So... does anyone have any proposals or suggestions?--TBCTaLk?!? 22:12, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nicely done, TBC. I'm glad that you included a lot of information from the manual of style; I've always felt that this was important. Since you have the template up and running, I'll go ahead and plaster it all over the discussion pages of any related articles. This is a pretty daunting scope, because the project covers anything related to Square (publishing games since 1984), Enix (publishing games since 1983), and Square Enix. EDIT: Well, I plastered the SE template all over the SE pages I have created and/or edited and the main series of Final Fantasy games--Tristam 00:17, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good work. Sir Crazyswordsman 15:40, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone wants to merge us with WP:CVG. Why? This project was created by community consensus at WP:FF so we can maintain more control over Square games and help improve articles outside the FF series easier. Sir Crazyswordsman 19:45, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was one possible idea, and not necessarily a bad one. The idea of that conversation is to just take a look to see if maybe there's a better way to organize our efforts. I did read that entire discussion you speak of before I suggested the merge. For all you know, maybe this will result in keeping this project but making it even better? Please don't take offense to my suggestion, as I simply want our efforts to be used in the best most efficient way. Keep an open mind, because I have no reason to personally want these merges other than helping the very efforts that inspired their creation. -- Ned Scott 00:35, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't take offense at all. Why would I, anyway? It's a particularly valid suggestion that has merit. But I personally think the merits of your argument would actually be better achieved through all these individual projects so long as they are active. Many of the projects are as such. Sir Crazyswordsman 02:29, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. -- Ned Scott 02:43, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I absolutely do think that WP:SQUARE can stand on its own, you guys do a lot more specialised task by focusing on getting your small subset of articles to FA than many of the things at WP:CVG (which is more general article creation and maintenance). Now that you've got quite a few FAs under your belt in the FF department, I'd love to see it expand. - Hahnchen 04:38, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If the WP:FF project is going to merge or whatever with this project, then I guess there will be enough rational for it's own project. I mostly suggested the "merge" because WP:FF was still it's own project. I've "retracted" my suggestion via that banner, but I still think it's a good idea to always have better interconnection between here and WP:CVG on the mind ;) -- Ned Scott 05:30, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are alot of square enix games. But TONS of video games. So a smaller section means a more specific an precise project is way better. I believe that the video game project should actually split into more seprate projects actuall EG. Rockstar project. But I am still a farely new wikipedia member, so don't take my word for it. (Masterxak 01:02, 5 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I'm going through and marking all of the FA's and GA's that are under Final Fantasy as SE. I might go through and hit the rest of the FF articles after that. --PresN 21:15, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit- done with the FA's/GA's --PresN 21:24, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Dragon Quest :-). — Anonymous User 6:50, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm working on expanding this page (and simultaneously overhauling the Dragon Warrior page). Do you think that Kenshin Dragon Quest should have a CVG infobox? If you don't know, it's basically a stand-alone plug-and-play game that you hook directly into your TV (a TV game). The box comes with everything needed to play, including a toy sword that has motion sensing capabilities. When playing this game, you slash out at enemies on the screen. Dragon Quest Swords will be similar to this, except that you have the Wii Remote as your sword instead of the plastic sword that came in the boxed set. Basically, I'm not sure if this strictly qualifies as a video game, or if it's more along the lines of a toy. I myself think that it should include the infobox. EDIT: In the infobox, what should I put for platform? Right now I just have it filled in with "N/A (Stand-alone)" --Tristam 00:34, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Handheld TV games count as a form of video games, so the CVG infobox should be used. As for platform, I suggest putting in "Handheld TV game".--TBCTaLk?!? 03:37, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestion. How about what I put for media (the game is shaped like a shield - I guess it's a cartridge?) and input (the input is the plastic sword)? --Tristam 05:59, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You should mention the plastic sword in the Input section, but the Media section should remain blank since (correct me if I'm wrong) handheld TV games don't use a seperate form of storage media (like CD's or DVD's).--TBCTaLk?!? 06:06, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More good suggestions. Thanks! --Tristam 07:03, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I put a lot of work into these articles, but the more I think about it the more I think they're crufty and non-notable. But then, the same applies for a lot of information about the Final Fantasy universe - nearly all of the games have lists of characters and individual characters. Amarant Coral (another one I put work into) may be a character of a big-name game like Final Fantasy IX, but is he notable in any way?

