Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Square Enix/archive/20

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

There appears to be a non-native-English-speaking IP using the range 2603:9000:7d0a:8c00:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx who has been making edits to a variety of SE pages including Final Fantasy XIV, Final Fantasy XIV: Heavensward, Final Fantasy XIV: Stormblood, Final Fantasy XV, Octopath Traveler, and others. The edits appear to be in good faith, but they're commonly vaguely ungrammatical or introduce an unwarranted level of detail to the plot summary. The IP changes about once per day and there's really no way to get in contact with them to register for an account (or stop, for that matter). Not really sure what to do here? Pinging some admins: @PresN: @Sergecross73: Axem Titanium (talk) 09:32, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

@Ferret: just reverted one of this editor's edits. Axem Titanium (talk) 19:44, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

If the edits are in good faith, just of low quality, that's not really blockable- they're not vandalizing, they're just not helping. Only thing you can do is point to here in your revert edit summary and wait for them to see it. --PresN 21:33, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Not really looking for a block of any kind. Is semi-protection a reasonable approach here? Axem Titanium (talk) 01:19, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

There's a discussion ongoing on the talk page for Sōkaigi, which I'm currently planning to rewrite and perhaps bring to GA; I initiated the discussion after finding that the spelling Soukaigi is both attested in more sources both journalistic and semi-official (1,2, 3, 4, 5), and easier to type and read. Sources for both spellings are provided in some of my comments (a mistake, I admit, as I should've looked for and provided them from the start). I'd like as much input as possible on this issue before the discussion closes, as there's been little attention so far. --ProtoDrake (talk) 08:25, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

There's a bunch of relatively long interviews with developers that SE has been putting out on their YT channel, apparently to coincide with the recent Switch ports. They've got FF7, FF9, FF10, and Chocobo's Dungeon covered, presumably with FFXII and Crystal Chronicles videos to come soon. Here's the link. Hope it's useful! Axem Titanium (talk) 05:06, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for that! The FF9 interview came in handy for a couple articles I'm working on. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 22:55, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

This text from the Final Fantasy Wikia is presently unsourced:

"According to the "Chocobo's FF Laboratory" feature published in V Jump in 1993, the character of Faris was originally a female gambler named Eva Scherwil. The developers encountered difficulties in making her fit in the game's world and atmosphere, and changed her into a pirate and Lenna's sister. In a later issue of V Jump the developers noted that Setzer Gabbiani from Final Fantasy VI evolved from this early Eva concept."

I was wondering if anyone would be able to help get the source for this. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 22:29, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

I created the article for [{Faris Scherwiz]], but my recollection of the story is weak. Can anyone help fill out her Appearances section? - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 02:59, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

I'm trying to get Ayla and Lucca Ashtear to GA status, but I am having issue replacing the temporary translation pages with the sources of those translations. Schmupulation for instance cites the magazines they translated, but they also note that they combined the three magazine's content into one because the interviews say much of the same thing. Is there anyone who can help figure out the sourcing information for these? - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 11:52, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

@Abryn: Oh man, that's a mess. What specifically are you looking for? I pulled up the first Shmupulations source, and it looks like they at least didn't mix them, it's 2 interviews (+ 1/2) on the same page, so it should be clear which interview was for what part. --PresN 19:50, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks @PresN: for the response! The text I'm citing is specifically:

Ayla

[1]

Lucca

[2]

There's also some Chrono Compendium sources I need to figure out more exact details; V-Jump Player's Guide for Chrono Trigger and a source for where "Masato Kato Interview" is from. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 20:49, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Also, if you could help out with Celes Chere too, that would be great.

Celes Chere

[3]

[4]

So, I'm a bit worried about the shmupulations sources- as far as I can tell, they don't actually say what interviews they're basing the translation on- e.g. for [5] it just says the originals were "featured in Japanese magazines Famicon Tsuushin, Dengeki SFC, and Haou". And "Famicon interview, sometime in 1995" isn't enough for a source. It may be worthwhile to email the site runner and ask them what the sources actually were- tell them that you want to cite their translations in wikipedia articles but need to know what the original magazine issues were that they were translating in order for it to be usable. --PresN 03:53, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks anyway for the help. I've attempted contacting them but the email I tried didn't work. Going to look into other means. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 06:38, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

@PresN: I did get a hold of them and got a source for one of the details which was nice. I also managed to figure out the direct sources for all of Lucca Ashtear's details. Now I just gotta fix Celes, Ayla, and Faris. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 17:41, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

FYI Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Final Fantasy czar 14:14, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

