantasy for yet another FA-class article: Final Fantasy IX! Cheers to all who have contributed, subtly or significantly! — Bluerで す。 18:05, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use

Hi everyone here, I just thought I'd give you all a heads up of this I stumbled across; User:Durin/Fair Use Overuse. As you know, the self-appointed powers that be of Wikipedia have taken it upon themselves to tag numerous images without giving editors a chance to add rationales. In this list the user has kept, a few articles from this Project are present so please be wary, and take whatever action you deem necessary to address the fair use issue. Inform all the other projects also, as a few other articles from other Projects are on this list. LuciferMorgan 16:49, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia's treatment of images is unprofessional and laughable, to say the least. Not singling anyone out, but overall, it's ridiculous. Thanks for the heads up. — Deckiller 16:52, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Durin's list is a list of pages with the most images. It exists because oftentimes such lists are full of non-free images, generally without actual or potential fair-use rationales, so administrators (or knowledgeable users, really) need to go through and make sure that valid rationales are present for each image. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 16:58, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

• Not only that, but Foundation:Resolution:Licensing policy item #3 stipulates that fair use images must be used minimally. The fair use overuse list wasn't constructed to look for missing fair use rationales. It was constructed to hunt down articles where fair use images were/are overused. The top article extant on that list is Characters of Final Fantasy X. It currently has 29 fair use images. It's hard to defend an article's minimal use when it has 29 copyrighted images on it.
• Indeed I echo LuciferMorgan's concern. There are a considerable number of Final Fantasy articles on that list, and they will most likely be touched by people working to reduce fair use overuse. Far better to have members of this project reduce this overuse than to have someone unfamiliar with FF do so. --Durin 17:14, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I think people editing the article lost track of the way we had set it up last year. We had links to images but limited images on the page itself. 29 images are NOT needed Renmiri 21:17, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, requiring a valid fair-use rationale does limit non-free images to minimal use. In the unlikely event that we could write valid fair-use rationales justifying each use of 65 non-free images in a single article, that would be fine. It's just nearly impossible to justify that many images. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 17:19, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

In a list of characters, it's easy to justify a large number of fair use images. If we weren't so admant about merging, then yes, you have a point. But we have an obligation to show what the main characters in these games look like. --Sir Crazyswordsman 13:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Benzo is hardly a main character... Kariteh 14:39, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Strawman again ? Benzo's image was never visible on the article. Please limit your criticism to facts, it gets hard to have a civil discussion when you resort to those kind of disruptive tactics Renmiri 21:51, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I didn't say he was visible on the article, I said he was not a main character and the existence of a picture of him is thus questionable. I mean, what would you write for Benzo's picture fair use rationale? The picture is precisely not used! The picture is not visible in any article, but is still in a permanent state of limbo on the site's server, so how and what are we supposed to justify in its fair use rationale? Benzo (and all other John-Doe-esque NPCs) should not be pictured at all anywhere on Wikipedia, since their physical appearances are not particularly relevant to anything and we're supposed to limit fair use images on the website. Kariteh 22:28, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Where did you see this is not Fair Use ? Based on what ? The inline pictures have been making the article comprehensible for more than a year without any problems with the Fair Use police. Sharrol who was part of the Fair Use cops was the one who taught me how to do it. The images are there for people who need / want to see it for clarification which is the quintessential fair use. As far as fair use go, the fact that they aren't even displayed unless needed quite satisfies the second criteria: amount of work displayed. Again, please discuss facts not strawman. We have had inline images for over a year, and have been reviewed for FA and GA without those having been flagged as copyvio. That is a FACT. Inline images make the article comprehensive. That is another FACT. Your personal opinion about the usefulness of a picture of Benzo doesn't make it a violation. Renmiri 01:34, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Way to miss the point. Write a fair use rationale for the picture, that's all "I" want. Kariteh 08:18, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• From my user page

