Talk:Final Fantasy VII/archive 5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Censorship

Was Final Fantasy VII censored at all? I mean, the content wasn't as strong as, say, Final Fantasy VIII's, but I would imagine something was censored. Plus, it doesn't say anything about censorship on this page. Could someone please answer to this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.224.109.205 (talk • contribs)

Not that I recall. It certainly wasn't censored as much as the older games were. Koweja 18:44, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
As I recall, some language was censored, some wasn't. --Daedalus 21:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
The word "bastard" appeared on various occasions, but "fuck" and "shit" were censored. Plebmonk 23:14, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
<---- recet indent

Some words were censored, some were not, which ones seem arbitrary. Only instance I could find of "Fuck" uncensored:

Computer: Cid! We have an emergency situation! A mechanic is still in the engine section of the rocket!
Cid: What!? Who is the little fuck!?
Computer: I don't know. Activating the intercom in the engine section.
Cid: Hey goddammit!! Who the #*$$#&'s still in there?

Earliest instance of "Shit"

Shinra Manager: I'm not give in to violence…and I'm not giving you my seat either!
Tifa: Barret!!
Barret: #^*$!! You lucky #$#*!
Cloud: So, what are we gonna do now?
Barret: Shit! The hell you so calm about? You bustin' up my rhythm…

In total, "Fuck" is said uncensored once, "Shit" is said uncensored 12 times, "ass" is said 15 times (sometimes occuring as Jackass), "Damn" is said 68 times, and I couldn't find any occurances of "Bastard". Censored words appear approx. 33 times. --Daedalus 16:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

My version must be different. The "fuck" is censored, and the comment with Barret the last editor quoted, the first word was uncensored(though it had an apostrophe stuck in the middle, making it "shi't". I noted a lot of uncensored "ass" and "shit" though, and after playing FFX and FFXII for so long, going back and playing FFVII, I was a little surprised by the language. In fact, it's the only Fantasy RPG I've ever played with uncensored profanity. But yes, it was at least partially censored.--Vercalos 08:42, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Nevertheless, unless we get concrete primary sourcing from an interview or whatever, we can't include this in the article. — Deckiller 09:10, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, the box says it's rated teen for mild language and violence... But I'm not sure of any primary sources that would even deal with this particular issue..--Vercalos 11:21, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Beyond a mention that there is some uncensored language I really don't think this type of info belongs in an encyclopedia. And even the slight mention is iffy to me. --Daedalus 16:27, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, it's the first Final Fantasy to come to America with any uncensored language. But then again, all the Final Fantasies to come to America in that period of time had to go through Nintendo of America's censorship guidelines of the time.--Vercalos 22:58, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
  • It might be worth noting (at least in the discussion) that the computer version was far more censored than the PSX version. Almost every instance of "shit" was removed, consistently with #^$& or similar characters. Also, certain important lines had their translations changed. "Back then, you could get by with only skinned knees", for example, was changed to something likely more grammatically correct, but weird to a long time player of the PSX version. 216.93.154.218 12:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I have the PC version of FF7 and I recall a TON of Cid lines where there was censorship as well as ones form Barret. They were all situations of anger though so it didn't impact the storyline much.

Actually there was some sexual censorship if I recall. "Slightly stretched underwear" was changed to "Therapeutic underwear." Not sure why it's better, but I'm pretty sure they did it because they thought "slightly stretched" was sexually inappropriate. (The item is found in Tifa's dresser drawer during the nibelhiem flashback sequence.)

[edit] Mentioning Midgar's future

During the epilogue that follows, the ruins of Midgar are shown five hundred years later. While the landscape had once been desolate due to Shinra's operations, it is now a land of lush greenery.

This sentence should be removed as it is trivial, unnecessary, and uhhh too minor for mention, and there is no explanation for this scene. Kariteh 10:33, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

The explanation doesn't have to be written or stated explicitly. This is a flash forward, to where groups like Avalanche have succeeded in saving the planet. The planet has presumably recovered and is letting life grow where its life, the Lifestream, was stolen before, similar to how plants will grow after a fire desolates an area. It may be 'trivial', and it's not necessary to the story, but it's there to give people a warm fuzzy feeling in knowing that the good guys succeeded in their mission. That's what I think anyway. Nique1287 13:36, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes, that's what you think. That's just an opinion, unlike Tidus' rebirth in FFX which is a fact. Kariteh 13:59, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Again, the shot of Midgar being overgrown with plants is an open-ended ending, you can interpret it the way you want to. The part of the FFX ending where Tidus is 'reborn' has no explanation, not even an IMPLIED explanation, whereas in FFVII Shinra had basically been dismantled, Sephiroth had been destroyed, and the planet was allowed to recover, so it follows that Midgar would be overgrown with plants after it was abandoned. On top of that, the "sequel", FFVII: Advent Children, doesn't nullify the ending of FFVII, whereas the sequel to FFX, FFX-2, does, since its beginning occurs when the rebirth of Tidus had not yet taken place. Also, please remember to assume good faith on Wikipedia unless good faith is proven to have been broken. I only say that this scene should stay in the summary, when I was against the inclusion of the Tidus scene, because this scene has reason, explanation without too many leaps of faith, and it fits in with what had happened at the end of the game. Nique1287 15:03, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
FFX-2 doesn't nullify the ending of FFX: you are yourself saying that it begins before the rebirth of Tidus has taken place. It would contradict something if it began after the supposed rebirth, but it's not. It begins before. So where's the difference here?? FFVII: Advent Children also takes place before the ruined Midgar scene (which is stated to happen 500 years after FFVII in FFVII), so of course it doesn't nullify the ending of the game. I fail to see where's the difference between the two examples. The two sentences in the two articles should either both remain or both be removed. Kariteh 15:13, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
FFX itself gives no explanation for the scene with Tidus. FFVII does give an implied explanation, if you do more than just watch the pretty shiny moving things on the screen, for the scene of Midgar. That's the difference. Nique1287 15:19, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Just a note, what goes on in one article has absolutely no bearing in another article. There is no rule saying that every article should be treated exactly the same. Axem Titanium 23:57, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unnecessary image

