Talk:Suikoden

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Suikoden article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find video game sources: "Suikoden" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk

Archives: 1

Video games Mid‑importance

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.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Atomas (1 participant)
PLAY: The Games Festival (2 participants)
FloodSim (1 participant)
Kunimitsu and Kunimitsu II (1 participant)
Blast Monkeys (2 participants)
Godzilla 2: War of the Monsters (6 participants)
Free Internet Chess Server (9 participants)
Gilman Louie (3 participants; relisted)
Yoshimitsu (5 participants; relisted)
Emote (3 participants; relisted)
Preston Arsement (6 participants; relisted)
Jackpot World (3 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Article name change

Suikoden should redirect to the first game, while Suikoden (series) should redirect to the series. Some quick research reveals that Breath of Fire and Dragon Warrior follow this convention, but Final Fantasy does not. What do you think? Schmloof (talk) 17:43, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was to merge 27 True Runes into Suikoden (series) per consensus. MuZemike (talk) 18:18, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that 27 True Runes be merged into Suikoden. The former lacks sufficient notability on its own, and it is better, as an alternative to deletion, that it be merged and redirected here. Please discuss below and indicate whether you support or oppose the merger. If no discussion occurs within five days on the sign date, then the proposal will carry due to lack of opposition. MuZemike (talk) 23:29, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support the merger. Pointless having this as its own article: not notable, very short, no sources. --Oscarthecat (talk) 20:31, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I'd much prefer the 27 True Runes article be expanded. There is plenty of information out there on sites like Suikosource. I may even get around to it myself. Godheval (talk) 16:07, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Those types of sites are fansites which are not considered verifiable sources. MuZemike (talk) 16:58, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - They're verifiable where they get the information from the game creators themselves, i.e. from artbooks and similar resources. Suikosource in particular doesn't just post anything, but information that has been verified. Godheval (talk) 20:49, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - I will seek further clarification from other users at WP:VG/S. In my view, it is not verifiable, even though there does seem to be some system of editorial oversight set up. MuZemike (talk) 00:28, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Sources#Suikosource. MuZemike (talk) 05:53, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This should be a no-brainer - it's total gameguide content, and I find it pretty unlikely that fansites would count as both independent and reliable when establishing notability even if sufficient secondary sources of that type were to be found. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 22:30, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Except it's not a no-brainer, and that's why we're having a discussion. The True Runes are not "game guide" information, as they not only correspond to the game's "magic" - which would be game guide information, but are heavily rooted in the story of every game and the overall lore of the Suikoden universe. That gives them greater significance. You will not see an in-depth background of the true runes in any game guide. Godheval (talk) 14:56, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - This page was previously deleted on the account that the information it contained was mostly copied and pasted from Suikosource. I think the expansion and improvement of this article should proceed with this warning in mind before this article is either kept or deleted. While I would like for it to remain, I think that it's fair to say that if the same thing happens in the compiliation of information, it will probably be deleted again. EikaKou (talk) 04:44, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- OK, I have seen that this article has been deleted twice - first for a copyvio for ripping material apparently right off of Suikosource - and second from an AfD discussion here. This can be a candidate for speedy deletion per G4 (blatant recreation of deleted material) and possibly also for WP:SALTing. However, I have judged that maybe this article can be better me merged to its parent article rather than deleted outright. Hence, I come back to why I have proposed a merge here. MuZemike (talk) 05:14, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Well, the only reason I prefer the expansion over the merge is that there is a lot that can be written about the True Runes, such that it would bog down the main Suikoden article. But if the consensus is that in-depth info about the TRs could be included without doing so, then I'm okay with the merge. I just want the subject to be adequately represented. Godheval (talk) 14:56, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support - all the relevant arguements for are stated above. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 16:09, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note — I have placed an invite notice on the WPVG discussion page in order to generate a more thorough discussion/consensus. MuZemike (talk) 16:41, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Move Proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Requested moves already done. MuZemike (talk) 18:31, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that this article be moved to Suikoden (series), and the Suikoden (video game) article be moved here, in keeping with the usual format for games and game series on Wikipedia. See Phantasy Star and Phantasy Star series as another example. The first game in the series is called Suikoden. If you say Suikoden, you mean that game, not necessarily the entire series. The word "series" is an important qualifier and should be in the title of the article about the series. I will post the request on the WP:RM page. Godheval (talk) 15:01, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The word "series" should be in parentheses per naming conventions. Hence, it should be Suikoden (series). Phantasy Star series should also be the same thing. MuZemike (talk) 15:53, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me. So I take it, that's a Support for the move? Godheval (talk) 16:04, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yes, support. This might be able to be moved without going to WP:RM. Did you try moving it yourself by clicking the "move" tab on the top? MuZemike (talk) 16:44, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was led to believe from a move proposal on another article that the WP:RM submission was mandatory, i.e. Wikipedia protocol. But if not, then I can just go ahead and do it. Godheval (talk) 20:39, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not mandatory, unless the destination page is already occupied, or the destination page is blacklisted, admin help is needed for moving, or if a move discussion is at a standstill and outside opinions/assistance are needed (read the first two paragraphs in WP:RM).