==Images used (and not used) in Characters of FFX and X-2==
I've tagged them for missing or offbeat rationales and/or missing sources. Sorry, but if I didn't do it, nobody would have. [[User:Kariteh|Kariteh]] 09:29, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I find it sad that instead of learning to use facts in debate, or - heaven forbid - decide to contribute to the WPFF project quality you decided , as you admitted yourself, to tag images no one else would have tagged. I have uploaded over 200 images and have had their fair use questioned several times, the inline images are not violating WP:FU and have survived several reviews already. I will add up to date rationale as my goal is and allways was to improve Wikipedia. As for you, please cease immediately with the strawman and petty attacks. I find your attitude very disruptive and prejudicial to the WPFF project. Renmiri 18:22, 4 July 2007 (UTC):::I am sorry if I seem a bit harsh but what makes me put the disruptive and prejudicial qualifiers is that it doesn't really seem to me you are concerned with fixing fair use with you editing each article not to fix, but to complain. Had you really been concerned about the Fair Use reasoning it would have taken you the same effort to fix the reasoning, the same effort it took you to tag the odd reasoning again, as you said yourself, the only problem with the rationale was that it was mentioning another article instead of Characters. With all the recent merges it was bound to happen, but the fix is easy, just remove mentions of the article in question. Please slow down and put aside any pettiness next time, concentrate on fixing the problem rather than trying to win an argument. We are a team here, and our goal is to improve the coverage of Final Fantasy articles, not fight with one another Renmiri 19:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea what's going on here with regard to the personal issues, and I'm sorry I didn't notice this sooner, but inline links to pictures of minor characters is a lousy kludge that in no way deals with the pressing fair use issues.

An inline link is no different from a transclusion. In fact, it's even worse as far as fair-use goes; it divorces the image from the commentary. If the image isn't appropriate for the article, it's even less appropriate as an inline-linked image.

In fact, we probably shouldn't be inline-linking non-free images at all. Image pages generally don't have the kind of content to justify at WP:FUR #8 claim, and it's abusing the WP:FUR #9 standard of not using non-free images outside of articles because only articles can offer sufficient context to justify fair use. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:45, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh dear god! Why do we have to rehash the same battles over and over again ? This has been fought and won already aMIB. Do you want to be more catholic than the priests ? If you are lacking something to do, may I direct you to the copyedit of the article in question ? It does need a lot of help after the merge, you can help there without having to redo all that has been done already. Renmiri 19:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea where the issue began either. Some pictures used and non-used in the Characters of FFX/X-2 article have a missing rationale, a missing source, or a rationale that don't actually rationalize the use of the pic (e.g. claims that the pic is used to illustrate locations even though there's no location at all in the pic). I have no "vendetta" or "petty attacks" to give; I would have acted the same way for any article or contributor, and if my constructive edits happen to annoy or anger some people, it's unfortunate and not my aim. Fair use images need fair use rationale, that's all. Kariteh 19:03, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

it's unfortunate and not my aim. Fair use images need fair use rationale, that's all. Kariteh 19:03, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Constructive Edits fix problems it would have taken you the same effort to fix the reasoning, the same effort it took you to tag the odd reasoning. Please stop taking this personally and grow up. Wikipedia is not your playground Renmiri 19:08, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I missed your last answer. Meh.. Fair enough, maybe it didn't occur to you fixing was as easy as complaining. Next time remember the main goal: make good articles better Renmiri 19:11, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• WTF ??? Why is this picture you loaded considered good reasoning] while you are retagging all my pictures ? Do I have to initiate an arbitration with you or will you stop playing political games immediately ? Renmiri 19:15, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Renmiri, Kariteh is shining a harsh light on the sources of these images, and some of them just don't stand up to it. We need to know where images come from because it's important for the fair-use rationale; while it's easy to justify a rationale for a promotional image, it's nearly impossible to write such a rationale for an artbook image because we're competing directly with the commercial use of such an image (and thus failing WP:FUC #2).

This isn't a political game. It's very necessary and important work. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 19:21, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry aMIB, I did try to assume good faith but I copied the current fair use rationale from images he himself loaded, btw, from artwork. I can't seem to find a logical explanation why they are sufficiently detailed for the images he loaded and then the identical reasoning is considered "not enough" today. Had I been a childish brat I would be tagging them with some harsh FU light of my own on his chrono chross images. But I won't, this is Wikipedia not a kindergarten Renmiri 19:26, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, that is why I am asking him to fix the rationale instead of playing games and risking 3RR on the images. Renmiri 19:28, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Try harder. Presumably, Kariteh hasn't looked at his own previous edits lately.

You are going to have to accept that, at some point, there are images we're going to have to lose. I just tagged an image of Rin, who has a grand total of two sentences in the FFX/FFX2 list. Why do we need a picture of him? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 19:31, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I've tagged the pictures instead of creating or modifying the fair use rationales because I precisely didn't know what to put as a rationale. It's one of my first point in this discussion section: what are we supposed to justify when the picture are not actually used in the article (appearing instead as inline textual links)? The rationales currently used are mostly off-topic because they say, for instance...