I've read a discussion in the archives on why the image of Aeris' death should be kept but found the reasons unsatisfactory, not because it's a "spoiler" (which is a different topic altogether), but because it really serves no purpose in this article. The purpose of an image in an encyclopedia article is usually to show what cannot be described in words, such as how a person/place/map/logo/thing looks like, otherwise an image would be pointless if words can already describe it quite clearly. Aeris' death can easily be summed up in a few sentences, so what exactly is the purpose of this image? In addition, why sould this particular image be kept instead of the many other "iconic" images in FFVII? One of the reasons in the archives was that this scene is apparently "the most notable aspect of the story", which itself is a biased and POV reason to keep this image. I really don't see the point in keeping this unnecessary image, unless there are any other reasons why this image should be kept? Jagged 85 04:31, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I suppose it's because it is the "most iconic" scene in the game, according to many, many independent sources. Whenever this game is mentioned in any review or publication, the scene is mentioned and Nojima himself has said that it was put it with that intention. Fair use law says that only a limited number of images can be included in an article so the most relevant one was chosen. Axem Titanium 04:45, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
As well as the picture being iconic its actually example of the different graphics in the game. All the pictures on the page show a different view of the game. The images are field map, battle screen, full FMV, Nomura art (not graphic in game of course), and not full FMV (Aerith and Sephiroth pic). The picture completes the whole collection from the game. It serves more of a purpose than just to illustrate "the scene". J-Axe

[edit] Final Fantasy VII staff list

I am trying to get the names of the production staff. I want to add staff members to the article under the production staff. It just gets deleted over and over. Can you help me? I was wondering about this. I really need to put the commentaries in ther as well. I tried to help, but I couldn't do it. I am really scared and it is driving me crazy. Please help. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sjones23 (talk • contribs) 22:40, 5 January 2007 (UTC).

The list of staff is trivial. It is not necessary for the integrity of the article, and if anything it detracts from the style of the article. As I've said in my edit summaries, credits are given at the end of the game if people want to know everyone who contributed to the production of the game. Extended lists, such as production staff with no commentary, just as a list, have no place on Wikipedia. Nique1287 22:43, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
I have no idea what "commentaries" you're talking about but per WP:NOT#IINFO and WP:TRIVIA, the production lists fail to be interesting or important (despite being factual) and can be easily found in imdb or some other website that doesn't have content restrictions like Wikipedia. Axem Titanium 23:01, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Yes, the important (relevant) staff members are already listed in the infobox at the top right side of the page, and are also described in the Development section. No need to repeat the information in a list with no commentary. Kariteh 23:39, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, Kariteh and AxemTitanium, I agree with your opinions, but I was just only trying to help add some more important people to the list, but I can do that in the infobox. Oh, wait, I can tell you that there are also the full staff list at [[Moby Games. --Sjones23 01:10, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
If it's already there, why does it have to be duplicated here? If it's useful as an external link, then add it. We even have a template for it: {{moby game}} Axem Titanium 01:43, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I guess you are right.--Sjones23 22:01, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] spoiler

for a feature article, I'd wonder why major plot points don't have a spoiler warning. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Joeblack982 (talk • contribs) 10:57, 14 January 2007 (UTC).

See #Spoiler Warning; this was recently discussed (again). — TKD::Talk 11:54, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Because it's a featured article. Only bad articles have spoiler warnings. I normally notice that whenever a page has no spoiler warning, it's normally well-written and comprehensive. --TheEmulatorGuy 05:21, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Well said. — Deckiller 09:09, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Typographical Dissonance

Deleted an unnecessary comma in the "Criticism" subsection, in the first sentence of the second paragraph.

I am finding few other problems with the grammatical integrity of the article, and hold it as one of the best I've seen in the community. .Absolution. 10:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Make that "Critical response." It's late. .Absolution. 10:55, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comment

I have a few comments. I know that Kitase and Nojima wrote the scenario, but only Nojima wrote the scenario for FFVIII. How long did development take? What is a flower merchant? What is the Compilation of Final Fantasy VII about? How many staff members worked on this game? Any information is always welcome. Sjones23 15:34, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

A flower merchant is someone who sells flowers, and the Compilation of Final Fantasy VII is all of the Final Fantasy VII related media, like Advent Children, Dirge of Cerberus, etc. "Compilation" is just what Square calls it. --PresN 22:55, 3 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Video interviews of staff

One editor added links to videos of interviews concerning the game to the article, twice, but both times it was removed without explanation. Anyone want to give a reason for removing the interview links?--Vercalos 05:11, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

These interviews are part of the "Making of Final Fantasy VII" featurette which appears on a bonus CD in the packages of Final Fantasy VII International and Final Fantasy VII Advent Children. It is thus a commercially released product and cannot be linked in a Wikipedia article according to Wikipedia:External links. Kariteh 10:17, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
However, if the editor who added them wants, you could reference them inline, assuming you have something to add to the article that's taken from these interviews. --Daedalus 20:32, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Someone fix all the titles

some idiot has been messing with the section titles, please fix. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.129.198.248 (talk • contribs).

Can you be more specific? I see nothing wrong with the section titles. :: ZJH (T C E) 04:22, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] extreme vandalism!

Someone erased all the articles and substituted it with the Japanese flag! (ChloeSong 06:18, 4 March 2007 (UTC)) Ah. nvm. I just got rid of the image, all the info is still there. (ChloeSong 06:24, 4 March 2007 (UTC))

[edit] Orphaned clause in Development section

"As his style was considered too exquisite to be compatible with the visual format of the project, this issue was addressed by bringing Tetsuya Nomura onboard as its character designer, while Amano aided in the design of the game's world map[61] Previously a monster designer for Final Fantasy V,[64] and also designed its title logo. Nomura's style was more reminiscent of manga, and considered easier to adapt.[61]"

As you can see, the bolded line is incomplete... The clause apparently became separated from its sentence after a certain number of edits. I'd correct it but I'm not even sure who it refers to (Nomura or Amano??). Can someone fix it? Kariteh 15:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Also, this article is going to be featured on Wikipedia's main page, so I'd suggest everybody to reread the whole article and fix stuff if there are other stuff to fix and if they have time. Kariteh 15:26, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

This is why I wish we had stable versions for FAs :) — Deckiller 18:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
I fixed the sentence above, although I'm not completely satisfied with how it sounds. I'll try to go through the entire article before its featured date. Axem Titanium 22:55, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Great Work!!!

