Talk:Fate/stay night

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article Fate/stay night was one of the Language and literature good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
January 4, 2007 Good article nominee Listed
November 17, 2008 Good article reassessment Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Video games (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
This article is supported by the Visual novels task force.
 
WikiProject Anime and manga (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
Wikipe-tan head.png This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime and manga related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-class on the assessment scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by the Visual novel task force.
WikiProject Hentai (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hentai, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hentai on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject King Arthur (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject King Arthur, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of King Arthur, the Arthurian era and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Important: Consensus Needed[edit]

I’ve -finally- decided to get to work on (a) terminology page(s) for TYPE-MOON-related concepts, elements, artefacts and all other sort of stuff that is far too extensive to stick anywhere else. However, before opening that can of radioactive flesh-eating worms, we seriously need to agree on what terminology to use for all the translated stuff once and for all.

My idea is to create several pages for Spell-related stuff, artefact/weapon-related, organizations/groups, Creature-related and a Concept page for everything else. Feel free to accuse me of ripping off Arai on that, I won’t fight it, but it really does seem like the most logical organization. This is all far in the future anyway, the only thing I’ll be doing anytime soon is the spell-related page, which coincidentally is the one that requires standardization the most. Of course, if there is any problem at all with that idea, feel free to say so.

Have in mind that there are no official translations for any of this stuff, so choosing the most suitable terminology is our responsibility. Whatever we choose is not meant to become standard in all of the TYPE-MOON fan community, and in reverse, what is common in the community does not necessarily HAVE to decide what we choose. Especially since there isn’t one clearly predominant usage, which is exactly the problem to begin with.

To keep things in only one place and not make everything cluttered, I fleshed out the whole issue in my discussion page. Once a decision is reached (and this is my wishful thinking begging for more than two people to actually pay attention to this), we could paste the whole thing into the newly created page for future reference.

Anyway, go here and tell me what you think. Ephyon 23:05, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Removing copyright infringement links[edit]

Okay then, I'll have to provide you the actual text from Wikipedia:External links#Restrictions on linking where it clearly states: Knowingly directing others to a site that violates copyright may be considered contributory infringement. If you know that an external Web site is carrying a work in violation of the creator's copyright, do not link to that copy of the work. This article currently has a reference link to both Mirror-Moon and insani, and per this reason should be removed. If you want a reference, find somewhere that does not distribute these fan translations along with the information. Also, see the discussions at Wikipedia talk:External links#Linking to illegal content and Wikipedia talk:Citing sources#References that link to illegal content.-- 22:32, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