The image is used to illustrate important locations mentioned in the article which permits to the reader to have an idea of how it looks like.

So remove the word, isn't that a) easier than tag it b)more appropriate to the goal we all should have: improve articles ? Renmiri 19:41, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

...even though it's clearly characters we're dealing with and not geographical locations.

In any case, please don't get so upset Renmiri. There's no political games. Do you think it's funny or enjoyable for me to see you get upset like this? Well it's not. We're all here to improve the articles and work together. Kariteh 19:29, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

As I said before, the fact that they are not even displayed makes the inline images there [resent solely for clarification purposes, which is the heart of the fair use law. They do not decorate the article or do any other spurious purpose. If today's roster of WPFF members decides as a consensus to take them off so be it. I've said my piece. Renmiri 19:41, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, like I said, I copied the rationale from your own image. Shouldn't you be fixing those too ? I have no idea how to fix them, should I start tagging them for deletion in 7 days ? Stop taking things so personally. I'm not upset with you, I'm trying to get this project to be a team again, like it was in 2006. Renmiri

This is really confusing... I haven't taken anything personally and have on the contrary "jumped" into an article which I never particularly edited heavily. The team work is precisely what we're doing (discussing and stuff), but it would be much easier if people were accepting differing points of view as points of view and not malicious attacks. Nobody has ever been malicious here apart from Headstrust. As for the word change in the rationale, that would have changed one insignificant bit of the problem, not the core of it as the next section on this page shows. Kariteh 19:56, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• Kariteh, I agree with you The team work is precisely what we're doing (discussing and stuff). As opposed to that, you went and tagged over 20 images, refusing the same rationale on images that you used yourself on Chrono Chross images you loaded. aMIB went on and tagged another 10 images This is not productive nor mature. The crux of the problem is the use of those images on the Characters page, as you admit yourself that would have changed one insignificant bit of the problem, not the core of it as the next section on this page shows.. Same for aMIB's red herring of waving the WP:FUC flag over image links. If image links are copyvio then WP:FUC has to be rewritten as it recommends using image links for all instances of images out of the core Wikipedia namespace. He must have realized his mistake because he later switched from tagging "my" images DFU to tagging them orphaned, which is the only violation the linked images would incur - not now - but if they are removed from the characters article. There are 2 issues here:

a) Are those images needed in the article which we are discussing below.

b) The way this "discussion" has been handled by you and aMIB - I said before, I find this tag the images method childish, petty and very unproductive. I am appalled that aMIB, someone who has admin powers and should have know better took part in such nonsense. I had heard that old timers were being chased away from this project and came back precisely to see if I could find out what was going on and make WPFF a team again. Yesterday's petty game of tagging images perceived as "mine" gave me all the answers I needed. I will not stand by quietly while people who were not here in 2006 use the good name of the project and some bullying tactics to run roughshod over well intentioned editors who have contributed years to Wikipedia and the project. I am entering a formal complaint, for mediation at first, to see if we can get aMIB to rethink his role as Wkipedia admin and the actions he took yesterday. Renmiri 15:57, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I have honestly absolutely no clue what's so similar about Chrono Cross (the rationale text is not the same, and inline image links are not used), but feel free to discuss that on the Characters of CC talk page if you want. Kariteh 20:51, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

It's funny you bring up Characters of Final Fantasy X, because just yesterday I started removing fair use images for minor characters. All you need is patience. --Teggles 00:21, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Final Fantasy Tactics: The War of the Lions article lost its box art image due to lack of fair-use rationale. — Bluerで す。 08:00, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

DFU for Rinffx2.jpg and other images

• aMIB, lets examine point by point

This is one of 20+ images being used in Characters of Final Fantasy X and X-2 to "demonstrate the game's distinctive art style," and the "important location mentioned in the article" is a character which only merits two sentences of commentary. Additionally, this is not transcluded into the page. This currently fails WP:FUC #3a, #7, #8, and #9.

From Image:Rinffx2.jpg

• • What is it with unilateral decision today ? aMIB, can't you debate an issue like a grown up ? Renmiri 19:49, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

If I wanted to make a unilateral decision, I have a delete button. I was tempted to use it.