Congrats for the ppl who made possible that one of my fav games appear in the main page. Great Work!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alextrevelian 006 (talk • contribs) 01:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC).

Look at all the reverts! Shouldn't the page be protected? Matrixhax0r 01:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
What the deuce? I havent notice that, why in earth it isnt protected since is a featured article?. Anyway, I just requested a cascading protection --ometzit<col> 01:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Actually, featured articles are never protected. Its so anon. IPs can add more info to it (but most of them end up vandalizing the article like here [1] & [2])-- Hdt83 | Talk 01:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
We don't want to say "Look, this is a featured article, one of the best in Wikipedia. Unfortunately, you can't edit it." Protection is only for extreme situations. -- ReyBrujo 01:54, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
OMG thats ridiculous I didn´t know that if its a featured article it´s because is great the way it is but if someone want to see today best article and found that only niggers like FFVII or that Aeris die at the end then whats the point? Also it would be horrible finding that Aeris dies at the end, I know that because i once enter to half blood prince article and the page was replaced with a bold Dumbledure is killed at the end by snape. In any case, I didnt know that, another point less to wikipedia--ometzit<col> 02:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Since Aeris' death is out in the open...I want to point out that Aeris does not die in the end, but rather at the end of the first disc. Sumnjim 12:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
OMG, Aeris dies! Why did you tell me? It has been only 10 years since the game was released! Now I won't be able to enjoy the game anymore! -- ReyBrujo 02:05, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
I can see a little bit of O rly? My brother havent play it nd i always have told he that is one of the best games for PS (Yeah, i still have it, it still works nd I enjoy it). In any case, if thats the policy that the almighty Jimbo imposed what can I do ;)--ometzit<col> 02:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Just remember to warn users when you revert, otherwise they will continue vandalizing. -- ReyBrujo 02:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Use test3 or blatantvandal. One warning is enough for immature mainpage vandalism. — Deckiller 02:27, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, congratz on the featured article. However, it is not clear from the summary that "Compilations of Final Fantasy VII" incorperates movies, and not just games. The fact that a good game resulted in sequel games is no surprise, but movies are significant. I don't know if this can be fit into the summary, but it should be there. This is probably the wrong place for such a comment, so when someone reads this could you please fix the summary and either move or delete my comment? Thanks (Tdmg 03:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC))

I won't delete your comment (it's bad form), but your suggestion is well taken. I'll try to incorporate it, but you're welcome to be bold and do it yourself too. Axem Titanium 04:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Just thought I'd swing by and say congratulations to all of the people who got this to FA status. You guys rock! Kntrabssi 04:35, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm not a regular contributor to Wiki, but thank you all who've helped to get this as a featured article. It's a fantastic compilation deserving of the honor. But it gave me a big smile to see it on the main page. Thanks again! 203.129.39.176 19:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)Joel
I also want to thank everyone for getting this on the main page. I remember when the game first came out. I already had it reserved for 6 months, and I skipped the last 1/2 of my school day to drive 40 miles to the mall to pick it up. At the time, it was the most amazing game ever made (IMO). That game gave me many ups (killing the weapons) and downs (Aeris' death). Absolutely fantastic game. Sumnjim 12:20, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Yeah way to go making this great game FA-status!--Richard (Talk - Contribs) 12:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)



[edit] spoilers

oh my god, i just found out Aeris dies...there should be one of those, "spoilers ahead" thingys to warn people because it just gave away a HUGE suprise for me and i'm in the middle of playing it. man, it's all spoiled for me. augh—Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.72.47.41 (talk • contribs)

The Plot and Story headers should have been the first indication that there might be spoilers ahead. --Onorem 12:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
The game is nearly 10 years old, I'm sorry, but I'm going to go ahead and say that the statute of limitations for FF7 spoilers has long past. Aeris' death one of the most well-known moments in gaming. The fact that it's unsigned also leads me to believe the guy is just messing around. EdenMaster 12:18, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
I agree with it, people younger that 10 years (my bro, 4ex) who have hear about how great the game is would want to play it some time, and if we screw all the story whats the point? I believe that all plots should have spoilers warning because doesn´t matter how old is the thing, not everybody have 20 years and know about the best moments in gaming--ometzit<col> 14:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)--ometzit<col> 14:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
The spoiler warnings are the headings "plot", "story", the length of time these pages take to load, and the walls of text. The debate about spoiler warnings has gone on for quite some time; the Final Fantasy WikiProject and a few other isolated edting bases have decided not to follow that aspect of the manual of style — Deckiller 14:10, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Actually, it's not right now. I think someone may have taken it out. I'll add it again. 204.118.51.210 14:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Ah, I'll clarify. I didn't say there were spoiler tags there, I said that those were the spoiler warnings, in essense. — Deckiller 14:51, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree there should be a spoiler tag. Ive seen spoiler tags on lesser spoilers then this. There are no spoiler tags ANYWHERE on this page even tho it gives away a ton of info. There are spoiler tags on the Harry Potter books... even tho just as many people have read those books as have played this game. Just because it says "plot" or "story" doesnt mean it shouldnt have a spoiler tag. The only time when a "plot" or "story" section doesnt need a spoiler tag is when, of course, there are no key spoilers mentioned in the text. Spoiler tags are seriously important and should be included in all instances where key elements are given away, with no special treatment just because something is popular. Kamiawolf 04:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

The point isn't popularity. It's not even related to if others have it. The point is this -- spoilers are optional. There is NO policy for them. Therefore, it's up to the editors to decide if they wish to use them or not. The editors to are the mains ones editing the article have decided, as a consensus, to not use them. You don't give ANY arguments outside of "I like them" for why they need to be there. So I ask. WHY are they important? Why should certain info be given a disclaimer, as it were, but we have to avoid all other warnings? What is a "key" spoiler anyway? I'm sure everyone could agree that, say, Aerith dying is "key", but what about, oh, that Cloud falls sick for a portion of the game? Or that Cid's rocket does end up working? Etc...
Seriously, almost every argument for spoilers I've seen has been in the "we need to protect readers from themselves" catagory. It seems like since everyone comes to expect it from most websites, they expect it here. I can sort of see that logic, but that doesn't mean that WP "should" just because others do. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 11:40, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Umm, actually, there is another reason to do what I suggest, and that is the length of you describing the story on the MAIN PAGE (which, in of itself, is kind of indecent when you consider how LONG and WORDY the description of said "spoilers" are). If for nothing else, at LEAST do what you do with the character part. (See below).—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Darkpower (talk • contribs) 11:01, 7 June 2007 (UTC).

hey there! while i'm still definitely not ready to get back into this pleasant "discussion," by y'alls own admissions you should obviously and unquestionably:

A) allow the removal or tagging of the (at least one) significant spoiler much later in the article, nowhere near the plot section whatsoever.