insani's link is probably fine to keep around, since the trial is distributed freely online anyway. I suppose it doesn't really matter, though - people shouldn't be looking on WP for this kind of stuff anyhow. Moogy (talk) 01:53, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Personally, I don't care about the legality of the links, but as far as references, I'm not sure if they would be considered reliable sources. -- Ned Scott 02:34, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
WP:EL is not applicable to reference links. (No WP:RS problems exist here either, as the information being cited is about themselves.) More importantly though, since I realize that's really a WP:LAWYERish argument, they do not provide anything illegal to begin with. Mirror-Moon is one of the "BREAK THE SUPPORT DISK!"-type groups, and their translations are unusable without a copy of the game. --tjstrf talk 03:04, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, since they're reliable, being used as a reference, and seem to only be an a grey-area for copyright law, I've added the refs back in. -- Ned Scott 03:52, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
A WEB reference provides a link to another website. How is it any different than just listing the website? On top of that, should it really be notable that an unofficial group of fans translated the game? What I mean is, why should the section on translation be in the article in the first place? -- 03:58, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Yes, it is, because any form of translation for a visual novel at all is notable. --tjstrf talk 04:48, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I do not agree with you. Why should Wikipedia care if a group of fans translated a game they do not even hold the license to? See Wikipedia talk:Citing sources#References that link to illegal content.-- 04:51, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Because it's a significant, rare, and notable event in the history of the visual novel. --tjstrf talk 05:09, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
How is it significant and notable? It just seems like you're stating your opinion.-- 05:21, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
I answered that question already, repeating my answer won't help. --tjstrf talk 05:25, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Especially as your answer is no way way accurate or in line with Wikipedia policy... so if you can't be bothered to come up with some other reason, you've admitted your reason is totally bogus. DreamGuy 06:34, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
What? You want me to find a line of policy someplace stating the (utterly self-evident) fact that rare events surrounding a subject are worth mentioning in the articles about them? --tjstrf talk 06:58, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, sure, because it sounds like sheer nonsense to me, and if you want to claim that it's obvious than certainly someone must have said so in Wikipedia policies and guidelines somewhere. But, to the contrary, this sort of thing is labeled as WP:TRIVIA -- which is encouraged to be removed, not kept. Not to mention you haven't shown that this is particularly rare either. All you;'ve done is say straight out that you are right and your right because you say you are right, which is not how things work. Looks like your "self-evident" is nothing more than wishful thinking. Rareness is not notability, not in the slightest. DreamGuy 09:55, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
If you want evidence that translation of visual novels is rare, I suppose you could consult the Visual novel article itself, which mentions the fact. Or you could check the list I found here, which lists there as being a "grand" total of 31 fansubbed visual novels. Your claim that it is trivia is nonsense, as it is not an "insignificant trifle of little importance", but rather an attributable fact which violates no content policy, and is significant to the article it is being placed on. This is true if for no other reason than that it is the only English release the game has received.
I'm not arguing Mirror Moon deserves an article here, I'm arguing that the existence of an English release for a visual novel is a noteworthy fact about that visual novel. --tjstrf talk 10:31, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Translations and other derivatives of copyrighted works distributed in any way without the permission of the copyright owner are illegal whether you need to own a copy of the game or not. Illegality trumps references, and the thing is trivial and nonencyclopedic anyway. DreamGuy 06:33, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Well then, I guess it's a good thing we are not doing anything illegal. Covering the topic of something illegal is not illegal. If we say "blah blah did this" we are stating a fact, not breaking the law. Don't believe me? Then look at AACS encryption key controversy, which, in the freaking article itself, we provide the encryption key to disabling copyright software, which is very illegal to do.
Now, if you want to argue that the information is trivial, ok, but then remove the whole section about the fan translations. -- Ned Scott 09:38, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
While *covering* something illegal isn't illegal, *linking* to it most certainly is, because we are contributing to the distribution of copyright violating material. The encryption key article should not be used to justify other actions, as the the Wikipedia Board was originally totally against including it but bowed to popular consent of very active and vocal editors as a political point even if under the risk of being sued. I'm sure the board doesn't want to take that same risk all over the place. It's an anomaly. Our policies are very clear on this. DreamGuy 09:51, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Considering it's not even completely clear if it's illegal (could easily be considered fair use, especially considering it requires the player to buy the game legally), no, our policies are not clear on this issue. -- Ned Scott 10:25, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Side note: Most of these people playing these games do not buy the game legally. So, pretty much, the game translation encourages the distribution of copyrighted material even more.-- 11:26, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