These images, as far as I can tell, fail nearly half of the fair use criteria. That's a major problem. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 19:52, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• As requested, I'm addressing the points

3(a) Minimal use. As little non-free content as possible is used in an article. Short rather than long video and audio excerpts are used. Multiple items are not used if one will suffice; one is used only if necessary.

The image is not even being displayed, therefore conforms to the lowest use possible: invisible.

7. One-article minimum. Non-free content is used in at least one article.

This image is used in at least one article

8. Significance. Non-free media is not used unless it contributes significantly to an article. It needs to significantly increase readers' understanding of the topic in a way that words alone cannot. The use of non-free media in lists, galleries, and navigational and user-interface elements is normally regarded as merely decorative, and is thus unacceptable.0

The image is there solely to enhance understanding of that particular game character. It is not there for any decorative purpose (it is invisible). Fair Use doesn't get any more well intentioned than that. It is there solely if needed as judged by the Wikipedia reader.

9 Restrictions on location. Non-free content is used only in the article namespace; it is never used on templates (including stub templates and navigation boxes) or on user pages. (To prevent an image category from displaying thumbnails, add to it; images are linked, not inlined, from talk pages when they are a topic of discussion.)

Precisely. Images are linked, as it is acceptable all over wikipedia areas where the use of ANY image is a Fair Use violation. By using the same method used on all other namespaces we are ensuring the same rationale applies

Maybe we should start by removing the easiest ones, like the Ronsos. They all look the same, there's no real need to show every Ronso. Kariteh 20:01, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• I think the best option is to have images for the main characters (playable and other main characters); no images for the groups or minor characters. I think that's a fair compromise. — Deckiller 20:03, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Deck, if image links are against fair use then all namespaces on en.wikipedia are against fair use. Linking to images when discussing them is part of WP:FU guidelines aMIB is wrong, plain and simple Renmiri 20:07, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

*sigh*

Renmiri, you removed the DFU template from each of the images I reviewed and tagged, and replaced it with this deeply flawed argument.

You didn't address 2 at all for the artbook images. We're competing directly with Square. We need a pressing need to do this.

3a isn't resolved; Characters of Final Fantasy X and X-2 has 20+ images all with essentially the same rationale, with more linked inline. That's not minimal use. That's dozens of images.

7 isn't resolved. These images aren't used in any articles. 7 exists so that images are only used where they're illustrating specific relevant points in the text; the images need to be on the page with the specific relevant points.

8 isn't resolved. These are all minor characters. The merchant? A bunch of characters who only merit a handful of sentences in the article? How does illustrating a character not even important enough to write free text about significant?

9 isn't resolved. 9 exists so that the images are only used in articles, where they can illustrate specific relevant points in the text.

So, all of the problems still exist. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:16, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, instead of playing tag the image like you and Karitech and some others. I was trying to have a grownup discussion of the problem and adress the issues in the proper place for it Renmiri 20:38, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Logic 101: If the sentence below is true

3a isn't resolved; Characters of Final Fantasy X has 20+ images all with essentially the same rationale, with more linked inline. That's not minimal use.

then the sentence below is false:

7 isn't resolved. This isn't transcluded into any articles.

An image can't be on Characters of Final Fantasy X and be unused at the same time.

Addressing the only valid logic concern: linked images constitute minimal use and are accepted in all namespaces of Wikipedia, linking to images instead of displaying them is even part of WP:FU. I see no exclusion of Main namespace on the rules, do you ? Renmiri 20:38, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Again, this was painfully discussed in 2006 and consensus was that the image links would enhance the article, the invisible section on the end was added solely to address the limitations of wikipedia software in recognizing the links. If the project team decides to revert this decision I will withdraw my complaints and let the images be deleted Renmiri 20:38, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

• I would like to add I find the current methods of "discussion" exhibited by aMIB, Kariteh and others very disturbing. I can guarantee you that Ryun would never have stood for it nor many of the old timers. I can't help but think this is why WPFF has been losing members. I saw no honest intent to address a problem, rather I saw a bunch of high school kids ganging up on work perceived as mine completely forgetting the project's lofty goals Renmiri 20:43, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

  You can make yourself out to be a martyr, if you like. My interest is only in dealing with images that don't satisfy WP:FUR. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:45, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

They are not in violation. Your personal opinion not withstanding. Image links are part of WP:FUR guideline for discussing images. This is a FACT. If links violate WP:FUR then we have to excise them from each and every namespace on Wikipedia, why dodn't you start with some non- WPFF images since you are so worried ? Renmiri 20:52, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

My opinion is a well-informed one. WP:FUC does not allow for non-free images that are only used for linking. We even have WP:FUC #7, which specifically requires that an image be used in an article. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:57, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm here to tell you that 30+ images, many of them artbook images of minor characters, isn't kosher, whether they're transcluded or linked inline. Inline links break standard style, fail WP:FUC, and happen to also be ugly as all get-out.

