Jump to content

Talk:List of The King of Fighters characters

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 98.193.101.49 (talk) at 14:54, 31 December 2007 (→‎Merge). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconVideo games Start‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Stuff

I am removing the "looks like [random celebrity]" comments because they are baseless. If these were obvious references (like Balrog was based on Mike Tyson), then it would be relevant, but these are anything but. King based on Ellen DeGeneris? That's highly implausible. --feitclub 23:16, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)

Make the red, blue! --Dangerous-Boy

sources

Where do these lists of characters, such as Elisabeth Blanctorche, come from? I can't find any information on a game called KOF Tales of Ash on google... - Stoph 04:18, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's in reference to the Story arcs that comprise the games. -ZeroTalk 19:22, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

KoF: Maximum Impact 2 and KoF XI (PS2) version characters

Should the remaining characters from these two games not be added? The S 19:58, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lucky and Brian

Didn't Lucky come from Dunk Dreams and dosen't Brain wear a uniform from one of the teams in Football Frenzy? If so shouldn't we put that here? (BackLash 11:46, 1 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Depict a source backing up these claims, and we can place them in the triva section of the respective aricles. -ZeroTalk

The infobox(es) for KOF characters…

…need to be adjusted to comply with Wikipedia:Don't use hiddenStructure. --elias.hc 18:33, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question Marks

What is the deal with all the question marks after the characture names?216.174.162.194 20:42, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

The characters of this series do not have an appropriate amount of real world information to require separate articles per WP:FICT. They would need a few paragraphs of solid creation and reception information each to stay. Because of that, they will be merged to this list after a general understanding is established. After that, this list will require general creation and reception information as well.

If you would like to keep some of the articles, you will need to find creation information from things like interviews and reception information from reviews. This information will need to be directly about the character, and there will need to be a good chunk of it for each one. Please note that if a number of people want to keep the articles, but cannot establish them that WP:CON states "When consensus is referred to in Wikipedia discussion, it always means 'within the framework of established policy and practice'. Even a majority of a limited group of editors will almost never outweigh community consensus on a wider scale, as documented within policies." That means that arguments are more important than numbers, so without an actual argument to back your side, it does not hold a great weight. TTN (talk) 21:53, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as separate articles and add pictures. Characters from multiple games in notable series have a cultural significance that merits separate articles. Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 22:02, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please read over WP:WAF and WP:FICT for what characters and other articles need. Also, this is required per WP:N, WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:NOT, so this is not limited to those or anything. TTN (talk) 22:07, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I do not see any "violations" that could not be fixed by adding extra sources. Best, --Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 22:35, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you can add the information that I describe above, that will be fine. The problem is that the information does not exist in a great enough quantity to actually be worth keeping the articles. I wouldn't doubt that you can find a few sentences for various characters, but that will not be enough to warrant separate articles, though it would help the list. TTN (talk) 22:39, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This proposal is too broad. Some characters are clearly more important than others; the most notable example is perhaps Terry Bogard, who is part of three franchises, 40 games, and is the mascot for SNK Playmore, not to mention various other media appearances. As far as I'm aware of, he's the most prolific video game fighter in existance. --SeizureDog (talk) 00:06, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If he is that important, he should have real world information. Otherwise, there is no reason for it to have an article. TTN (talk) 00:20, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Jesus Christ. What is wrong with you? --HanzoHattori (talk) 03:00, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What's wrong with who? Those are the rules. I'm sure SeizureDog is right about Terry Bogarde, but even that article is currently unsourced. Any individual characters who are worthy of their own articles need to prove it. This is basic stuff that applies to every single one of Wikipedia's two million articles, not just these. Miremare 16:57, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing below is intended as a personal attack; rather, it's an attempt to identify ducks and move on to productive discussion.
It looks like things have gotten off on the wrong foot here. IMO, TTN struck the wrong attitude with the statement that boils down to "Unless you fix this right now, I'm going to delete all these articles. And then I'm going to go after the list I merged them to. To stop this, you need to bring the articles up to FA-level sourcing." I assume that's stronger than what TTN intended, but that's how it reads to me. Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles came back with an argument that boils down to Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#Notability is inherited, to which TTN throws back a number of abbreviations related to the wider issue rather than the specific fallacy. Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles later makes a good point that the "problem" here could easily be fixed by adding sources; this is completely correct and is exactly what needs to be done. But rather than encouraging that solution, TTN slaps it down by basically stating "Yes. But you won't be able to do it, so it's not worth even letting you try." TTN, you seem fond of quoting policies; try this one from WP:CON: "Note that consensus can only work among reasonable editors who make a good faith effort to work together to accurately and appropriately describe the different views on the subject." There is no deadline, so you can take the time to try to build a real consensus and convince those who disagree instead of trying to steamroll them.

SeizureDog raises a good point in that a more focused discussion is needed, as some characters are more likely to be Wikipedia:Notable than others; from what I've seen, the same thing happens at WP:AfD when a large number of articles are grouped together, and the decision is often to relist the articles in more focused chunks. This should not be dismissed out of hand. Perhaps consensus can be easily reached on a merge for specific minor characters, leaving the ones that are more likely to be sourceable for people to try to do so.