I believe you mean "derivative work". --tjstrf talk 10:31, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
And derivative works are illegal without explicit permission of the owner. DreamGuy 11:10, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Absolutely no way is it fair use. That's not just some term you can throw around to mean "I get to violate the law because I want to," there has to be a very clear rational defense, and there isn't one. And, yes, out policies are clear. Whether you choose to accept that or not isn't my concern. Take it up with the Wikimedia lawyers, they set the policy. DreamGuy 11:09, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Alright, do not put me in the same category as all the morons who actually do throw around the term "fair use" like that.
To quote the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. § 107:
"Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
It is not unreasonable to think that such a use could be fair use. And of course, we are talking about fair use for the players and the said websites, which differs from our stricter restrictions in regards to content we host ourselves.
My point was that this was not a black and white issue, and policy does not "clearly" back you up in this case. It is questionable, and it is likely that many people are using these fan translations in a non-legal way, but that's dependent on how players end up using the content, not the content itself. And while there is a level of speculation in my thinking, the same can be said for you. Unless you'd like to actually back yourself up on what you say. -- Ned Scott 21:47, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Err, sorry about that, I just got a bit worked up with the accusation that I was "one of those people". I don't enough care about this situation, and I'm not going to try to start an argument for something I am suggesting in a theoretical sense. It's not a black and white situation, policy is not clear on this, but whatever, it's not worth a debate. -- Ned Scott 22:13, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Anyone who seriously suggests that a fan translation of this scope is non-notable trivia doesn't know what they're talking about. Mirror Moon are probably notable enough to deserve their own article (first fan group to translate a longform visual novel). -- grm_wnr Esc 01:51, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Just so you know, Mirror Moon had an article a year ago but it was deleted; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mirror Moon. The group is not notable enough for its own article, thus anything they produce is non-notable material.-- 01:53, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
They hadn't released their Tsukihime patch back then, you know. -- grm_wnr Esc 14:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't want to get into this discussion, but that is a flawed argument. A non-notable group could definitely produce notable material. What if a group like Mirror Moon came up with a medicine that cures cancer if taken daily for a week? Hypothetical, but the point is there. Voretus 14:45, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I'd say that would make the group notable. Anyway, the reason why I'm not going out and restoring the article about them is that there's not much verifiable stuff to say (which is mostly due to the fact that no respectable sources even care about them). But notability? Come on. In fact, I'd say this article does not deserve its GA status as long as the game translation isn't mentioned. -- grm_wnr Esc 15:43, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Basically what I meant is that a group is notable if they produce notable material and non-notable if they produce non-notable material. Fan translations are not only non-nonable, they're technically illegal since they do not own the rights to make and distribute a translation of any of Type-Moon's games. And notability, I'll reassert, is not an opinion. You said yourself that "no respectable sorces even care about them", so what argument could you possibly assert to include their translation patch in this article?-- 23:20, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
We're not linking to them, so what are you even arguing about here? --tjstrf talk 23:29, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
"Fan translations are not notable?" How is that not an opinion? It must be, since I have a different one. What you mean is verifiability. And I can easily verify that said patch exists, since the file is readily available. So we can't directly link to it because it would be against a certain interpretation of policy, but that does not make it not exist. It is an important facet of the topic and must be covered if this article is to be called comprehensive. -- grm_wnr Esc 23:42, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Okay, point made, but I'll just point one more thing out. If a section on the translation was added back in, wouldn't that then intice future editors to add in the link to Mirror Moon's translation site? So, to deter this from happening, the translation section was removed, and I believe it should stay that way.-- 01:07, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I only removed it because there wasn't much to say about it. Once we have more information on it, then it will deserve its own paragraph/section. That something might "intice someone" to do something is not a reason against it. We're on a Wiki where we openly invite people to change our content (thus inticing vandalism). --tjstrf talk 01:20, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
We may be openly initicing vandalism since anyone can edit Wiki, but if we can devise a way to lessen vandalism, edit wars, and general disregard for policy, then shouldn't we? You say that there wasn't much to say about the translation, and I agree on that point; what more could be said for it to warrent inclusion?-- 02:12, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