B) allow the removal or "cut-linking" of the image of Aeris getting it, which is rather large and VERY hard to miss while scrolling past the plot section.

please do so, as i don't want anyone to flip out on me doing it myself. peace. Elgaroo 19:13, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

  • "...nowhere near the plot section whatsoever..." As has also been pointed out, it's an encyclopedia. Just because there are spoilers outside of the plot and story sections doesn't warrant spoiler tagging. If there's no spoiler tagging in the most obvious places that "should" according to spoilertag fanboys, why should we tag a mention that's (presumably, since you don't say exactly WHAT it is or where) further down?
  • "...removal or "cut-linking" of the image of Aeris..." Why? WP:NOT#CENSOR. We're not here to protect people from themselves. It's been 10 years since the game was released. There's got to be a statute of limitations on this stuff, because 10 years after the release, people should not expect to be coddled, no matter how popular the game still is today. Aeris dies. Stuff happens. Get over it. Nique talk 13:56, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Uhh...so you're saying a spoiler tag or a article split is coddling people? C'mon. Darkpower 11:02, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Especially since it's revealed in FFVII's multiple sequels (including a full-length movie) that Aerith is dead. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣΣ 00:37, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Please try to keep an out-universe perspective. A piece of fiction is a piece of fiction before being the sequel or the prequel to other fictions; what I mean is, all of these stuff aren't part of real history, and the internal chronology of the events is irrelevant to Wikipedia's out-universe stance (just because something happens in a sequel doesn't mean the original work has suddenly shifted in the "past"). Aerith being dead in FFVII:AC/BC/CC/DC/and whatnot is not a spoiler, but Aeris dying in FFVII is a spoiler. Kariteh 12:30, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
May I just add my view on this. I can understand the rationale behind not plastering spoiler warnings all over the article. However, I feel that the image of Aeris' death is too much. As has been said above, it's hard to miss it while scrolling through the page. It should be removed. 82.32.210.193 01:20, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Ironically, if you look at Gamespy.com, they have a feature up right now about the "25 best cutscenes", and Aeris's death is right there, no spoilers. It's not too much. The game came out 10 years ago. The statute of limitations has passed. --PresN 04:02, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
I personally could care less what another website strictly run by a set amount of administrators does with their content. I believe that a spoiler is a spoiler whether its Aerith dying or any other event in a video game that may take someone by surprise. It doesn't matter how old it is, one should not assume that everyone who reads this page will be fine with finding out something crucial in the plot and ruin their experience. Besides, what's so hard about putting a little spoiler line indication anyways? - Dabomb691 08:27, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Go read WP:SPOILER there is a guideline about this and if someone is not bright enough to understand that the plot or story section will contain plot and story, they are just not bright enough to read the article altogether. MythSearchertalk 11:05, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, there's a good touch to this debate. Tell you're audience that they are not bright enough to read an article just because they didn't see something that you think they should have. See below on the REAL reason why people are complaining.Darkpower 10:56, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
There's a HUGE problem, though, when talking about the Plot sections in ALL of these pages. I can see how the Character sections are linking to main articles that people have a choice to CLICK and go to said article, thereby neglecting the reason for such a tag, "Story" has no such page. It's just there, without any option like the other parts. My view: put the detailed story of the games (from beginning to end) on its own page (that way you eliminate the whole "don't mess with the spoiler tag or else" deal and you give the user a chance to decide whether they should delve deeper), and then leave just the beginning summary (as in, what you may see in the instructions) on the main page. Just a thought, so you don't have to be all wise-ass to everyone saying "you should know", while making debates like this all the more moot (it'll condense the actual main article, anyway, which the story sections make the pages drag out far too long).
Plus, this whole debate and how people are handling it is a bit immature. How hard is it to put a one word tag around something, and what is all the big deal if it IS in there? This whole "OMG, they actually added a SPOILER TAG, quick call to action" BS is exactly WHY Wikipedia is under fire for being loaded with people who think they're the second coming of Christ. I'm imploring you people, just fix it so everyone is happy and find something more important on these pages to whine about.Darkpower 10:54, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Though i'm of the oppinion that a sopiler warning would do better than worse, i can understand your point for not to place them. Ok, it's true that people should be intelligent enough for not to read the story if they don't want to know spoilers. But just like someone has said before, the image is too much, you can't avoid it when scrolling! I think that has to be removed... I also like the idea of the user above me, to move the story to a sepparate article. I guess it's "ok" to put all the unwarned spoilers there, even the image if you want, beacuse you won't see them unless you want to. 85.137.22.225 02:06, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Another extreme vandalism

The article Final Fantasy VII has been heavily vandalised once again...!!! Can anyone restore this article back? After that restoration, I think maybe we should semi-lock the article to avoid vandalism by annonymous users. Hezery99 13:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree. The bastards have been vandalizing all night. J'onn J'onzz 13:04, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I put the page up for semi-protection. Should get protected soon. --Ashfire908 13:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I can´t belive that featured articles aren´t protected the moment they go to the main page--ometzit<col> 14:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

It's today's frontpage article, we can't protect it, and admins will not protect it either. It has to be left unprotected so that anyone who wants to make a constructive edit can. It just happens that frontpage articles tend to get vandalized the most on their day. Nothing we can do but keep reverting and wait til tomorrow. Nique talk 14:03, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
I thought that (at least at one point) all featured articles were semi-protected during the day that they are put up precisely because of the potential for heavy vandalism? - Fearless Son 17:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

they discussed that earlier... they couldnt do it in time so they just undo everything that happenes...im watching this article as well as them so i guess it helps a little. but no one can get it protectedDark reaper6789 17:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

That's a shame, 'cause some people keeps changing the article in an inappropiate way and submitting stupid stuff--DrMauroFrenchman 04:47, 12 May 2007 (UTC).