That is fine with the Suikoden article. However, I think what you are asking for with the Suikoden (video game) article is for it to be merged into that new series article, is that correct? MuZemike (talk) 21:02, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, not at all. I want to maintain separate articles, but have Suikoden be about the game, and Suikoden (series) to be about the series. The Suikoden (video game) article would disappear, or rather, redirect to the new Suikoden article. Godheval (talk) 21:34, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I think I understand what's going on, now. If I'm right, you're trying to make it just like the Double Dragon group of articles. If you're going to do that, you will need to request at WP:RM for the second move you mentioned. You will also need to create a disamb page and note on top of both articles what each article pertains to. Of course, you can also keep everything as-is (see Ninja Gaiden for example) and just create a disamb page. MuZemike (talk) 22:51, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, the first move is complete. The second move will require administrative intervention and the original request (Suikoden → Suikoden (series) was altered on the WP:RM page to become the new request (Suikoden (video game) →Suikoden) Godheval (talk) 00:08, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the dab suggestion above seems better. 70.55.85.122 (talk) 08:02, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Does anyone on the English language Wikipedia speak English? I get so tired of having to look-up Wikinese terms just to understand what people are saying. What is a dab? And regardless of what it is, it's not a better suggestion. CONSISTENCY ACROSS GAME ARTICLES. Good grief. Godheval (talk) 14:02, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - dab = disamb = disambiguation. See the WP:GLOSSARY for a bunch of frequently used "shorthand" terms. MuZemike (talk) 14:58, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- However, some articles do it one way, while some do it another. The ball seems to be already moving, and until we have a uniform way of how to disambiguate video game articles without a certain user arguing his only way to the point of disruption, then we might as well finish it. MuZemike (talk) 15:01, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note — I have placed an invite notice on the WPVG discussion page in order to generate a more thorough discussion/consensus. MuZemike (talk) 16:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of the discussion was no consensus. Quasi human | Talk 15:41, 20 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

108 Stars of Destiny (Suikoden) should be merged into this article, as it is a gameplay aspect of the series and is not referenced enough to merit its own article. As for the huge chart, I commend whoever made it but it's still original research and should be transwikied unless a source is found attributing those characters to their counterparts.--_ZXCVBNM 20:39, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. Okay, I don't watch the Suikoden articles much anymore, but the chart is a navigational table - more helpful from the time when every character had their own article, sure, but still a table (consider it something like "List of Suikoden characters (all)"). It's not original research - the Stars are clearly identified in every game in a tablet, if you haven't played it. I guess you could argue that the description parts of the article are too gameplay-focused, but WP standard seems to be to have some description of the lists rather the list straight-up, so I'm not sure there's a good way around that. I guess the table could be merged here and then made collapsible into one of those show/hide boxes, but meh. Why not just have the table in its own page? It's no different than, say, List of people associated with the American Civil War, which also could be theoretically merged somewhere, but is a bit too long. SnowFire (talk) 22:17, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. Like SnowFire, I don't watch the Suikoden articles as often anymore, but I agree with most of the points presented regarding the article. EikaKou (talk) 03:05, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

What section of the article are violating the Wiki in general??

I want to know please!! (game instructions etc...) I would be pleased to help trim it down as I've helped changed most of the article's content.--JCD ^(Talk) 10:29, 28 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Suikoden. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120229144710/http://www.4gamer.net:80/games/132/G013230/20110721001/ to http://www.4gamer.net/games/132/G013230/20110721001/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:25, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]