I've opened a discussion on Wikipedia talk:Copyrights. To put it briefly, my position is that we should refrain from linking to blatant copyright violations, but that pursuing the copyright status of questionable or marginal off-site links - which we aren't even responsible for the content of - is a waste of Wikipedians' time and effort that could better be spent elsewhere. We are not responsible for policing the entire Web, or even endorsing the content of every single external link in every article on Wikipedia. *** Crotalus *** 23:17, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

By putting links there we are endorsing them, and your attempts to rewrite the copyright policy to impose your contempt for the law have been reverted. Please do not try to recruit people from this talk page, especially when you know that they lack any real knowledge of copyright law and are only pissed off at their link to pirated material was taken down. This is a bad faith attempt to try to overturn policy by sheer mob tactics, and it won't work. DreamGuy 05:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
To the contrary, DreamGuy, we're not "pissed because 'our' link got taken down", nor was I pissed at all until right now when you started flinging about nonsensical accusations of bad faith. May I humbly suggest you tone down the self righteousness 5 or 6 notches and keep a civil tongue in your head? --tjstrf talk 05:59, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
It's not nonsensical. Crotalus above tried to modify the Wikipedia:Copyright page to reflect his own views and suggest that everyone who disagreed with him is just wasting their time, and he is here clearly trying to encourage people to go over to the other page and support him even though he was reverted by countless numbers of people, with more waiting in the wings to revert should he or anyone try to put that nonsense back. If you do go over there to try to cause trouble, then that's a credit to you. The fact that he is trying to recruit people to defend his anti-policy actions doesn't mean any of you are stupid enough to fall for it, but I thought I should point out that his actions are going to get him in trouble, and so that anyone who might be foolish enough to try to go change the policy to encourage copyright violations can get a heads up that he's not getting anywhere with it. Might I suggest you not call things nonsensical unless you know what you are talking about. Oh, but then from the debate above I see that it never stopped you before. So, hey, if you do feel brash enough to go try to change policy, don't say I didn't warn you, as the people here might be open to copyright violations, but obviously on the copyright page itself people who care about it are there at all times.DreamGuy 11:31, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't intend to discuss this issue with you, DreamGuy, until and unless you are willing to comport yourself with the requirements of WP:CIVIL, WP:NPA, and WP:AGF. This is not the first time you have violated these policies, and I don't intend to get into an argument with someone whose discussion style consists of flinging around insults. *** Crotalus *** 20:21, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

More Pages[edit]

Terek here, sorry to be brief. I think we should include a section about the locations in Fuyuki City, as well as establish pages for stuff common to all Nasu themes (like, say, "prana") so we can avoid descriptions within the FSN article. I'll devote some time to Arthur/Heracles research in the future to improve the backgrounds of the articles. Cheers, good luck on finals and the lot. 169.237.235.71 21:03, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Additionally, expand on the "Reception" box by noting the following: the impact of FSN on the doujin world, such as the creaton of Fatal/Fake and Battle Moon Wars, the participation of some characters in SaiMoe 2006 and FrenchBread's Notorious Brand. Terek 08:16, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Status Charts[edit]

User:69.234.104.212 has rather hastily gone ahead and wiped out every Servant status chart in every article so far, I assume under the logic of… actually, I’m not too sure since he/she/it only linked to a pair of policy articles without discussing it. I assume this person believes this information is not relevant enough, or doesn’t mean anything, or something.

That’s not quite right. While http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NOT#INFO does mention statistics as being not ideal, it clearly states that the articles should contain enough information to make sense of them, because let’s face it, there’s a whole lot of stuff that can’ be done any more efficiently than pasting a good data list like that. Simply saying Berserker is way strong and fast doesn’t quite drive the point home as well as showing a comparison of HOW stronger and faster he is than others.

There IS a problem though: While the status boxes ARE relevant, someone who doesn’t know anything beforehand won’t understand much. AGI isn’t raw speed, bur overall movement capacity, STR is power + weapon, etc

Why Am I bringing this up instead of fixing it myself? Because I haven’t got time to do it all right now and someone else might take it up. In short, we need a way to explain what each statistic… a good place to put it would be something like an overall description of what a Servant is, which I believe is largely overdue. --Ephyon 15:28, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I propose a section somewhere, likely a data page or something, that explains the significance of terms, concepets, and stats common to the TYPE-MOON universe so there won't be confusion when referring to the stats. It also makes for a convenient page to link to from the table since there's not enough info on certain skills like Archer's Eye of the Mind to warrant it a whole section, which is why I previously omitted putting them in there. One could describe Eye of the Mind in two words - battle experience. Everything else would be fluff and Wikipedia aims to minimize the fluff as much as possible. Sadly, I do not have much time to make edits either, but perhaps we can rally some interest in a data page when Kara no Kyoukai comes rolling around. Terek 07:42, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Romanji and Styling[edit]

This is aimed at anyone with some experience with the style guides regarding inclusion of Japanese text. Enenth added the Japanese forms for all the NPs in the Servant's pages, but I was wondering if it would be acceptable to change from this format:

  • Invisible Air (インビジブル・エア Inbijiburu Ea?): Barrier of the Wind King (風王結界 Kaze-ō kekkai?)

to this:

  • Invisible Air: Barrier of the Wind King (インビジブル・エア: 風王結界 Inbijiburu Ea: Kaze-ō kekkai?)

since I think the second looks a bit easier to read. I'm particularly ignorant on Wikipedia's policies regarding this type of formatting, and that ":" stuck between the two Japanese characters might not be acceptable for all I know. --Ephyon 16:10, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I would agree with the second way of stylizing the text since it organizes the English, kanji/kana, and romanji better.-- 20:45, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
I agree too. I actually thought about doing it myself, but decided not to (mostly to avoid possible confusion). Since in the game the english names (i.e. インビジブル・エア, INBIJIBURU EA) are written in furigana above the kanji (風王結界, Kaze-ō kekkai), I believe the correct format would be:
Barrier of the Wind King (Invisible Air) (風王結界 (インビジブル・エア) Kaze-ō kekkai (INBIJIBURU EA)?)
However, the kanji names are never used in the anime (Saber screams "Excalibur!", not "Sword of the Promised Victory!"), so maybe this would be better:
Invisible Air (Barrier of the Wind King) (インビジブル・エア (風王結界) INBIJIBURU EA (Kaze-ō kekkai)?)
Any thoughts? --Enenth 15:55, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Second option would be best. Any verbal reference to any of the NPs go by what's written in furigana, such as both the anime and Realta Nua’s voiced scenes, and even more significantly, those are the real names of the mythological artifacts (Those that aren't made up by Nasu at least), so it makes a whole lot more sense to set the hierarchy between the names as Name (Furigana) - Subtitle (Kanji).

Though I’d like to get rid of the parenthesis somehow. They are just ugly. --Ephyon 23:17, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

What about this: Invisible Air: Barrier of the Wind King (インビジブル・エア: 風王結界, INBIJIBURU EA: Kaze-ō kekkai?) --88wolfmaster 23:27, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

FLC[edit]

I've cleaned up List of Fate/stay night episodes and nominated it at WP:FLC here. Feel free to express your opinions. Thanks. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 06:14, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Problems with this article[edit]

It's not as bad as the character articles, but the plot summary is somewhat over-detailed and has a real in-universe problem.

Also, in my mind, the character sections are largely unneeded - they could be direct links, with possibly a sentence-long description, since they are the same text as the character pages. However, it is important that they mention who the Servant is - Wikipedia isn't supposed to be about preserving spoilers or keeping secrets.

There's a lot of problems with the character articles themselves, but I've left a note about that on the WP:Video Game discussion page, since that was the most applicable project.KrytenKoro 15:10, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Manga[edit]

We are going to have to update the manga list considering that its past December and we dont know if more volumes are out, and if possible does anyone know where you can read them considering most of the common manga reading sites like onemanga and mangafox dont update Fate anymore Estarrol (talk) 23:31, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Terminology[edit]

Seems like this gets Sorcery and Magic, Sorcerer and Magus mixed up a good bit (TYPE-MOON terminology). Too lazy to fix, someone else do it. Also, shouldn't we use the terminology from the mirror-moon translation, since this is the English page, and that is how most people will have read it (Hero of Justice would be Superhero, etc)

70.58.58.223 (talk) 01:28, 27 May 2008 (UTC)Pie

Arthurian?[edit]

I think this game definitely belongs in the category Category:Arthurian games. It is certainly Arthurian in the sense that it involves elements of the Arthurian legend; they are featured in a major way as far as I can tell. The Holy Grail, an intrinsically Arthurian element, seems to be a major plot point (and it did not exist Arthur, though that is a fairly common mistake to make!) Additionally, the character Sabre is a version of King Arthur, and other Arthurianisms appear as well (Mordred, Avalon, Morgan, etc). I don't know much else about this game, but rarely does a week go by that a fan doesn't try to add a mention of it to some Arthurian article or other. The category does not imply the game revolves around Arthur, or else any number of indisputably Arthurian works would be excluded from all such categories, but it certainly involves the legend prominently, and therefore belongs in the category.--Cúchullain t/c 02:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