See Wikipedia:Main Page featured article protection, there's no actual policy/guideline against protecting the main page FA, just vocal opposition to it from various people, and 2-3 years of tradition. --W.marsh 19:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Too much plot in the setting section?

It seems like there is too much plot (story) in the setting section. Especially the second half. 66.167.71.151 14:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Not really; it's describing the backstory. I would prefer a lot of it moved to an article (along with the crufty location list subarticle, not the two paragraphs in the article, those are fine) called Gaia (Final Fantasy VII) to follow in the footsteps of Spira (Final Fantasy X), but we'll get to that eventually. — Deckiller 14:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spoiler Warning

I don't think I saw a spoiler warning before reading this article. This article does contain many details that viewers might not want to see if they have not played the game —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.118.21.98 (talk) 14:48, 20 March 2007 (UTC).

There have been numerous debates over this in the past, which led to certain WikiProjects, such as the Final Fantasy/Square Enix WikiProjects, not using them. — Deckiller 14:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
Which projects have banned it besides the FF project, and are you sure the SE one banned it? Kariteh 16:00, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
[3]. I don't really see the need to detract time away from editing to look for the other projects that omit them completely or go on a "case by case basis", except the Video Games WikiProject, which implemented a "case by case" guideline for flexibility. I said "do not use them" ("ban" implies a strict ruling), which ties into that "case by case basis". Also, a WikiProject does not necessarily have to be a formal group: it can be as simple as a FA push. This can be seen in articles like Shadow of the Colossus, The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, and so on, which do not use the tags and fall under the CVG guideline stressing "case by case basis". But the horse has already been beaten enough; if a group of editors working on an article do not wish to use the warnings (and vice versa), then that's the example of the case by case basis outlined in the CVG MoS. — Deckiller 16:22, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
One I know of is Wikiproject Opera ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 22:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reception

I remember this game having a poor response when it came out. I remember it getting bad reviews and everybody talking shit about it when it first came out. It seems like it has more of a cult following, but the article suggests that it did extremely well. Can somebody explain this to me? Rzrscm 19:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

You remember incorrectly. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 19:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
I definetly remember correctly. I was reluctant to buy it because of the criticism. Rzrscm 19:44, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

It's obvious that whatever magazine or blog in which you found this criticism was in the extreme minority. Final Fantasy VII does not have a "cult following"; it is an incredibly popular game, as it was upon its release, and its admirers have always outnumbered its detractors. "Cult following" is simply not an applicable term in this case. (Anonymous, March 20 2007, 6:18 PM)

Cult following in descriptive use of FFVII is tantamount to calling Army of Darkness a cult film. Evil Dead is (or perhaps was) a cult film. By the time Army of Darkness came out it had become much more mainstream. How the hell do you think Bruce Cambell is doing Old Spice commercials anyways!? Dj8thick 03:22, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Or, cutting more to the facts than opinions, the vast majority of the reviews at launch were positive, and it was a best-seller. That isn't to say you didn't read or hear of a negative review, but they were not in the majority at the time. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] And the vandalism starts...

This is sorta getting rediculous. Mendinso 20:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Unfortunately, I'm on wireless, so my vandal fighting is limited. I think first-offense blocks are good in this situation; the first block is the user's warning. — Deckiller 20:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
There seems to be a fascination with turning the words backwards..--Cao Wei 21:12, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Main page, whoo!

Congratulations, everyone, Final Fantasy VII has survived being featured on the main page. Axem Titanium 02:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank god! That was arguably the hardest main page defense in my year as an admin. — Deckiller 04:44, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm not so sure... I don't think this article is referenced very well. You just need a few more — Jack · talk · 13:46, Wednesday, 21 March 2007

[edit] Starting a subtext analysis page

I really think we should do this. Final Fantasy VII has intense philosophical, psycholigical subtext. It's why I loved the game anyway.--AquaFox 20:27, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not allow original research and unsourced analysis. Please see the attribution policy and its subpages for more. The Final Fantasy Wikia might allow something like that, however. — Deckiller 20:42, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
I like this or it at least should be mentioned inr eception or something because there has been a lot looked into. I know that in A Play Within A Play in Issue 84 of The Escapist e-magazine they take a look at some of the psycological aspects in how they developed the characters and why exactly FF VII was a success Ariolander 06:32, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clone

So is Cloud a copy of Sephiroth or not. I was never to clear on that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.119.6.234 (talk)

Firstly, please sign your talk page entries, and add them to the bottom of the page instead of the top. Second, Wikipedia talk pages are not a discussion forum, they're for discussing changes to the article. Thirdly, he's not a clone of anyone, though he does believe for a time that Zack's story is, for the most part, his own. Nique talk 00:17, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Compilation

The article Final_Fantasy_VII_Snowboarding states that it is not part of the compilation but the list here still includes it. So what's the real deal? Berserkerz Crit 14:09, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

It says quite clearly that Compilation titles are listed in bold and FFVII Snowboarding is not bolded. Axem Titanium 14:54, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] You shouldn't be using the american Cover

Came out in japan first... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.145.213 (talk • contribs) 17:39, 8 April 2007

Wouldnt you only use the japanese cover on the japanese wikipedia? Evaunit666 00:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
No the consensus was First release region gets the cover, many japanese games come out in us first and get us cover here.
Plus all us final fantasy title covers are ugly. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.42.145.213 (talk • contribs).
What consensus? Where? Nique talk 11:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Besides, this is the English Wikipedia. — Deckiller 14:16, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lack of Spoiler Warnings

Why in the hell are there not spoiler warnings? There's a "plot" section, but that doesn't necessarily mean there will be spoilers, just as the back of a book or a review or a preview gives away the plot but doesn't spoil anything. In fact, the "Setting" section has some very helpful info without spoiling anything, leading a reader to believe he/she can read on without a problem.

Furthermore, if "plot" is a sufficient spoiler warning, then why are spoiler warnings used at all in Wikipedia? Why don't they just have a "plot" section for anything with a story? Simple: because "plot" is not a sufficient spoiler warning.