All you're doing is concealing the WP:FUC 3a problem, not solving it. When all is said and done you still have three dozen non-free images on Wikipedia. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:40, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

This is a valid concern aMIB. On 2006 the team felt that links would enhance the article, maybe in 2007 the team will agree with your concerns. The way to deal with it is to discuss it in a civil way on the project page, not go after each image. They all have the same problem, the grownup way would have been to discuss it here. Renmiri 20:48, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Your heart might be in the right place but your methods are disruptive, heavy handed and counter productive' You, me and your many friends could have been arriving at a compromose or -heaven forbid - be editing the article in question, which still needs a lot of work Renmiri 20:48, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I tagged the worst of the images with DFU. That's what you do when you have some images with disputed fair use status.

Now, please stop waving your arms and crying for sympathy. Nobody is persecuting you. This USENET-style grandstanding is obstructing any sort of discussion. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:53, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

aMIB, you are indeed not persecuting me. I do not consider those images mine, I consider them part of Wikipedia, improving an article I care about. This is where we differ. I am not here to play little games, I am here to see that the WPFF are continues to be what was in 2006. And I see yours, Kariteh and others actions on this particular case very telling on why the old timers left and why there is no more sense of team here Renmiri 20:59, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Have you considered the possibility that people are enforcing Wikipedia's fair-use policy for some reason other than a desire to play "little games"? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 21:01, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I see no Wikipedia's fair-use policy problems. Linking to images is a well established practice and perfectly compliant with Wikipedia's fair-use policy.

The issue as I see it: Should we have links to images instead of displaying them on the Characters page ?

I support it because it enhances the article. If others think it is too much hassle to fight this WP:FUC wars every time a self appointed non-laweyer tries to make a crusade against it, then so be it, take them out. Renmiri 21:08, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

You keep saying that it's allowed, but it's not. WP:FUC #7 is clear. Additionally, having 30+ images, including artbook images (#2) and characters with trivial representation (#8) in the article, doesn't even come close to satisfying #3a. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 21:14, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

WTF? (sorry if I used profanity) I agree with Man in Black that WP:FUC is definitively clear. Greg Jones II 21:25, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't violate #7 because it says "Non-free content is used in at least one article." Linking is still using. But in this same defense, it violates #8: "Non-free media is not used unless it contributes significantly to an article." Identification of minor characters isn't significant. I don't want to see them go, but I'd also prefer them displayed in the article. Perhaps talking about it at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion is a good idea. --Teggles 00:28, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

The FF Wikia's role is to give more details, so why not rely on them like we do on other Characters articles? Kariteh 09:07, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Teggles got my point. Linking to an image does not violate WP:FUC. The bone of contention here is the image's significance on the Characters article. Renmiri 15:36, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Linking to images in an article page is a creative way to both have a comprehensive article and comply with WP:FUC and was used by us in 2006 to greatly reduce the number of pictures on the Characters page. Sure enough, after being FA and surviving almost a year untouched, we saw the number of displayed images creep up to an unacceptable level after teh links were removed. I myself used it last week to cut down from 29 or more displayed pictures on the merged article to the current 22. Brother was one of the images moved to a link. He is a major character on FFX2 but very minor on X and by leaving a link to the image we leave it up to the reader to see if it is needed. Renmiri 15:36, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Again, I prefer to leave the need for the image up to the Wikipedia reader instead of me saying it's needed or aMIB saying it's not. The reader will click on the link if he feels he needs to see it. In my view, Fair Use doesn't get any more "pure" than that. Renmiri 15:36, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Resolved

There is vandalism here on Wikipedia:WikiProject Final Fantasy. We need to stop them from editing this page at once. Greg Jones II 17:53, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