I think most of this sentiment stems from going into the Wikipedia chatroom. There, many of the editors would be happy to see the entire WP:CVG project whittled down to about six articles. One of them put it: "Ask yourself: how do these articles affect anyone not familiar with them?" In hindsight though, the same can be said for other so-called scholarly articles. --Tristam 07:03, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're on your strongest footing when you stick with things that have been covered in sufficient third-party reliable sources that you can write an article without having to constantly make direct reference to the game in question. In the case of Amarant Coral, for example, the article is nothing but duplicate plot summary, reiterating the plot of Final Fantasy IX. Why do we need two articles retelling the plot of FFIX?

You're on safer ground when you have multiple games but no third-parties to draw from (you'll probably be able to keep the article from being merged or deleted but it probably won't make even GA and definitely won't make FA), and on safest ground when you actually have third-party coverage of that character specifically (take a look at Solid Snake for an example). I would try to merge any article that doesn't have any third-party sourcing, but that's not always a popular choice. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:47, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In this, at least, you and I agree (I appreciate your views on cruft). However, you're right in that it's not a popular choice, so before merging I'll wait to see what a few other users say, particularly inclusionists. Cheers. --Tristam 02:20, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I do admit I hold these views pretty firmly, to the point of flunking Magus (Chrono Trigger) on GA review because of them. Amarant seems like a clear-cut case for a list merge, though, as he appears in one game and has little or no third-party coverage/analysis. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 02:25, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For Amarant I'll actually go ahead and merge. Sometimes, however, I question the need for the character lists, even for games like Final Fantasy IX. --Tristam 03:51, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally, the character lists would be merged into the articles, in that the plot summary touches on all the major characters and omits the ones that aren't important enough to mention. This is a really unpopular view, though. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:59, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed once again. --Tristam 04:35, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was going over the agenda for expansion, cleanup, etc. and noticed that there are several games that are merely published under Squaresoft, Enix, or Square Enix names and developed by other companies. For example, many Enix games were developed by either Quintet or tri-Ace. Should these articles be included in the project? ~ Hibana 10:17, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I feel they should, Hibana. Enix, in reality, was little more than a publishing company. They simply contracted small, third-party developers to design all of their games. I actually put up that massive list of pre-1990 games under the list of Enix games. Enix just had creative ways of pulling in programmers (like the national programming contest they sponsored); once the program was designed they handled the rest. Even for Dragon Quest, they hooked up with Koichi Nakamura's company Chunsoft to program the game. Basically, all games we think are developed by Enix are actually developed by exclusive or generally exclusive development teams, like Quintet, tri-Ace, Chunsoft (Nakamura), Armor Project (Horii), Bird Studio (Toriyama), and so on. If we planned on cutting out games Enix didn't actually develop, well, Enix would have a very small game lineup indeed. Besides, when most people see Dragon Quest, Star Ocean, or ActRaiser they'll think of Enix as the designer, not some small-name group of programmers. --Tristam 16:45, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Similar to WikiProject Nintendo, articles that fall under WikiProject Square Enix consists only of games that are either developed by Square Enix, or on series which Square Enix owns the copyright to. For example, though the Star Ocean games are developed by an external development team, Square Enix still owns the copyright to the series, thus the game falls under this WikiProject.--TBCTaLk?!? 19:17, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was under the impression that this project also covered articles related to Square and to Enix, since both are (obviously) integral parts of the currenty entity known as Square Enix. If we limit ourselves to only games developed/published by Square Enix, well, we're talking about only 3 years of games. --Tristam 22:10, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Square Enix owns the copyright to all the content previously owned by Square and Enix when they will still seperate, so it still counts as part of WP:SE.--TBCTaLk?!? 02:31, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that was sort of understood, that it would include things published under the Square or Enix banner as well. Axem Titanium 00:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just for any new guys, if you have old magazines or access to them, Final Fantasy IV could use another couple print sources for reviews. Another editor has objected to its FAC by virtue of a Geocities site, which we could simply remove. However, that's an integrally important reference (the Geocities one), so I'd rather not remove it until we can get the print sources. Thanks for reading. --Zeality 22:48, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to have been sitting like this for a while. I wish I could help more. ~ Hibana 23:05, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey everybody. I was hoping I could help you guys out in any way possible, but wanted to first consult you about it before taking any actions :). My name is Zerhynn and I think that you guys are doing a great job and I'd like to help anyway I can, if you don't mind of course. --Zerhynn 19:47, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome aboard. It's great to have you. Please don't hesitate to be bold and fix anything you see that needs fixing. If you have any questions, someone here will definitely help. Axem Titanium 00:26, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article Square Co., which was originally Square Co., Ltd. has been moved to Square (company) by user Sig0 without justification. Accordingly, I changed it back, but I was reverted. I asked the user his reasoning behind doing so, and have yet to receive a reply. I was wondering if anyone knew the correct naming convention for corporations such as Square, which has many subsidiaries. The Enix article is titled just like that. ~ Hibana 00:09, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From Wikipedia:Naming conventions:

"Please note, "company", "international" "group" "industries" or similar suffixes are not legal statuses and should be included as specified by the originating business. For example: JPMorgan Chase & Co., but The Coca-Cola Company."

Therefore, the "Co." part of "Square Co." should be retained since it stands for company but it should remain abbreviated. Axem Titanium 02:00, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is WP:FF going to be rolled into this? That seemed to be the consensus, but it never happened. --PresN 18:00, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure. Should we have a straw poll? But then again, voting is evil...--TBCΦtalk? 19:19, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinkin' that I'll start a vote/discussion thingy over at WP:FF. Everyone feel free to vote/discuss. --PresN 04:17, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Final Fantasy IV is now featured. Special thanks to all who helped! Sir Crazyswordsman 17:25, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As said elsewhere congrats, and great job. I really wish I had been able to help out more with that one. Ryu Kaze 17:34, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think Super Mario RPG may be a decent goal for FA. The article freaking sucks right now, but it could be improved ridiculously easily. I've got full Nintendo Power coverage of its development and awards as well. I'll probably get it up and running and then ask for some help. Any assistance is appreciated. --Zeality 17:05, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can help a bit this weekend. I was going to do EarthBound, but I can do this instead. Sir Crazyswordsman 00:39, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm currently on a wikibreak, so I'm not sure if I can help...--TBCΦtalk? 00:41, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What a great game. I'd love to help. I'll take a look this weekend when I have time. Axem Titanium 02:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In order to feature this, we need List of Super Mario RPG characters and Mushroom World (Super Mario RPG) to be created. I prosified the embedded list of characters, and it still needs lots of links. As a result, we need these articles. Sir Crazyswordsman 04:13, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ACK HALT DON'T DO THAT. Please try not to make crufty spinoff articles unless absolutely necessary, and I don't see any reason we need to do that here. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 20:04, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We're trying to make the character and setting sections of the article nice and short (the way you like it). And don't accuse me of inviting cruft when the purpose of these articles is to try to hold cruft back rather than watch it spread. They would be similar to the lists of FF, KH, and Chrono characters and locations. Nothing more. I know you're an exclusionist, but we can't leave readers with a general overview without explaining certain things. And they don't have to be explained in the main article. Notice how every character and location in our featured articles has a link to somewhere in a list at the minimum? Sir Crazyswordsman 21:05, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then just remove the unencyclopedic cruft. You don't need to dump it into a crufty junkyard article, and most of these character articles are terrible, or, at best, redundant. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 21:12, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have to agree with A Man In Black. Also, we already have a List of Mario series characters, a List of Mario series species and a List of Mario villains, so having a List of Super MRPG characters would be redundant.--TBCΦtalk? 21:16, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can have the articles link to the List of Mario series characters. But tell me if you think "Mallow is the prince of Nimbus Land, which is a kingdom in the sky" is suitable for the main article. It clearly isn't, because it's crappy prose. And in order to give a one to two sentence explanation of who Mallow is, these things have to be left unnoticed. Also, character backstories aren't cruft. Abilities and stats are (and I have removed that crap on more than one occasion). If Mallow's backstory is cruft, than woudln't the minor KH character backstories be as well? Sir Crazyswordsman 03:29, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes. If it's a minor character, why are we fiddling with their backstory at all? Why not let people just play the games for that kind of stuff? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:35, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Point. Still, I'm the one that always gets picked on for this, even after what I did to the characters section. Sir Crazyswordsman 00:10, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps this is a different discussion but is it really necessary to have individual character articles at all? I know this isn't the most popular view but many character articles end up being ill-maintained stubs that basically repeat the plot from the main article. I'm sure some can stay if there's enough out-of-universe perspective about character design and whatnot but many don't and I feel like there should be a project-wide decision on this. Axem Titanium 21:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A bit of an old discussion, but I strongly agree with AMIB and Axem Titanium. I know Wikipedia covers pop culture, but c'mon, List of Super Mario RPG characters? Actually, the worst type is List of weapons in [game article] or List of items in [game article]. Turning Wikipedia into a game guide is slightly degrading. --Tristam 05:54, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Still, I do quite a bit of cruft removal, you have to admit. I found pages we can redirect to. Back on topic, the story needs to be expanded a bit. But not too long. I plan to make it about 2-2.5 times the length it is now (four lines). The section should ideally be two mid-lenght paragraphs long. We don't need a massive detailed description, but we don't want to be minimalists. Sir Crazyswordsman 04:47, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I only take issue with the paradox of creating crufty articles in an attempt to protect against cruft. I actually think you should go ahead and create the redlinked articles listed above, but just make them redirect pages to Super Mario RPG. That's at least one form of protection. Plus, you can add commented out notes in the code stating that, by consensus, these articles aren't notable enough to exist, so please don't create them. --Tristam 07:42, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How do you do that? Sir Crazyswordsman 16:11, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know I sort of got off on a tangent with Goemon, but I'll totally add my NP info next if someone will just run through Mystical Ninja Starring Goemon and copyedit anything that needs it. I'd like Tony's support (he didn't object, but wanted fresh eyes), and I'm really at a loss for who to contact since Ryu_Kaze is gone and Deckiller is a bit busy. --Zeality 22:24, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, I think I'll help as well. I'll start by add some much needed citations....--TBCΦtalk? 07:52, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added List of locations in Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars to our to do list (but, we're probably going to rename it to something like Mushroom Kingdom (Super Mario RPG) pretty soon, since it's a world article now, instead of a list). I need help expanding the Creatures and races section, but any help would be great! Thanks in advance! Taric25 17:20, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. The WikiProject Council is currently in the process of developing a master directory of the existing WikiProjects to replace and update the existing Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. These WikiProjects are of vital importance in helping wikipedia achieve its goal of becoming truly encyclopedic. Please review the following pages:

• User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory,
• User:Badbilltucker/Culture Directory 2,
• User:Badbilltucker/Philosophy and religion Directory,
• User:Badbilltucker/Sports Directory,
• User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory,
• User:Badbilltucker/Geographical Directory/United States, (note: This page will be retitled to more accurately reflect its contents)
• User:Badbilltucker/History and society directory, and
• User:Badbilltucker/Science directory

and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope to have the existing directory replaced by the updated and corrected version of the directory above by November 1. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 21:21, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if you tried to update it before, and the corrections were gone. I have now put the new draft in the old directory pages, so the links should work better. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused you. B2T2 00:08, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I originally posted this on the talk page for FFVII but perhaps this place gets a little more traffic?

Maybe this is completely unimportant but I've noticed that most of the articles for the Compilation titles add a colon ":" that doesn't appear on official sources:

• "Before Crisis -Final Fantasy VII-"
• "Crisis Core -Final Fantasy VII-"
• "Dirge of Cerberus -Final Fantasy VII-"
• "Dirge of Cerberus Lost Episode -Final Fantasy VII-"
• "Final Fantasy VII Advent Children"

With the exception of Advent Children, Square Enix seems pretty consistent with the "-Final Fantasy VII-" name scheme and they all lack colons. Should we move the pages there? Axem Titanium 00:45, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some websites use colons, others use slashes, and a few use neither. Either way though, does it really matter?--TBCΦtalk? 00:59, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The point is that all the official websites use dashes rather than colons. I guess these would be uncontested moves since it's pretty clear cut? Axem Titanium 01:47, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The official websites also write Final Fantasy in all caps and often have the trademark symbol next to them. We don't do those. Sir Crazyswordsman 19:30, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's because there is Wikipedia policy against using them. Anyway, it's already done so it doesn't matter. Axem Titanium 23:10, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to mention here that I have reinstated this article with new sources that confirm from Final Fantasy XIII and Final Fantasy Versus XIII staff that this engine will now be used on ALL next-gen games from Square Enix. The article will be able to grow in the coming months as more information on these and other games are revealed. If anyone has objections, please voice them. -- moe.RON ^{Let's talk | done} 19:56, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed it again. The consensus to merge it was made only two months ago, and the basic premise hasn't changed. This isn't the first time that Square Enix has said that they intend to use the engine for multiple games, but the fact remains that none of those games have been released yet, and only one or two have even been announced. There's next to nothing concrete known about the engine, and the source cited in the article states that it's not even completed yet. Wikipedia is still not a crystal ball, and I don't see any reason to doubt that the consensus reached earlier still holds. It's best that this discussion be continued at the Square Enix WikiProject, as there's probably a higher concentration of interested editors there. – Sean Daugherty (talk) 21:32, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I copied this here from CVG because it seemed relevant.--Clyde Miller 22:30, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the crystal ballishness of this is getting vaguer by the week, since there have been two interviews in magazines in the last two weeks detailing Version 1 of the engine by Nomura as well as his take on what Verison 2 and 3 are going to include. Granted, they are in Japanese (Electric Shock Magazine and I forget the other), but the information is steadily rolling in now. I will not reinstate the article yet again, but there is probably going to be enough for a full article very soon. -- moe.RON ^{Let's talk | done} 18:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the best option is to wait a few more months when more details about the engine is released before splitting it off again. In its current state there's too much speculation and not enough content to merit a seperate article.--TBCΦtalk? 21:01, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The first verison has already been detailed in the Japanese media while the only speculation now is of verisons 2 and 3. The problem, of course, would be getting the Japanese translated (which I can't do). -- moe.RON ^{Let's talk | done} 18:36, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Final Fantasy :-). — Deckiller 15:43, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The people over at the Donald duck page refuse to put any info about Donald's involvement in kingdom hearts in his page. As such. I have put him under our domain, until the time that we compleate a section. Please revert any attempts of theirs to stop our efforts. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lego3400 (talk • contribs) 03:14, 18 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Ummmm... this is Wikipedia, not war. I'm pretty sure that his Kingdom Hearts appearance is pretty minor compared to his long illustrious history since 1934. Wikipedia has a neutral point of view so I'm sure it would be fine to sum up his involvement in KH in a short paragraph grouped with his other video game appearances. Axem Titanium 03:28, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes thats true... BUT! Goofy, Mickey, and Maleifcent go into depth about their LARGE roles. I mean Donald a key charcter for Christs sakes! Also i propose we start up a Wikiproject: Kingdom Hearts to deal with KH exclusivly.. --Lego3400: The Sage of Time 16:55, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide and Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals then, but none of these articles should talk much about KH. DD has been around for 72 years. He's been in 17 games, 3 of which relate to KH. (not to mention 8 tv series, 14 movies, and a bajillion cartoon shorts.) Yes, he was a main character. Yes, in the world of KH, he's a big star. But it is a relatively small part of his (fictional) career. Should it get a small paragraph? Sure. Mickey Mouse's is too big. Goofy's is about right. There's no need to "take over" the page, and I really don't think that there's enough material to base a wikiproject on. You really like KH, and that's great, but I'd recommend starting with the main game articles and improving them, rather than spending your time on taking over articles on characters that are very notable and popular outside of the games. --PresN 17:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I think Goofy's is too Small... But i added a section in between the sizes of Mickey's and Goofy's with an image, Now will you help? Please *Offers Cookies* Lego3400: The Sage of Time 01:27, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure it would be a bad idea to just drop it and edit KH-related pages. As PresN and I have said, Kingdom Hearts is pretty insignificant compared to the rest of ol' Donald Duck's history and a comprehensive article about him may not have enough room to go that far in depth. Besides, any info you add there would probably be a repeat of info found on the main KH pages. Axem Titanium 02:40, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They want it at two sentateces tops.. and dump the rest of the info on the list page.. Which is not where it belongs.. It belongs on his page! Just help! Lego3400: The Sage of Time 16:38, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why should we help? I personally agree with them, and no one else here is agreeing with you. No one is supporting you in this. There are over 1.5 million articles on the english Wikipedia, and over 10,000 cvg articles, if you want to stick with that. Go work on them, and drop Donald Duck. Better yet, there are no GA or FA class Kingdom Hearts articles. You like those, so go improve them. --PresN 16:49, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 17:22, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does it apply here as it applies to Wikiproject Final Fantasy style guide that there is no need for spoiler tags? 私はBluerfnです 05:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. No one seems to have written a WP:SE manual of style yet, but it would almost certainly just be a copy of WP:FF's anyways, since most members here are members of both, and vice-versa. --PresN 06:51, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recently (and not so recently) there has been a little reverting and editing on the Sora, Riku, and Kairi pages, involving whether or not to add both of the Kingdom Hearts and Kingdom Hearts 2 ages, since both of the games take roughly a year apart. Looking back through their talk pages, there were several events in which people wanted to add both of the ages to the articles, on their respective infoboxes. These edits were reverted, and no mention of different ages is mentioned in the articles either, although being suggested. I feel that someone outside of the KH games, although still dealing with SE and Disney could take a look and decide whether or not we should add them. Thank you for your time. Disinclination 04:15, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just checked Riku's page, and his age is mentioned close to the top. Then, KH 2 section starts by saying it takes place one year after the first game. Perhaps that could be enough. Icecypher 20:09, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One of the arguments mentioned was that some of the Featured articles list two ages, like Yuna. Why is it acceptable for Yuna, but not for Sora/Riku/Kairi? Disinclination 22:05, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One other thing I noticed, was that the Cloud Strife page as well lists several ages, dealing with all the games he is in. I don't mean to be a bother about this, but I find it strikingly unfair that some characters have this, and some don't. Disinclination 22:16, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The campaign is continuing at Wikipedia:WikiProject Final Fantasy to improve Final Fantasy articles to an encyclopedia standard across the board. Check it out, although you might have to dive into the archives for earlier discussions. — Deckiller 22:11, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A centralized discussion about video game navboxes, which may impact some or all of this project's navboxes, is ongoing. Members of this project (or anyone else interested) are invited to participate. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 07:47, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I need aid in providing info, and sources for dub-cast, and having the page be edited by those who have registered on wikipedia.Fractyl Fractyl.