Even further, there's a BLATANT PICTURE of Sephiroth killing Aeris, with a caption that says Sephiroth kills Aeris. WTF?! This is ****ing ridiculous. I decided to be safe and scroll on past everything else after reading the "setting" section, but I couldn't miss that picture, and now that significant part of the story is ruined for me.

I don't give a crap how old this game is, it will always be new to somebody. I'm 23 and it's new to me. I heard a lot about this game, but never played it and never knew anything about it other than 2 character names and the fact that it's an RPG. Now I know a very important part of story, one that may have been quite sad for me had it been a surprise, because someone was inconsiderate enough to put that picture there. I'm extremely disappointed. 216.89.144.18 18:18, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

It's the decision and consensus of WP:FF (it's in their Manual of Style) and WP:SE editors to not use Spoiler warnings where spoilers should be expected in an encyclopedia. Read the previous discussions and archives of even just this page for the major reasonings, and put up with it, because it doesn't show signs of changing any time soon. In short: We're not here to protect people from themselves. Nique talk 18:42, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
This topic is in far too many places. Please post new concerns in the existing thread. You'll find that many of your concerns have already been addressed there. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣΣ 19:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Just to clarify, it's the consensus of WP:FF, not a consensus of WP:SE. Spoiler Warnings can and should be (and are) used in non-FF related articles. Kariteh 20:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

  • And how exactly would a spoiler warning would have made you miss that image as you scrolled down? You would've still scrolled down and seen the image. — Deckiller 21:28, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Do we really have to answer this for you? Seriously, even IF everyone else has valid points on this topic, THIS PARTICULAR STATEMENT says that you're really not thinking this through. They are saying that the word "Plot" dignifies "Spoiler", and others call for spoiler tags. Do you think that there being ANY spoiler warnings on the page would make someone NOT want to scroll down seeing as how many may NOT have even played the games? Really, this is one of those quotes that I think you might have wished you didn't say. Darkpower 11:12, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I would read and post in the current spoilers thread, but in it people have given away more of the story. That's real smart. "It's the decision and consensus of WP:FF (it's in their Manual of Style) and WP:SE editors to not use Spoiler warnings where spoilers should be expected in an encyclopedia." I don't care who's decision it is/was. I'm saying it was a BAD decision, or at least an INCONSIDERATE decision. And I expect spoilers to be in Wikipedia, regardless of the fact that it's an encyclopedia, because you use them everywhere else where appropriate. "We're not here to protect people from themselves." Fantastic! Then why are spoiler warnings used at all?!! Whatever you're here for, can you at least be consistent? "And how exactly would a spoiler warning would have made you miss that image as you scrolled down? You would've still scrolled down and seen the image." Did I say spoiler warnings would make me miss the image, or was I talking about both things separately? The point: please put spoiler warnings up AND remove the image.24.107.92.149 00:45, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

"We're not here to protect people from themselves." Fantastic! Then why are spoiler warnings used at all?!! Well yes, that's exactly how some of us feel. Noone owns a page, so the only way things like this happen is through consensus -- and the FF project's consensus is to not use the warnings. Same with the opera wikipreject, and there is a lot of fiction, especially "classics" that don't have the warnings. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 01:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
We are consistent- there are no spoiler tags in any FF page. Also, yeah, most of us don't think that there should be spoilers anywhere in WP, but hey. Also, and this is something I wonder everytime this discussion comes up, why the hell would you read the WP article on a game that you haven't played but are going to? it's going to ruin things. Finally, you obviously have never read the back cover of a book in your life if you think it doesn't spoil things. Any back cover is going to ruin the first quarter of the book at least, and I've read some that mentioned plot points that don't happen till well past halfway. Any WP article is going to go all the way to the end, spoiler tag or no, leaving out information is not what an encyclopedia is about. --PresN 03:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
The picture has also been debated. The consensus of the project is to keep the picture, because spoiler or no, it is an iconic image of the game as it is one of the most well-known scenes. And Wikipedia is not censored, so we will not remove information just because someone doesn't like it. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣΣ 19:45, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I think you should use a different picture because something else happens in that scene, anyway (the materia falling from her hair, which is very important in its own right).
Personally, I think the picture in question is being left in (not saying I really care anymore, this whole spoiler shit is retarded, anyway) to prove a point to fanboys or something like that. Plus, PLEASE read my answer to this up above, calling for an article split of all of the story parts of these, since this spoiler thing is stupid and needs to be resolved once and for all.Darkpower 11:12, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wutai

Someone's forgotten to mention the fourth landmass...the western continent! Unless it's not relevant to the section, I dunno... --195.195.249.9 13:56, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Wutai isn't a fourth landmass, it is an archipelago that is part of the western continent. For that matter, Wutai is the name of the village, not the area. Wutai is an entirely optional location that only has any significance if you get an optional character, thus it is trivial in regards to game as a whole. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣΣ 15:52, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
It's also where you have to go to get a summon Materia (Leviathan) in which said optional character is required in order to get the Materia. So it has some respects to gameplay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkpower (talk • contribs) 13:49, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Absolutely, it does. But those are still all optional. It should have no more credence in this article than any other optional sidequest. Does Missing Number and the side quest with the chests in the ShinRa Mansion get a mention in the article? You get a Summon Materia for that one too, right?. Yet overall it is still completely trivial. The same goes for Wutai. In fact, the only place that Wutai really should be mentioned at all is to say that Yuffie comes from there. Not even the ShinRa-Wutai war from 15 years before the game is notable enough to be mentioned in any way other than backstories for Aerith and Yuffie. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣ 17:15, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Youtube Links

Is posting Youtube videos on Wikipedia allowed? Especially videos that show the gameplay of a certain player's video game? — Bluerです。 なにか? 11:39, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

There might be times when a YouTube video could technically be 'allowed'...I'm not positive. FFMaster7's links don't belong here though since they are simply not notable. --OnoremDil 11:45, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Youtube videos are allowed when they are legal. Copyrighted stuff are definitely not allowed. Kariteh 14:13, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Abbreviations

I removed the abbreviations as per Wikipedia:WikiProject Final Fantasy/Manual of style#General Rules because these aren't allowed generally (i.e. RPG, PS1, WIN). Sjones23 19:49, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Combat subsection