It's from the various sockpuppets of User:Headstrust. My userpage and usertalkpage have been assaulted for weeks now, and a sweeping IP block needs to occur to prevent the child from accessing grownup stuff. — Deckiller 18:59, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, god have mercy on Headstrust and his/her sockpuppets for vandalizing this page. We will treat this page with a block if we can. I can't believe he/she used sockpuppets! See WP:SOCK and WP:VANDAL. This vandalism is a huge disgrace. Headstrust has underestimated us. Greg Jones II 19:41, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I have now contacted information about this situation to User:Darthgriz98 at User talk:Darthgriz98. Greg Jones II 19:48, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Whatever the motives are, hopefully his/her attacks won't require us to protect the page. — Bluerで す。 19:51, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Correct. Greg Jones II 19:52, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up Sjones, I blocked Headstrust, who wasn't blocked at ALL for having so many suspected sock puppets, indefinitely with an autoblock. This situation deserves an autoblock, but if I wrongly blocked the user I will unblock them, but I doubt that is necessary. The next step would be just wait and see if that stops them from creating accounts, and if not, auto block every sock. BTW, this project does some great stuff on Wikipedia, keep it up :). DarthGriz98 00:40, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

"WikiProject Final Fantasy sucks ass and should be nuked." Uh, okay. I'm not sure what his problem is. --Teggles 00:48, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

He probably lost some of his work during the consolidation. Which is laughable, since we all did. Hell, I did more work on some of those articles than the vandal. — Deckiller 00:53, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I remember someone making articles on individual Xenosaga characters... - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:00, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, two years ago. And I redeemed myself. — Deckiller 02:17, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Redirects are nice but clean up is necessary too

Electro-Mag Rod has been nominated for deletion. Please vote/discuss on Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 July 1#Electro-Mag Rod → Turks (Final Fantasy VII)#Reno. Kariteh 21:45, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

MoS

I tweaked the MoS a bit. Nothing major; just reflecting current trends in article structure and whatnot. — Deckiller 07:40, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Characters of Final Fantasy X and Characters of Final Fantasy X-2

Renmiri has merged these two articles. Great work. Sadly, there are problems. The first problem is that the inline images have returned. Renmiri, you ask: "Augh!!!! WHO deleted all the images carefully put inline ? Based on WHAT ?? Idiot!!" Well, it was me, and it was based on WP:FU. There's no way we'll be able to justify the use of that many images for that many minor characters. Right now the article breaks copyright law, depending on whether or not that many images is justified (I would say no). The second problem is the length. This article is HUGE, at 133 kilobytes. I'm sure it can be cut down. --Teggles 04:02, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

At our last go with the WP:FU the inline images (linked but not displayed) did not violate Fair Use. When did this change ? They are there merely for identification and are not displayed. The display=none at the end of the article is there to prevent the images from being considered orphaned, while the inline link allows readers to browse the image only if needed for clarification. Renmiri 04:27, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

How is linking the images any different to displaying them? --Teggles 04:39, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Eh, I guess it doesn't matter, they can easily be removed when we get yelled at. --Teggles 04:43, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Precisely. We have been through all this WP:FU rigmarole already. My idiot comment was in exasperation that all that was blatantly ignored. My apologies, you meant well. Next time, ask first, will ya ? Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Final_Fantasy/To_do#Miscellany has the painful discussion and decision process behind all those inline images, display=none, etc... Renmiri 04:46, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I did it without asking because the same thing happened to Characters of Final Fantasy VIII. I wasn't part of WikiProject Final Fantasy at the time of that discussion, so I really had no way of knowing. --Teggles 04:51, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

But they're not hidden! I can clearly see four weird empty boxes at the bottom right side of the article.[1] Kariteh 09:13, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

That's because of some sort of CSS issue. I'll try to fix it. --Teggles 09:47, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Alright, it's fixed. It happened because a few of the hidden images were given the "thumb" attribute. --Teggles 09:51, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, it looks like most of the Japanese characters were broken. Fixing it now... :( --Teggles 05:01, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Gaahh.. Sorry, must have been the text editor I was using to cut and paste between pages. Thanks for your help BTW Renmiri 05:19, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Also, we need to add voice actors for X-2, since some of them are not mentioned in this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjones23 (talk • contribs) 14:26, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I forgot to sign my comment above. If that is the case, I apologize. Greg Jones II 14:38, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

FA push

Anybody in the mood for a FA push? Tactics or XI? — Deckiller 05:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

