Talk:List of Call of Duty characters

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Fictional characters (Rated List-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters 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.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
WikiProject Lists (Rated List-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Military history (Rated List-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
List This article has been rated as List-Class on the quality assessment scale.
WikiProject Video games (Rated List-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.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.


BattleshipMan, you keep reinserting Overlord into the article. A voice that gives orders, Overlord has no character name, personality, or role in the story. As both myself and another editor have removed Overlord, I think there is at least some consensus that Overlord is not sufficiently notable to be listed here. Please discuss before reinserting Overlord, or any other recently removed characters. Some guy (talk) 01:16, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Well, I know that his voice is overheard mostly and that he is never seen or named, not to mention Overlord is protrayed by different actors, such as Glenn Morshower in MW2 and Bruce Greenwood in MW3. It just that Overload is someone who gives player intel on enemy strength and armory and such, which is pretty important in the games itself and the players. BattleshipMan (talk) 01:44, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
I understand that being a disembodied voice alone is not a good pretext to remove something from the article. (I certainly don't want others to say "Overlord and Baseplate are removed from MW, let's remove EVA or LEGION from Command & Conquer series, Fleet Intelligence from Homeworld and Adjutant from Starcraft" without discussing.) I do know that even trees add value to the game and I don't deny that Overlord does so. But for something to be considered a character, it must have personality. For it to be a character of due weight, it must have some uniqueness too. Overlord has none of these. That's why MW articles often skip its mention and use passive voice or metonymy instead.
Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 07:04, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Call of Duty 3[edit]

I created the Call of Duty 3 section because we should also list characters from the previous games before Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. Isn't that worth the idea? BattleshipMan (talk) 16:13, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

KIA/MIA status[edit]

I've been considering whether we should keep the "MIA/KIA" markers in the article or not. Downsides to their inclusion:

  • They promote massive numbers of trivial edits marking and unmarking characters as KIA/MIA. This makes the page difficult to monitor and bloats the page history.
  • While some characters' deaths are scripted, many others are random, and may or may not occur. This increases the chances of edit warring over whether a given secondary character dies or not, aggravating the previous point.
  • Determining which characters die in the game is inherently original research, and per the previous point partially unverifiable.
  • The value of the KIA/MIA markers is negligible; they do not contribute substantially to the reader's understanding of the games. Significant deaths should already be covered in the prose.
  • Including the KIA/MIA markers probably encourages the crufty edits where users describe in detail all of the possible places a character might die, and how those deaths can occur.
  • Including the KIA/MIA markers completely prevents readers from any possibility of avoiding spoilers. Generally a reader attempting to avoid spoilers can make assumptions about which part of the article to read or not read, but that is impossible with the article how it is now.

Any thoughts? Some guy (talk) 02:02, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Let's just keep the ones that are official in the games and that cannot be altered, not the ones that are trivial and can be altered like Sgt. Roebuck and Private Polonsky and some of the characters in Call of Duty: Black Ops II. BattleshipMan (talk) 03:02, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
That is a bad strategy, as determing which deaths are trivial is subjective, and the logic we use in applying or not applying the status markers won't be obvious to random readers. Some guy (talk) 03:59, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
If you played those games, You would know which ones to decide, since you have to decide whose live to save in Call of Duty: World at War, like Roebuck and Polonsky and, although I haven't played Black Ops II yet, every decision you made in that game is a matter which charactes live or die. BattleshipMan (talk) 05:23, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
I know, I've played World At War. You haven't covered the circumstance of secondary characters who can die randomly but are not guaranteed to. Again, I feel that including death markers for some characters but not for major characters who can die but might not will likely be confusing to some readers. Some guy (talk) 07:13, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Hmmm...Maybe. Based on what you said, some of those characters are indeed scripted, although some others are very much random. I know in the original Call of Duty, one of the characters Elder in the American campaign, can either be killed or survived in one level after finishing a part of a level where either he can be KIA and survived. So some of your thoughts does make sense to a cretain degree. I just a bit concerned that some characters who are scripted to be KIA, POW and WIA will be confused to read without those markers. BattleshipMan (talk) 07:56, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
Would anyone else care to comment? Some guy (talk) 08:33, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Notability of characters[edit]

Do not insert minor characters, or characters who do not play a major role in a level or have a notable impact on the plot, into the articles. If you think a character is notable, the reason why they are should be reflected in the prose. Descriptions such as "x fought alongside the player and got killed by y" do not establish enough significance for that character's role, as the vast majority of allied NPCs in all CoD games fight alongside the player and then die. Characters with descriptions that do not adequately establish why they are important to the story will be removed. Some guy (talk) 01:07, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

BattleshipMan, if you cannot come up with suitable explanations for why characters are notable, they will be removed. Descriptions such as "A British soldier in the first mission. He orders Davis through the trenches to get to Price, but is killed by a German soldier" fail to establish notability. He gives one order, and then dies, in the first level? How significant is that in the overall context of the game?
Other examples:
  • "A Canadian soldier who is part of the 4th Canadian Armored Division who assists the player in Normandy" - he assists the player? So does every Allied NPC. That's hardly notable enough for inclusion.
  • "The radio operator of the 4th Canadian Armored Division. He is killed on Mont Ormel" - is radio operator a particularly notable job? Does he influence the story with his radio operation? If so, that should be mentioned. Without more explanation of why he's significant, he's just another soldier who dies.
  • "A US soldier who assists the player in France. After taking Hill 400, he is possibly killed while holding off the final wave of Germans." - Another soldier who assists the player and possibly dies. This is the same as every single random allied NPC; in other words, it's not even worth mentioning.
If you continue to restore the material without discussion, I will consider it vandalism. Some guy (talk) 11:23, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

RfC: Should the KIA/MIA markers be kept or removed?[edit]

Remove the KIA/MIA markers. czar  16:55, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

The following discussion 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.