References a "flaregamer.com" article as its primary source material, and yet the source article has no form of attribution. It talks about Nomura in third-person, never quoting him or providing any source of its own. For all I can see it is purely speculative. One problem in particular is that the article claims that Limit Breaks were a replacement for Desperation Attacks, however the Limit Breaks have much more in common with the unique special abilities that characters had in FF4 and FF6. In fact, some of the Limit moves are borrowed from the earlier games' specials, such as the Dragoon Jump. If a reliable source cannot be found for these statements, I think the entire portion of the Combat subsection where Nomura is discussed should be removed. Ham Pastrami 16:03, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

The flaregamer article cites its sources and has an editor staff; it is reliable enough for the subject at hand. They are a modified form of the Desperation attacks; similar concepts. The names of attacks have nothing to do with the actual concept. — Deckiller 16:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wait Just One Second

In Final Fantasy 7, Cloud THROWS Sephiroth into the Mako Pit, he does not merely FALL in. While impaled, Cloud pulls the sword down, lifting Sephiroth up and catapults him over the edge! This is ENTIRELY different than in the Anime where the whole thing is skewed. Cloud undeniabley defeats Sephiroth as a footsoldier in the actual game! This is VERY important. Michaelkulov 18:42, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

While that's all well and good, the plot section of this page provides a summary of the game. Great detail about anything might make it too long. Try to add that to the Last Order page if it's important enough. Axem Titanium 20:16, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Isn't it too long already.Darkpower 11:50, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

how is a level 1 cloud throwing a level 50 sephiroth into the mako anything but important?Michaelkulov 21:41, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

i added in the fact that cloud throws him in. it should stand and the article retains its summary status. Michaelkulov 21:50, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Just as a side-note, don't forget that all these are fictions and that Wikipedia follows an out of universe perspective. There is no "truth" regarding what happens in the Mako reactor. This article must report what is shown in FFVII; the Last Order article must report what is shown in Last Order, and the Sephiroth and Cloud articles must report both versions of the events in an objective way. Kariteh 22:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
Also as another side note, their levels are irrelevant. Game mechanics serve to aide the narrative story-telling by providing a believable interactability, what happens in narrative story-telling is not neccessarily dependent upon game mechanics. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣ 22:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
how are their levels irrelevant. id say level 1 compared to level 50 is relevant and in context. it shows just how unbelievable it is that cloud was able to throw Sephiroth in, who is supposed to be unbeatable. and as for the first note on my comment, all I did was state what happened in the game, which is what the article is about. I will check out that WP:Fiction page.
It's irrelevant because Narrative is not constrained by Gameplay Mechanics. Aerith's death, for example, why can you not use a Life spell or a Phoenix Down to bring her back to life? Because she died in the Narrative storytelling, and it does not neccessarily follow game mechanics which otherwise would allow us to ressurect her. Their levels are irrelevant for the same reason. What is relevant is that Sephiroth was SOLDIER 1st Class (and the best at that) and Cloud was merely a member of ShinRa GUARD. This keeps the information with as little gameguide as possible. --—ΔαίδαλοςΣ 18:41, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes I see what you are saying now. Thanks for the correction :)Michaelkulov 23:05, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] To all those who wished to add a spoiler tag

Please go see WP:SPOILER and read what does not need a spoiler tag, fictional articles with the plot or story section is KNOWN to contain spoilers and does not need a spoiler tag. So stop adding those in for the sake of following the guidelines. MythSearchertalk 00:52, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merger of Chocobo Stallion into FFVII article

The article is a one sentence mention, since the whole game is just the putting of the chocobo racing element from this game onto its own disk. Judgesurreal777 05:40, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Agree. I don't even know such article exist! — Bluerで す。 06:31, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Just a question. Do you really know if the game is a direct port of the FFVII Chocobo racing minigame, or do you say this only because that's what's written in the article? Kariteh 20:40, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
http://www.square-haven.com/games/ps/cs/#links Here is a link and on further inspection, I am not so sure....could we get some other people to help look into this? Judgesurreal777 00:12, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Talked about it on FF wikiproject, evidence points to a unique game. Removing merger. Judgesurreal777 03:42, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Massacre? Rediculous!

I doubt Final Fantasy ACTUALLY cause the 1999 massacre. Who else agrees? And, before this is erased, be sure to actually answer this, someone! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.111.228.106 (talk)

I agree. It is ridiculous. What's your point? The article does not say that the game caused the massacre. The article says that families making that claim filed a lawsuit, which is verified by the reference provided. --OnoremDil 01:31, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] error in paragraph 3?

It says in the mid 2000s. Would that not be around 2500? I know what you mean but you may want to rewrite it.

[edit] Spoiler warning in "Other" section

I don't feel like warring over it, so I'll ask here. Has WP:FF decided to use them? If not, do the recent changes at WP:SPOILER make a difference here now? --OnoremDil 14:30, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