The Grail may be tied into Arthurian mythology, but even it's own article states that it began either in Celtic mythology, 12th Century Christian churches, or to promote Communion. Saying that it's a mistake to say it existed before Arthurian legends seems a bit far-fetched. Still, the game only uses pieces from various other sources, and I can't help but notice you're not asking for a Greek Mythology category, or a Christian Religion category. The categories the game has promote the major themes, of which Arthurian works are only a subset. One may as well add things like Time Travel due to Archer. Nezu Chiza (talk) 04:58, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
The Grail did not exist before the Arthurian legend, it originated in a 12th century Arthurian romance, and was developed in later Arthurian works, though it potentially evolved from earlier concepts (Celtic or not). Our article on it may need some work if it doesn't convey that. At any rate I didn't mean to pass judgement on that point. My point is, that as the Grail is intrinsically an element of the Arthurian legend, and as it seems to be a major plot point in this game, that qualifies the game as "Arthurian"; there are a number of other Arthurian elements as well. Categories do not promote only the major themes, they are intended to help readers find related information, and I'd argue the game clearly relates to the Arthurian legend in a major way. I would imagine it could also be placed in a category for Category:Games with featuring elements of Greek mythology if one existed, though I know less about that.--Cúchullain t/c 06:54, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

GA Reassessment[edit]

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Fate/stay night/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

I am listing this article for GAR as it does not meet the bulk of the GA criteria. The prose is not well-written and the article is in need of copyediting and clean up. The tables should be prose, and really the anime themes should be covered in the episode list, with the music section focusing more on soundtracks released rather than treating the music as separate from their media. Together, these fails criteria 1. Most of the article is unsourced, including most of the media and reception sections, and the character section. Most of the references are lacking basic details, such as publisher, and #8 is claiming a magazine reference while linking to an add for that issue instead of actually providing the magazine details and page numbers. This fails GA criteria 2. There is an excessive amount of plot information in the article, particularly the overly long character section when there is a separate list and individual character articles. The plot section is also overly detailed, and the stand out quotes violate the MoS. There is no production detail at all, and the reception section consists of only one actual source statement. Together, these fail criteria 3 (3b and 3a, respectively). The article also has an excessive amount of non-free images. Consensus is clear that individual character images in lists, either standalone or within an article, are inappropriate and considered to be decorative rather than being illustrations supported by critical discussion/analysis. Additionally, several of those character images have invalid or missing FURs. Also, the infobox image does little to identify the game, as its only a stylization of the title. An image of the cover would be more appropriate.

I have left some relevant tags on the article related to some of these issues, and I have left notifications with the relevant projects and primary contributers that the article is under a GAR. If there is no sign of the article being corrected so that it can meet these criteria again, it will be delisted as a GA on November 17, 2008. Additional time will be allowed if there is an active effort seen to correct the article. For good examples of GA level visual article novels, I strongly encourage viewing Air (visual novel) and Clannad (visual novel).