In line with the excellent work at the Final Fantasy wikiproject at getting the non main game articles to GA and beyond, I had an idea for the "Mana" series. We could combine the Elemental Spirits • Flammie • Mana Tree • Mana Sword • Rabite articles into one Gameplay of the "Mana" series article. That way, we could create one informative and excellent article on the series and not 5 articles that probably won't become Good articles because there isn't enough info on them. :) Judgesurreal777 02:43, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a great idea. I know nothing about the Mana series, but I'm looking forward to seeing the end result! — Deckiller 05:44, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In my younger days on the site, I wrote the Flammie article and heavily edited Rabite (The second one got me a barnstar, too!), and I agree, they need fixin'! These were sort of learning articles for me, and I would like for them to be turned into something useful all the same. I may help on this eventually, when I'm satisfied enough with my Wild Arms stuff to take a break for other articles. Nall 06:37, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great, well I'll start studying the Final Fantasy merged articles, and see how to get a proposed page started. If you guys could find any references about the Mana series, that would be great. Judgesurreal777 17:58, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh actually guys, I had perhaps an even better idea. Since there is a whole topic Seiken Densetsu article that seems rather underwhelming, could we perhaps combine this series descriptive articles into that one? That way, it would be more complete and more likely to get a GA. Judgesurreal777 18:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On the subject of charatcers like Xehanort and the Organization, I believe we should work the profiles in an chronological order relating the game series storyline, just like with other fictional charatcers, NOT how the "real world" protrays it. I like to place it on vote to see. Fractyl

We're supposed to present them in a real-world context, as is stated in WP:WAF. I don't see any reason to change this for a small batch of articles. ' 02:56, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Chrono Trigger and Template:Chrono Cross have been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Chrono Trigger and Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Chrono Cross. Thank you. — Kariteh 14:37, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! Vagrant Story is now the first non-Chrono series GA of this wikiproject. It was about time. Kariteh 20:43, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello everyone, the Chrono Series Topic is being voted on at Featured Topics, take a look and see if you like it! Judgesurreal777 18:59, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One more time, this time with feeling! Judgesurreal777 06:54, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone go comment on the Kingdom Hearts peer review. A couple of editors and I are FA pushing it. Axem Titanium 22:49, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I compiled them like they are at the Final Fantasy Wikiproject, seems like there are only 215 good articles to go to make all the Square Enix articles (excluding Final Fantasy ones) Good Articles. Judgesurreal777 07:27, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please, everyone, please give your comments on the Vagrant Story article! A PR before I nominate it for Featured Article. — Bluerです。 ^なにか? 06:26, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If there's no more revision needed, I'm nominating this article for FA. Wish me luck. I thought it over. Gave it a week or two. — Bluerです。 ^なにか? 17:12, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why not put a pic of Saint-Émilion or something? That would add to the out of universe perspective, and would serve as the article's free picture if if ever has the possibility to appear on the main page. Kariteh 18:22, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've addressed that, with one picture found in the Saint-Émilion article. — Bluerです。 ^なにか? 10:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've nominated the article for FA. — Bluerです。 ^なにか? 10:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]