WP:SPOILER clearly states that spoiler warnings may be used when "the editors proposing them have compelling arguments for their insertion." It does not say "Any spoilers outside of a (plot/synopsis/characters) section need a spoiler warning," and I don't see that an event, however heartbreakingly spoilerish to some people, in a game that's been incredibly popular for 10 years is reason enough for a spoiler warning. If anyone has a better reasoning than has been come up with previously, maybe it should be considered, but I don't recall there being a spoiler warning in the section before: why now? Nique talk 14:53, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
I'd say that if the section only mentioned Aerith's death, it does not need a spoiler warning, however, I highly doubt that mentioning what is happening afterwards, like travelling in the life stream part is not a spoiler. I hate spoiler warnings, but I think that one follows the WP:spoiler guidelines pretty well. It is well known that she died, that is a given, but she died but still took part in the story and did something? That is less well known, and talks too much. Anyway, I am not a strong defender of using a spoiler tag, and have no wish to be on an edit war or arguement regarding this, if anyone strongly opposes it, I do not care about it being there or not, just trying to follow the guidelines and stating my point of view here. MythSearchertalk 15:00, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
And again, I have to ask why now? Why now, when there was no talk of or attempt to put a spoiler warning there at any point I can find in the history a few pages back. This article has had no spoiler warnings, and it has not suffered because of this. Yes, there have been occasional anons or new accounts ranting on about spoilers and how knowing about Aeris's death ruins the game (which it doesn't, it's on the first disc, of all places), but that hasn't prompted the lasting addition of a spoiler warning war before. So, why now? WP:SPOILER doesn't require it, and even says it shouldn't be there unless there's a compelling case for it, so I don't see what this fuss is all about. Nique talk 15:32, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
I have the same opinion as MythSearcher, except I think that this precisely means a Spoiler warning is needed. The "Why not" argument is totally irrelevant; there is no dead line. One could find examples of articles in which something that had to be done has still not been done for ages. The Final Fantasy (series) article has been sucking since ages for instance. One could also find articles in which a typo, a mistake, or an error has not been fixed until months for instance, and that doesn't mean that the typo, the mistake, or the error was not important or wasn't one at all. This "Other" section needs a Spoiler warning regardless of how much time it had survived without one, and your only counter-argument to this seems to be an irrelevant "I don't like it". Kariteh 16:21, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
There is just 2 things I have to point out here: Nique1287, as much as you said you did not violate the 3RR rule on my talk page, you just did when you reverted Kariteh's edit. Second, it seems to be very funny that the discussion stoped right after the edit war, which Nique got what he wants(no spoiler tag). I don't know if this is why he did not reply to the discussion, or simply because he went offline, but this is not making him look good nor improving things. MythSearchertalk 17:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
P.S. Aerith's death is not why the spoiler warning is there, it is more of the lifestream thing that is not revealed until the very last disc. At least that is why I reverted the edit. MythSearchertalk 17:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
No, I did not. More than three reverts. Also, I'm not taking offence, but I'm not a he, just for reference. As for the revert war stopping, I just restored it to where it was before this nonsense because the discussion should come first to justify the tags per WP:SPOILER. You two and anyone else are free to revert it back to with the tags, and I wouldn't do anything not only because of WP:3RR, but because the discussion should come before action at this point. As for going offline or making myself look bad, I have a life, and thus I have things to do other than sit on Wiki all day. I check back when I have time and when I feel like it. Is that a crime?
There may not be a deadline, but I still don't see why it needs a spoiler tag. The game's ages old, the number of people for whom it would ACTUALLY be spoiled is so minimal by this time, even considering newer/younger gamers, that I don't see the justification. 10 years is a long time to be caring about spoilers on a videogame this popular. And "the lifestream thing"? I don't think I understand what you mean. I never said this was about Aeris's death, I said that there were anons and new users who raved about how that was spoiled for them even though it's on the first disc. However, I don't see how "It follows Aeris' journey in the Lifestream following her death at the hands of Sephiroth, taking place concurrently with the second half of Final Fantasy VII" is a spoiler for anything but Aeris's death and/or the novella itself. Nique talk 17:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
No, I only said that you made yourself look bad, which is not a good thing to do. I would have at least write down something here before leaving, after the article was modified to suit my interest. Also, I said that her death is not the spoiler, every other person know about this, but is the story about she died and did more afterwards a well known plot? I doubt it is. Like I've said, I personally hated spoiler tags, and I fighted as much as I can to avoid it being used when the anons keep adding them in, but I think that certifies as a spoiler since usually people die in stories, and that's it, they seldom have anything to do with the story again(unless it is the type of story where people keep coming back to life and it became the norm in the story) So saying she did something after she died sounds pretty like what people claim spoilers are to me. It suggests something happened out of the norm. Maybe the paragraph itself can be modified to avoid the spoiler warning, like "It follows Aeris' journey in the Lifestream, taking place concurrently with the second half of Final Fantasy VII" would be perfectly fine. It shows nothing about the story, and does not specify it happened after her death,(at least to people who do not know the story.) but will be perfectly meaningful to people who played the game. And I don't see a violation in the guidelines in the WP:spoiler with this edit, and the sentence itself loses no information. MythSearchertalk 17:54, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
(Random unindent) I did write something down before leaving. When I left, there were no other replies. Am I supposed to give a detailed, minute-by-minute account of where I am when I'm part of a discussion? As for the spoiler, I don't see how "...following her death at the hands of Sephiroth" is any more spoilerriffic, really, than just saying "her journey in the Lifestream". The fact that she dies doesn't change, it's still obvious because, except for Cloud and Tifa, only dead people have gone to the Lifestream, and the death is what people seem to complain about most spoiler-wise, as far as I've seen, because she's so beloved a character in the beginning. However, the "at the hands of Sephiroth" is kind of repetitive considering the HUGE WALL OF TEXT that is the plot section, so it should probably go, but even so, saying "her journey in the Lifestream following her death" is no worse than "her journey in the Lifestream" for spoilers, unless you're going to bring out the "but if people don't know what the Lifestream is, they don't have to know she dies!" argument, in which case I have to, again, bring up the age of the game: if you don't know she dies yet, play the game first, it's cheap enough by now that it won't break the bank, and you can get emulators to play it on almost any computer, even, without a Playstation, with just a Google search. Wikipedia isn't here to coddle new users; that's why WP:SPOILER was written the way it is. Nique talk 23:02, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
My point is: "if people don't know what the Lifestream is", they don't know "only dead people have gone to the Lifestream" and "can do something there". I have played the game, so I know, but obvious enough that people who did not play the game, can probably only get their hands on the fact that "Aerith died in the middle of the game" but not "What a lifestream is" The spoiler is telling what a lifestream is to non-players, not she died. MythSearchertalk 05:26, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I find putting a spoiler warning on for what the Lifestream is to be somewhat ridiculous. Again, the number of non-players who will care afterward about being spoiled at this point is minimal. It's not as though FFVII is some underground yet incredible game, it's been in the public eye for a decade. It's time to give the spoiler warnings a rest on it. Nique talk 13:48, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Like I said, I don't think this is a strong case, but I see nothing wrong with modifying the sentence to avoid and minimize the anon spoiler haters poping up and messing around. Since people who played the game will know what a lifestream is, mentioning it happened after she died is just redundent, especially the sentence said it is concurrent with the second half of the story in the game. MythSearchertalk 14:36, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
  • How about you fellows work on getting articles to GA/FA status instead? It's much more productive, and may actualy take less time. :-) — Deckiller 15:43, 1 June 2007 (UTC)