As a final note, this article's name seems to violate Wikipedia naming conventions with the use of a /. Please recheck the naming guidelines to be sure this article's name is appropriate.-- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 20:57, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Without speaking for any of the other issues, as I've never touched the article in my life, I can say that if the title of the article violates wikicoding guidelines we have a problem, as that's the correct title -- the slash definitely is in the title of the game, anime, and manga. How do we handle the coding for titles such as .hack//Sign? (Where's the guideline for the use of slashes in titles? I must be blind today, as I can't find it.) —Quasirandom (talk) 22:31, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Good question. The guidelines say "Do not use an article name that suggests a hierarchy of articles" which precludes the use of forward slashes, but it doesn't say what to do if that is actually part of the proper article name. Now, interestingly enough, the .hack's are listed at Wikipedia:Articles with slashes in title as articles that can't be "fixed" with renaming, so it may be that for now, nothing can be done. But certainly something to look at, as it messes up all the talk page breadcrumb links and stuff. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 22:58, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
The official title is always written "Fate/stay night" so it's really not fair if the .hack articles (and the ton of others in that 'articles with slashes' list) are kept that way, and this article is changed. As for the GAR, I'm not surprised in the least. FSN was one of the earliest VN GAs, back when it was still experimental, and no one's really updated it since then. In fact, after FSN got GA, it motivated me to make the Key VNs all GA. I personally believe if someone stood up, they could stave off the GAR (as I recently did with Strawberry Panic!), but I don't have the time nor the interest to keep FSN a GA at this time. If it loses its GA status, I believe I'll attempt to get it back to GA in the future, possibly with User:Cloud668, if someone doesn't do it first.-- 01:04, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
As per the above notes, this article has been delisted as a GA article as the issues have not been addressed. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 05:59, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Are there any interests right now in working on this article to bring its quality back up? I believe the most fatal weakness in this article is lack of good sources of citations. Formatting could use some work, as well. Aqua3993 (talk) 00:47, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
I tried to do some formatting based on the kanon/clannad/air articles and add reference where I could but there are still parts at need some work. The internet radio shows Fate/Stay Tune and Unlimited Radio Works still needs to be added, as well as the several manga anthologies and art books out there. The music probably would do with a rewrite as well. I did what I could for the Setting and themes and Development but someone who knows japanese could write something better based off all the art books/character material/interviews. Radiotsixty (talk) 15:16, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
Although I am able to read some Japanese, I do not have any art books/character material/interviews, so can't help much on that aspect. As for Fate/stay tune, the Japanese Wikipedia already has a page on it, but there are no citations. Also, somehow, I can't visit the radio drama website http://www.animate.tv/radio/details.php?id=furw The website only shows "data error" on my firefox. The "Reception" section that needs a lot of work. I am currently looking for good sources on that subtopic. Aqua3993 (talk) 16:22, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the old "FATE"[edit]

I recently get hold of an official release of "Character Material" in Chinese, and found some information regarding the production of Fate and how it's link to the Type-Moon's production history etc. Fans who really dig into those information probably know about what I mean by old "Fate" here. (The one with Saber being male and Shiro being female etc.)
My question here is, are those info allow on this page? It don't really fit in any other pages link to Fate/stay night, and I can see that those info is in both the Chinese and Japanese wiki page due to having official information backing. I know that some film articles on wiki including production history and stuff, so I think it's allow here too.

Also, as many characters loss their articles, are there any attempt to bring those information back into the character list? I mean, that's a lot of information regarding legend and history that is quite important. Japanese wiki just clump them all into one big pages, should it be done here too? Or otherwise? Hope people care to reply and teach me about how those guide line here work..... Marlon unknown (talk) 01:53, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

English Translation[edit]

I think at this point it should be at least mentioned. With bascially every other translated visual novel the translation is linked in the article(examples, Saya no Uta and Wanko to Kurasou), even with ones that aren't nearly as strict with player owning the original game. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.157.121.189 (talk) 10:10, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Regarding Fate/Zero's Release Date[edit]

As mentioned in Talk:Fate/zero, the official website has the date of release as December 29, 2006. A claim that it was released in Comiket prior to official release date is also dubious, since Comiket 2006 started on December 29, 2006. If anyone can prove the December 12, 2006 release date, then cite the source and edit the light novel section accordingly. (and maybe edit Fate/zero as well) Aqua3993 (talk) 22:12, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Fate/Prototype[edit]

Should i make as separate article for Fate/Prototype ova? The reason i want to do this is because the cast and VAs of Fate/Prototype are different from Fate/stay night. Your thoughts?--FonFon Alseif (talk) 04:34, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't think Fate/Prototype should get its own article. It may potentially pass WP:NOTE, but since Prototype is only around 15 minutes long and pretty much share the same development history as Fate/stay night, at least initially, it probably doesn't diverge from Fate/stay night enough to warrant one. The differences can probably be noted in a single paragraph under the anime section. -- クラウド668 05:39, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Okay then. What about the cast of Fate/Prototype? Their characters are very different from their Fate/stay night counterparts including their voice actors. So where should i put them?--FonFon Alseif (talk) 11:58, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Can't you create a section in List of Fate/stay night characters?-- 20:03, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
I agree with the previous editor, and make sure whoever does it creates an entirely separate section called 'Fate/Prototype characters' or something. Don't mix them up since they share the same names and there is cause for confusion. Overmage (talk) 05:39, 17 April 2012 (UTC)