For the first time since December 2018, we're back down to 0 stubs across the 440 articles of the project! (Also 0 portals, as per above). If anyone's still trying for it, the next level up is getting all of the starts to C+- we're at 85.5%, 64 articles away. --PresN 19:53, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

I'd be happy to try and assist with that. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 20:04, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Scope broadening

I'll be taking a crack at Dragon Quest Builders articles, Dragon Quest Monsters articles, Torneko's games, and Threads of Fate. Also, I noticed that the list of Other Enix games is rather short. Is there a reason why we do not have, for instance, Illusion of Gaia in the list while featuring The Portopia Serial Murder Case? - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 20:08, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Historical nonsense. We "don't cover games that S/SE/E published but did not develop" (unless it's like a 3rd-party Final Fantasy game or something), but when we absorbed the Dragon Quest project in March 2011 we modified the scope to add specific sets of articles where Enix/S/SE had a hand in development despite not being the developer, or where it's heavily associated with the company. This wound up being: Dragon Quest, Star Ocean, Valkyrie Profile, Tactics Ogre because of the SE remake, and anything developed by Armor Project (which is where the Portopia game comes from. We have not changed scope again since, I don't think, but it's been left as perpetually open to discussion if we want to adjust the scope again to include/exclude things. Essentially, we stopped there because people cared about doing Dragon Quest articles but did not care about working on the other dozens of Enix-published games. --PresN 20:17, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Well I'm really interested in working on a lot of Enix games; perhaps getting E.V.O. to FA and get ActRaiser 1/2 and the Quintet RPGs to GA. So I would defo like to open that discussion back up. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 20:22, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

I also promise that I am not just trying to sabotage this thread's accomplishment. :T - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 20:25, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Haha, well, I think the 10 character articles you've created in the last week would be more sabotage to the no-Starts goal than anything else. Anyways, personally I don't feel there's much connection between "Square Enix" and a bunch of scattered JRPGs that Enix published... on the flip side, this project is pretty slow right now, so maybe a scope expansion would be alright. --PresN 19:38, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Well FWIW only three of the seven are still Start-class, just need to flesh out the Appearances and lead sections of those lol. I think broadening our horizons could also help to get a few extra people interested in the project as a whole. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 21:40, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Then the wikiproject would have to include all of List of Enix games and List of Square games and List of Square Enix games. I think the appeal of this project has been mostly Final Fantasy, Kingdom Hearts, Mana, SaGa, and Drakengard/Nier.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 00:00, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

But the appeal to who though? There's not terribly much activity here, and we could get some more members by broadening our horizons. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 16:42, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

I don't see the logic in that. How does including more games give more attention to the current scope we have? They have a lot more stubs too.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 19:23, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Because they are articles edited by people who may not presently be interested in the project but may be interested with the niche works of Enix. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 19:48, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but you didn't answer my question. You confirmed that Enix enthusiast editors will stick with the Enix articles. You didn't confirm how they will impact the current scope this wikiproject has currently.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 19:58, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

I mean, Dragon Quest falls under this umbrella for reasons other than getting DQ editors interested in KH or FF or what have you. Expanding the scope does not inherently need to involve getting people into specific aspects of the project, especially when the cutoff of the appeal for the project seems arbitrary. To go back to Dragon Quest, that is something I am interested in, and honestly, I think that the specific interests is a product of a lack of activity, not an abundance of specialty. If SE was more active, would the niche Square Soft products get more attention, for instance? I mean, it stands to reason that the games you listed are the most appealing ones, because they are nearly the list of Square Soft games with a large number of entries, not because people are disinterested. Xenogears is a Good topic, and I imagine if there were more Xenogears games, that would surely be a topic that gets attention too. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 21:34, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

I'm personally not interested in Enix published games. And my concerns are similar to PresN's about introducing more stubs. And that's probably not a task anyone wants to handle all over again. At least not immediately. But I'm just one lonely editor. Why not put it for a vote? I don't think you're going to get the results you expected. Because if we want to accept all Enix published games, we're going to have to also accept all the Squaresoft games that were published, and the same for Square Enix published only games. And the more modern SE published games may get more attention first. Enix games may be the last thing that gets any attention.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 21:51, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