Even if an article is currently unsourced, that does not automatically mean that sources do not exist, and that does not mean that sources need to be added right now. The issue of sourcing and Wikipedia:Notability has been raised, and as has been said the only appropriate response is to go out and find sources. Don't waste time arguing over whether any character is wikt:notable or not, and don't waste time arguing that sources cannot be found until the search has actually been attempted (or until a more than reasonable amount of time passes where no one even tries). Yes, those of you who want to keep the articles, this means you. It's not up to TTN, Miremare, or anyone else to do it for you. Anomie⚔ 04:42, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did I ever say that I wasn't going to give them time? As I stated, this will be open until a general understanding is established. My approach is pessimistic, but given the facts that these are part of a very, very large problem that is always addressed with the same response by the fans ("All we have to do is source them!" *Three weeks later* "Sources are out there! Give us more time!" being just one of them), I think you should be able to see why. TTN (talk) 14:45, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm making a list of characters that have out of universe information for reference. Angel, May Lee. Wow.. that's not as much as I thought it would be. Just to let everyone know, there are a couple of other characters that have one point in the trivia section that could be cited for out of universe information, but those two articles are the only ones with actual sections on character development. Zemalia 14:12, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I object to TTN's proposal on merging articles. It has happened on many sectors of Wikipedia. That practice has gone out of hand. TTN is an outright deletionist and a pessimist, and has prior controversial deeds on Wikipedia. It is not right to be a pessimist. We need to search for out-of-universe information on as many characters as we can. There is also the Wikia Annex. Decimus Tedius Regio Zanarukando 04:26, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If anything's "out of hand" it's articles like these, and way out of hand at that. It is unfair to portray anyone who is trying to merge a bunch of unencyclopedic articles as somehow "bad". We are trying to build an encyclopedia here, and that goal is being hindered, not helped, by endless articles that have no place in an encyclopedia. Miremare 14:18, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Many of those articles are not what you call "out of hand." It IS fair to portray someone who is too strict about considering what is encyclopedic or unencyclopedic as somehow bad. Those articles can have a place in an encyclopedia, if they are likely to be sourceable. Out-of-universe information can be obtained when you do a search engine or import interviews or documentaries. The minor King of Fighters characters, which are those who are original to the King of Fighters series and appeared in only a few games in the series, are to be merged into lists. They would be listed according to each King of Fighters saga, which are the Rugal/Orochi saga, the NESTs saga, and the Ash Crimson saga. The articles on characters who are not original to the King of Fighters series and who appeared in most King of Fighters games should not be merged. Decimus Tedius Regio Zanarukando (talk) 02:18, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't referring to any individual article, but to the articles as a whole, and indeed all articles like these as "out of hand". And no, it isn't fair to portray someone who is "too strict" about this as bad. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a repository for non-notable fiction, as confirmed by all our relevant policies and guidelines. Pick up a paper encyclopedia, such as one of the 32 volumes of Encyclopaedia Britannica, and you won't find a single article like these, and not because of WP:PAPER, but because they are simply not suitable for an encyclopedia. Miremare 16:25, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I object to merging some of the articles, like those on Kyokugenryu practitioners and on major Fatal Fury characters. I have just edited the article on Yuri Sakazaki by taking the Trivia section and integrated some of the entries in the section into an Appearances section. I am researching for more out-of-universe information on Yuri Sakazaki. The Fighting Style section contains out-of-universe information. Decimus Tedius Regio Zanarukando (talk) 05:08, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I definitely agree with consolidating these entries into a single list - exempting a couple of the more notable characters (the Bogards, Mai and her assets, and probably Kyo). That said - is there any GFDL-compatible Wiki (similar to the TV Wiki) that this stuff can be trans-wiki'd to? It's neat information to have somewhere, even though Wikipedia is most definitely not the place. I'm aware of the shoryuken wiki, but it's more focused on strategy (and spam. Lots of spam). --Badger Drink (talk) 00:20, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, no, I object to consolidating entries like Kyokugenryu practitioners (which are the Sakazakis and Robert Garcia). I also object to merging the entries into a single list, because it would either too long and/or too concise. The list would have to be split by saga, which would include Rugal/Orochi saga, NESTS saga, and Ash Crimson saga. There is no GFDL-compatible Wiki that could be used as the place for KoF fighter entries. I feel like Wikipedia is turning to an eyesore for SNK fans as well as Nintendo fans. Do not merge the following: Ryo Sakazaki, Yuri Sakazaki, Takuma Sakazaki, Robert Garcia, Terry Bogard, Andy Bogard, Ryuji Yamazaki, Mai Shiranui, Geese Howard, Athena Asamiya, Kyo Kusanagi, and Rugal Bernstein. Decimus Tedius Regio Zanarukando (talk) 00:47, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Articles ready to be considered for merging

I'm going to start adding articles that I believe are ready for the merger and I think have little or no out of universe information and have been cleaned up (trivia removed, copy-edit, etc). These articles of course will not be merged until a consensus has been reached. Please comment and provide opinions so these mergers can be put through swiftly and without hassle.

We should decide on the general method of the merging or this could take an age. Using the above Elisabeth (The King of Fighters) as an example, and considering there's little out-of-universe info, what from there needs to be included in this list? Miremare 18:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I trimmed it down to the necessary information to understand the character. Though, it was rather lacking in context, so I have no idea what it's talking about. TTN (talk) 19:09, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good to me. I think this is a great model to use for the rest of the characters. If there are any characters with notability, we should perhaps keep a little more information about them than this though. Otherwise, I feel the rest is up to the editors who want to focus on improving the content of the article. Zemalia (talk) 19:24, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok you guys must be kidding me. Take a look at the StreetFighter characters. Has it been suggested that those articles be consolidated as well? Terry has as much history, if not more, as Capcom's Ryu. In fact, Terry has been the symbol of SNK's fighting games since the first Fatal Fury game. How about you SF fanboys stop trying to water down SNK's franchise. TKG

Merging of some character listings

I wanted to mention that Glaugan should be merged with Zero given that there is not a lot of information regarding it (the info given is pretty much all that was ever known and/or released by SNK). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Koho7 (talk • contribs) 09:28, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please do so. He's Zero's pet for one, plus his article is FAR TOO SHORT to stand on its own. -- ZeroGiga Contact 00:36, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_The_King_of_Fighters_characters&oldid=181193561"