If I had to choose, it would be Final Fantasy Tactics, I haven't played Final Fantasy XI. --Teggles 05:35, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Ditto. But FFXI is so close; it just needs trimming in the gameplay section and maybe some refs. Maybe when Ra comes back? — Deckiller 06:05, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

We could have two FA pushes at the same time, though Tactics would be more in my scope, but still, my wikibreak is starting next week. I'm afraid my contributions will be sporadic. — Blue。 12:42, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Mediation Cabel

File:Amib.jpg

blatant attempt to quell dissent by going after someone's contributions

The issue on the pictures explained above is now at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-07-05 WikiProject Final Fantasy. Any comments there should be very much appreciated. :D Thanks Greg Jones II 16:43, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

This better not open a can of worms. We don't need this negative attention. — Deckiller 17:23, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I was just pointing out an issue by the Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal, Tyler. The parties involved in this dispute are Ren(miri) and aM(an)I(n)B(lack) and Ren initiated the process. Most of the old timers left because of that issue Greg Jones II 17:27, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I wasn't shooting you (the messenger) or Ren/AMIB. It's a necessary thing to deal with, but it also may cause some problems :) — Deckiller 17:36, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

This mediation case was absolutely necessary after aMIB and Kariteh started tagging images I loaded in a blatant effort to silence dissent by going after someone's contributions. Renmiri 21:11, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

TO ALL: I care not for whether the images I loaded stay or not, I have my own Wiki and also contribute to FF Wiki. My main concern is the method employed by aMIB and Kariteh, which I view as a blatant attempt to cower me into submission by singling "my work" for spurious claims reeking of Wiki lawyering. The kind of tactics used by aMIB and Kariteh against me yesterday are aimed at intimidating editors. I beg you to consider that WPFF earned it's prestige with quality work and civility, never by bullying editors. We have a good body of work and do not need to be reduced to online posse tactics like the ones used against me on a simple editing dispute yesterday. Renmiri 21:11, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

BTW, I added a picture of the extremes Kariteh and aMIB went to pursue my contributions, in spite of the fact that the images destination was being discussed here on the project page, leaving absolutely no need to go after individual images. This is the kind of action I am against Renmiri 21:25, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Extremes? Bullying? Is it really what comes to your mind? I am really, really dumbfounded. These actions' only goal were and are to improve the articles and make them follow guidelines; they have nothing to do with putting anyone in submission. I can see how they could be seen as a bit harsh (though I just see them as bold, since some flawed things tend to sit there untouched for ages if no one actually do something about them), but the intended result is to catalyze actions and make the article better, not to kick you out of this place and have the issue about those pictures remains unresolved. If I had make 500 edits on articles or pics only to found out that there were 500 mistakes about them, I would not mind seeing all those 500 stuff tagged, and I'd gladly try to fix the problem even if it's a pain. Please don't take it personally (it could have been anybody) and just forget these stuff about editors and "child"; we're dealing with an article, there is an issue about it, and it has to be fixed. The persons behind the arguments hardly matter, only the arguments matter. Kariteh 22:29, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

What do we do about this situation now, Deckiller? I was wondering if I would report this to you (an administrator) or not? Greg Jones II 21:29, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

I will now report this incident at WP:ANI. Greg Jones II 22:24, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Dedicated Pages

anything wrong with starting the Shiva (Final Fantasy), Ifrit (Final Fantasy), etc. etc. Minor Final Fantasy Summons and such? i mean, the Blood Elf article can exist, so can the Miser (Soul Calibur) article, c'mon! seems a bit unfair. AnYtWo! 19:30, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

The FFWiki is a better alternative to that IMHO. — Blue。 19:31, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

You might want to check out WP:PTEST. It's somewhat relevent to that question. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 19:41, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

The existence of Miser and Blood Elf has absolutely no relevance to these FF summon topics. However, since Bahamut (Final Fantasy) exists, maybe the other summons should. (Or alternatively, if we reach the conclusion that Shiva and Ifrit shouldn't have articles, maybe Bahamut shouldn't too.) It's something to discuss. Kariteh 20:47, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

In 2006 we had Final Fantasy magic as the article to mention summons that appeared in several games of the series Renmiri 21:14, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

The Bahamut article seems kind of lame with little hope for improvement. I don't plan on setting Ifrit and Bahamut on the same level but I feel that Bahamut should be merged somewhere. Axem Titanium 21:31, 5 July 2007 (UTC)