That logic doesn't fly, because if it did, we'd have already had to do that when we added Dragon Quest to the project. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 21:58, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Dragon Quest fits the current scope. They're games that are developed by "Square Enix" now.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 22:01, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Unless I'm mistaken, Square Enix wasn't in charge of making Dragon Quest games when it was added to the project. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 23:04, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Square Enix now owns Dragon Quest, so I can't say they weren't in charge. Maybe they outsourced development, but its still part of the Square Enix brand. Square Enix did develop games for the DQ series too. DQ 9, 10, 11, Builders, Builders 2, Slime 3. And I'm not sure if they touched the ports or remakes of the older ones either. But I'm making a safe bet that they must've been involved with at least one.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 00:00, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Since the company is owned by Square Enix and has been for over a decade now, would video games and other pages relating to Taito fit the bill of this WikiProject? I'm much more interested in them than Square Enix, and I'm interested in doing some cleanup work for a lot of their pages, but I wanted to check if they would still qualify. Same with anything regarding Eidos. Namcokid47 (talk) 23:26, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Neither Taito nor Eidos games are included in this project's scope; at the times of their acquisition, it was felt that their catalogue (hundreds of games each) didn't really fit with the main thrust of this project, which was Squenix-style RPGs + other SE games (as opposed to "arcadey/anime games" and "whatever big-budget franchises Eidos thought it could make money on"). This project grew out of the Final Fantasy project, and there's some oddities to the scope that come from that.

As I said above, the scope is malleable- if people want to work on Space Invaders, there's an argument for including it. I don't personally think it makes sense, regardless of corporate structure, to include such a distinctly different set of games in this scope, however. --PresN 04:25, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

The Eidos acquisition was a point of contention, actually, and is the reason the scope is so specifically defined (unlike WPVG's "anything even tangentially related to video games") - the editors at the time didn't like the idea of including e.g. the Tomb Raider games in the scope (which, to be honest, is centered on Final Fantasy, and when it grew into the SE project instead of the FF project it was primarily to pull in Chrono Trigger and Mana games). --PresN 04:31, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

What games are developed or published by Taito/Eidos that is heavily tied to SE?Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 04:42, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

A lot of Taito games after the acquisition were published by Square Enix (Space Invaders Extreme 2 for instance). Namcokid47 (talk) 14:08, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi. I've just finished a substantial expansion of the article for Tokyo RPG Factory's latest game Oninaki. I had intended to create it, but someone beat me to that and I decided to expand it instead. I've got it in a reasonable condition, but I'd appreciate another eye looking over it. It was a little difficult to put together one way and another. --ProtoDrake (talk) 22:12, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

I gave it a skim; I think it's pretty solid! Development gets a bit choppy, and reception could be expanded, but it's not far away from GAN if you wanted to. --PresN 05:32, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Back in 2013 this was redirected to Ivalice, per discussion here.

To someone not intimately familiar with the series this is a really bad surprise redirect, and I think this decision needs to be revisited.

The reader is expecting information on a group of video games, and winds up at an article about a fictional land. Articles about fictional things are often redirected to a real-world article about the work they appear in, but doing it the other way around is poor form, and very confusing unless you're already well versed in the subject matter.

If there's good reason not to restore the original article, I'd like to suggest that the redirect be changed to point to List_of_Final_Fantasy_video_games#Final_Fantasy_Tactics. That way it's pointing directly to real-world information about the games.

ApLundell (talk) 17:51, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

I'm surprised there isn't a Final Fantasy Tactics series article.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 01:20, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

No one's dredged up sources about the series as a whole, unfortunately. Agree with the redirect change- a series->world redirect feels weird. Now done. --PresN 02:42, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

I noticed that Square Enix articles have "Versions and merchandise" sections. IMHO, the label of the section is not the most conventional name and not the most optimal way to organize the content. Versions of the game and merchandise aren't exactly synonymous. If we look at KH1, KH2, KHCOM you will see those sections begin with the revised version, followed by printed adaptation, and then a second re-release as part of a collection. IMHO it can be confusing to see a sandwich-style of organization. I personally scratched my head when i saw it.

I don't want to offend anyone here, this is probably a decision made a long time ago before my arrival. If no one minds changing it though, would it be better to have all re-releases in a "Release" section, and adaptations as "Related media" or "Adaptations" or perhaps split the difference "Related media and adaptations"? I have no idea how many articles will be affected. I was just looking at Kingdom Hearts articles as a start. If there's more than a few, and everyone agrees this is a better solution, I'd take the burden of reworking the articles, since I proposed the change.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 01:20, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

I think it's kind of strange, yeah. I think it just became a standard at some point, not sure it was a conscious choice any time recently. I'm not opposed to splitting releases and non-game media into separate sections, though it is going to be a pack of work. --PresN 02:47, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm willing to re-organize the information myself. Even if there are over 50 articles. I don't think it will be a huge issue.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 11:01, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

I made a bold edit in Kingdom Hearts (video game). Let me know what you think.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 20:37, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

I think that looks better, yeah. --PresN 00:41, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll be repeating this to the other articles until someone doesn't like it.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 07:00, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)