Right now the article includes small markers next to each character's name to indicate if that character was Killed in Action (KIA) or is Missing in Action (MIA). Do these markers contribute significantly to the article? Does the article benefit more from their exclusion or inclusion? Some concerns about the markers are addressed in a section above. Some guy (talk) 01:12, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Remove completely While they can be described in text as KIA/MIA, they are fictional characters, not real military personal where these symbols are typically reserved for. --MASEM (t) 01:49, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Remove completely - WP:INUNIVERSE. Wikipedia writes about fiction from a real-world perspective. A Call of Duty wiki is better suited for such WP:GAMETRIVIA. --Teancum (talk) 01:58, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Remove completely per WP:INUNIVERSE. Wikipedia writes about fiction from an out-of-universe perspective. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:32, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Remove completely, for the exact WP:INUNIVERSE reasons stated by the three above. -- Sabre (talk) 16:05, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Comment - While I agree it violates WP:INUNIVERSE, so does 95% percent of the article. I'm surprised this is such a focus point, when not much outside of the voice credits seems to be out-of-universe... Sergecross73 msg me 16:10, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Comment - I am heartily in favor of deleting the article entirely, if you'd prefer that. Some guy (talk) 23:56, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Comment - I think this article is awfully written, but I'm afraid that, if brought to AFD, it would probably be kept on the grounds of WP:BEFORE. For such a broad view on such a mainstream subject, there's almost certainly the sourcing out there to meet the WP:GNG. The article's just in terrible shape at the moment. Sergecross73 msg me 15:23, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
At best we might find articles that cover a fraction of the characters. There are simply far too many characters, and until recently they haven't been notable enough to write articles about - I can't even easily find an article about Soap. Obviously we can still get information out of reviews, but as a comparison there are generally plenty of articles specifically about Valve game characters. Some guy (talk) 00:27, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
Comment - I do admit that the markers violates WP:INUNIVERSE. We probably should also focus of setting up the voice cast in those characters. BattleshipMan (talk) 18:03, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Comment - Voice cast lists for video games are generally considered inappropriate per Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines. Some guy (talk) 23:56, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Convert to prose when necessary. Otherwise remove. e.g. Soap lived through Modern Warfare and Modern Warfare 2 but not through Modern Warfare 3. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 05:57, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Dammit! How did I go this long without having that spoiled for me? Curse you, Sir or Madam! Some guy (talk) 00:27, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Remove markers and convert to prose where possible. Is the in-universe issue really an issue though? Lots of these omnibus lists exist because the individual characters are not notable on their own, and so get heaped together, so it's not necessarily possible to have real world prose/analysis for each character, since no such coverage exists for most. —Torchiest talkedits 03:47, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
Remove {{KIA}} template and MIA icon per WP:GAMECRUFT. A brief, concise summary is all we need for each character, not specific information . -- LuK3 (Talk) 21:15, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

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.

Purging the article[edit]

Since two of the cleanup tags have been outstanding for six months with no improvements in the article content, I will be cleaning out much of the secondary characters. If you want to try to provide sources or a better assertion of notability for any secondary character, now is the time to do it. Some guy (talk) 21:50, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Battleshipman, please discuss before reverting any changes. Also, don't use deceptive edit summaries. Some guy (talk) 03:41, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
That page maybe in need for clean up and some improvement. But in a meantime, do not delete any of the characters that have been deleted until we can provide a reliable source for them. BattleshipMan (talk) 16:00, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
No, that's the opposite of how that works. You've had plenty of time to find sources for them. At this point, they can be deleted, and you shouldn't bring them back unless you find reliable sources. Some guy (talk) 01:12, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
Some of those characters you deleted have some importance to the storyline of those games, which is why they should on this article, we have some characters in various video game series that are unsourced, but do hold the importance of the game's storyline. BattleshipMan (talk) 02:07, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Instead of reporting or edit warring over this why not make a list of the disputed characters either here or in your sandbox. This will allow for anyone to provide sources with no immediate rush. If sources are found then editors can agree as to the suitability of them being added back to the article. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 12:40, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Closure on Tags[edit]

The article has a few tags put on it back at the end of 2012, apparently to mark that there was concern over notability of some characters being established. While the reasoning that one does not list every spear carrier or tree carries weight, I note that the discussion to me seems to be about lack of such definition in the article simply never defined bounds or conditions - the title is the List of characters, not the list of notable characters, and the lead says nothing about defining 'notable' or 'character' criteria or asking for support. The tags seem to have been stuck on and then no progress gotten towards fixing them so they're either fair warning or leftover junk. I'm going to add the two words "of note" to the article lead and delete the tags, but if folks think it's more fair warning then they can put tags back up. Markbassett (talk) 15:30, 3 January 2015 (UTC)